Hitching Post case in settlement talks

The city of Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, is backing away from its threats of fines and jail for two Christian ministers who refuse to conduct same-sex wedding ceremonies at their commercial business, Hitching Post.

But the question remains: Can the law require someone to conduct a homosexual "wedding" if it violates his or her Christian beliefs?

A lawsuit filed by the Hitching Post owners could provide an answer, according to a lawyer for the nonprofit legal organization Alliance Defending Freedom.

Jeremy Tedesco, an ADF attorney and spokesman, has been working with Coeur d'Alene and the Hitching Post owners, Donald and Evelyn Knapp.

TRENDING: Fireworks! Watch Rand Paul crush Stephanopoulos on 'stolen' election

The city has tried several "litigation tactics" to "try to get out of the case," he told WND.

But the Knapps could face criminal fines and jail sentences if they fail to comply with the city's social agenda, he said.

In cases of a New Mexico photographer, a Colorado baker and several others, courts have ruled service providers can be required to violate their faith. Those cases, however, carried fines and other penalties, not possible jail time, as does the Coeur d'Alene case.

After issuing the threat, the city later reconsidered and said that all the couple needed to do to be exempt from the law was organize as a nonprofit instead of a commercial business. Then the city attorney later determined the move wouldn't make any difference.

Tedesco said that while exemptions may help the Knapps, the city's ordinance still must be clarified.

The city now is considering new wording proposals, and ADF is awaiting the results to determine the next step, he said.

"They need to clarify who the law applies to and who it doesn't," Tedesco said. " … This is criminal law. … You've got a criminal law that allows for jail time and fines. It cannot be vague. People can't be left guessing whether they will be subject to the ordinance.

"People don't give up their First Amendment rights just because they open a business," he said.

An American Thinker report described city officials as having "buckled" in the fight.

"Initially, the city said its anti-discrimination law did apply to the Hitching Post, since it is a commercial business. [Then] Coeur d'Alene city attorney Mike Gridley sent a letter to the Knapps' attorneys at the Alliance Defending Freedom saying the Hitching Post would have to become a not-for-profit to be exempt. But Gridley said after further review, he determined the ordinance doesn't specify non-profit or for-profit."

The dispute raised alarms for many, including WND co-founder Joseph Farah, who wrote in a commentary that the Knapps were the "latest believers to be set up by homosexual activists for prosecution and persecution for their religious convictions that include the very simple and fundamental biblical principal, first enunciated in Genesis and later affirmed by Jesus in the Gospels, that marriage is a union between one man and one woman."

In an interview, Idaho state Sen. Steve Vick said the case was so egregious that he would eliminate the state government from marriage entirely.

"It's very disappointing to me that they would require a Christian business owner to do something that violates their religious convictions, which I believe are protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution," Vick said. "Most of the reaction that I incurred has been from disappointment to shock that [the city] would do that."

Listen to the WND/Radio America interview with Idaho state Sen. Steve Vick:

Vick warns that the next step "will be to say that churches themselves cannot discriminate … [and] the church will have to marry same-sex couples and not be allowed to say anything."

"Clearly they're going after the freedom of the church's speech through the hate-speech statutes," he said.

The action was begun when the Hitching Post owners filed a federal lawsuit because of the "unconstitutional" demands from the city they allege were forcing them to violate their religious beliefs.

In another First Amendment speech and religion case, a federal judge in New Mexico ruled that there would be a trial against a university because its officials allegedly punished a student for describing lesbianism as a perversion.

Chief U.S. District Judge M. Christina Armijo denied a motion by the university to dismiss a case brought by student Monica Pompeo, who claimed she was improperly dismissed from the class for describing lesbianism as perverse in an assigned critique of a lesbian romance film.

The course, “Images of (Wo)men: From Icons to Iconoclasts,” was taught by professor Caroline Hinkley in 2012.

Judge Armijo, in her Sept. 29 order, wrote that the First Amendment "violation in this case arises from the irreconcilable conflict between the all-views-are-welcome description of the forum and [the professor's] only-those-views-with-which-I-personally-agree-are-acceptable implementation of the forum."

The judge noted that "due to Hinkley's hostility, including her refusal to assign a grade to plaintiff's critique," Pompeo withdrew from the class.

Noted law professor, legal analyst and writer Eugene Volokh, writing at his Volokh Conspiracy, pointed out Hinkley's supervisor, Susan Dever, also warned there would be "consequences" because of Pompeo's opinion.

The school officials "acted to suppress a viewpoint [they] found personally offensive, rather than for a legitimate pedagogical reason," Volokh said.