Now 'gays' thrust beliefs onto Christian T-shirt maker
'It's intolerant to insist' business owner produce expressions that violate faith
Published: 8 hours ago
Freedoms of religion and speech, protected in the U.S. by its Constitution and recognized widely in other parts of the free world in law and practice, are under attack again, this time in Kentucky where a local commission is demanding – at the request of a homosexual organization – that a printer produce T-shirts with a message that violates his Christian faith.
The fight now is before the Kentucky Court of Appeals over whether Blaine Adamson, the managing owner of Hands-On Originals, in fact has the rights that the U.S. Constitution is supposed to protect for him. Or whether he can be forced by homosexuals to produce a message which conflicts directly with his deeply held religious beliefs.
Get the brand-new bumper sticker that reminds everyone that Christian Lives Matter!
“Protecting Blaine’s freedom affirms everyone’s freedom, no matter the nature of their beliefs or convictions,” said ADF Senior Counsel Jim Campbell. “The government shouldn’t be able to force citizens to create speech that conflicts with their deepest convictions, and the trial court’s decision rightly affirmed that.”
Adamson had declined to print shirts promoting a “gay pride” event held by a “Gay and Lesbian Services Organization” in the Lexington-Fayette region. He explained it was because of the message that contradicted his faith. In fact, he wasn’t even aware of the sexual lifestyle choices of those making the request.
“Outlasting the Gay Revolution” spells out eight principles to help Americans with conservative moral values counter attacks on our freedoms of religion, speech and conscience by homosexual activists
Despite that, the homosexuals filed a discrimination complaint and the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission ordered Adamson to violate his faith. A local court decision reversed that, but the commission then took the fight to the Kentucky Court of Appeals.
The Alliance Defending Freedom, which has been working with Adamson, now has filed a brief there.
ADF explains that Adamson routinely declines to do print jobs when the message violates his faith, rejecting at least a dozen in recent years. Instead, he offers referrals to other print shops for those customers. Those subjects included a strip club, a sexually explicit video and a message that included violence.
So that’s what he did when the GLSO wanted to promote a “gay pride” event.
Instead of recognizing Adamson’s constitutional rights, however, the GLSO filed its complaint, which ultimately failed in the district court.
image:
http://www.wnd.com/files/2016/02/Blaine_Adamson3.jpgBlaine Adamson
Blaine Adamson
The ADF argues that the decision will impact all people, not just those of faith. For example, a lesbian printer in another state endorsed Adamson in the fight, because a ruling against him could then be used to force her to produce messages with which she disagrees, too.
Adamson, the brief explains, has “never declined to work with people because of their race, sex, sexual orientation or other legally protected characteristic. On the contrary, HOO works with everyone, including gay and lesbian customers … and regularly hires gay and lesbian employees.”
“The government … cannot force it citizens to convey message that they deem objectionable or punish them for declining to convey such messages,” the brief explains. “The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that the government could not apply that law [in another case] to force that organization to convey unwanted messages.”
The high court also has determined “entities … do not discriminate against gays and lesbians when they serve LGBT individuals but decline to promote messages of LGBT advocacy groups.”
See Adamson’s explanation of the fight:
The constitutional concept that people cannot be forced to provide a message with which they disagree is the focal point of the fight.
"That constitutional principle, at issue because Mr. Adamson declined to produce advocacy materials for the Gay and Lesbian Services Organization (GLSO), protects all individuals, regardless of their beliefs," the ADF brief explains.
"It is thus no surprise that 'a lesbian owned and operated T-shirt company…,' and groups that 'strongly support[]…gay rights…,' have publicly supported HOO. For just as surely as the First Amendment protects HOO against the GLSO's discrimination claim, it also forecloses a religious-discrimination claim against an LGBT printer who refuses to create materials that disparage gays and lesbians. Thus, a ruling for HOO upholds the freedom of all who are asked to produce expression that they consider objectionable," the filing explains.
"The government has no good reason for overriding a person's freedom to peacefully live out his beliefs," added co-counsel Bryan Beauman with Sturgill, Turner, Barker & Moloney, PLLC, of Lexington. "Everyone who contacts Blaine gets the expressive materials they're looking for, because he will either create the expression for them or refer them to someone who will. It's intolerant to insist that Blaine's business must produce expression that violates his beliefs."
READ MORE
Read more at
http://www.wnd.com/2016/02/now-gays-thrust-beliefs-onto-christian-t-shirt-maker/#AYpUe1JJJ5X3JZoU.99
