HEY, GAYSTAPO: Here’s 10 Business Reasons Liberals Should Support Christian Liberty

It’s a curious thing how the Clinton who struggled with the definitions of straightforward words like “is” or “sexual relations” has a much stronger grasp of other words -- say, “religious freedom” -- than the Clinton who still hopes to become President. America -- the very place to which people once fled to secure their religious freedom -- has become a place where even simply affirming such freedom is to paint a target on your back. What has happened, and what accounts for this Big-Government slide toward totalitarian control of The People? Mostly, the people raging against religious liberty exemptions see this through a very specific, and ideologically charged grid. Like so many other issues, the politics here involve an us/them zero-sum game. For their side to see this question in any other way, they must first see situations where they support the right to refuse business. To that end, here are a few examples where Liberals would probably acknowledge such a right. 1. Advertising. -- There are many instances where individuals or organizations make a conscious choice not to accept sponsorship or advertising from certain groups or products. Example: Even where laws permitted, children’s groups would typically shun any connection to Tobacco Companies. The reason? Public perception about such a group’s commitment to the well-being of children would be compromised. The brand would be damaged. 2. Music. -- It isn’t uncommon for bands to write “cease-and-desist” orders to people using their music. Why? Because they do not want something they made used to promote someone/something they oppose. Example: “@ScottWalker @GovWalker please stop using our music in any way...we literally hate you !!! Love, Dropkick Murphys” -twitter 24 Jan 2015 3. University Campus -- Should all employers have equal access to recruitment on campus? Some universities oppose Military recruitment. In fact, the Solomon Amendment specifically recognizes schools with a longstanding religious pacifistic history. Such schools are not obligated to provide campus access to military recruiters. Should this be allowed to continue? 4. Guest Speakers -- If people are employed as public speakers, how selective can they be in their gigs? Let’s say a speaker was a renowned sales coach. But in his personal life, he was very committed to some unrelated cause -- the Sierra Club, for instance. Would his personal convictions give him the right to refuse an invitation to instruct a mining company’s sales team how to become more effective? 5. A Muslim Barber was in the news for refusing service to his Lesbian customer. (True story.) He only cuts men’s hair. His religious convictions forbid him to cut women’s hair. She sued. Was he on solid legal ground? 6. Fitness clubs. Some cater exclusively to a female clientele. And the public is ok with that. Is this a problem? 7. Videographers. Suppose a videographer was hired to film a documentary. She later learns that it will be a Pro-life expose on abortion-mills like the one Gosnell went to jail for, but she is an abortion advocate. She refuses the job. Can she do so? 8. Book publishers. Suppose a homeschooling group approaches an emerging textbook publisher and asks them to print a science text from the Young-Earth Creation perspective. The publisher refuses for purely business reasons, as they do not wish their brand to be associated with this particular controversial content. Is this ok? 9. Gatherings. A privately-owned mountain retreat suitable for large gatherings is approached. Should access be granted equally to such diverse groups as the Red Cross, SEIU, NRA, Earth Liberation Front, NAMBLA, and AARP? Or is it reasonable for one or more of these groups to be ignored or even flatly refused? 10. Wedding planning. Companies exist that offer wedding services specifically, and exclusively to same-sex couples. Should they be accused of hetero-phobia? The moral of the story is that some jobs, gigs and business arrangements can absolutely be refused for perfectly natural reasons that have nothing to do with biases against a certain person or group. Business is business. We sell ourselves as a brand. Whom we associate with helps define us in the eyes of those we do business with. Take the niche, for example, of same-sex wedding services (catering, flowers, planning, etc). That is branding. Business. They will either stand or fall, based on their business model. Might they “hate” heterosexuals? Who knows, and -- more importantly -- who cares? They have a right to target a niche they think is profitable. They will select their associations in ways that will maximize, rather than diminish, their profile among their target market. Which is precisely what the Christian businesses are doing. Unless you’re going to tell me that Springsteen and Lady Gaga don’t have the right to refuse gigs at the GOP, or that Sierra Club members have to speak at mining companies, or fitness clubs can’t refuse memberships to men, you’ve already accepted the premise that you are not actually obligated to do business with everyone who asks. For a group that so often claims to be on the side of Freedom of choice, they spend a lot of time and energy micromanaging everybody’s lives. Isn’t that what they claim to hate about other people? Image; http://gallery.moeding.net/AroundTheWorld/NorthAmerica/NorthEast/NewYork/

Wes Walker

DEAR TED CRUZ: Don't Try To Hip & Cool, Hip & Cool Got Us Screwed, Be A Leader Dammit!

LAST NIGHT I HAD THE STRANGEST DREAM: A Debate Among Conservative Republican Presidential Candidates ...