Reserved for Christians Alone
Donald and Evelyn Knapp, owners of Hitching Post Wedding Chapel in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, are facing up to 3 years in jail and daily fines of $1,000 for refusing to officiate at a wedding for two homosexuals. The Knapps’ chapel is a for-profit entity, not a church, and the Knapps are professing Christians who typically conduct wedding services with scripture and prayer that reflect their beliefs. By refusing to officiate, howls the City of Coeur d’ Alene, the Knapps are in violation of a nondiscrimination ordinance.
What’s interesting about this case is the glaring prejudice against Christians and Christians alone―not members of other religions―that permeates every angle. To date I have not read about homosexuals testing the law—and that’s what they’re doing, testing the law—anywhere in the United States by demanding to be married (or to purchase a wedding cake or floral or photography services) from a Muslim-, Jewish-, or Hindu-owned business. These others are not the target, because nonbelieving homosexuals who set these traps don’t really want to be married in a church, synagogue, or mosque; they aren’t interested in a religious ceremony of any flavor. Their singular goal is to harass Christians and put them out of business, exactly like the Nazis set out to do to the Jews in 1930s Germany.
America has a long history of accommodating religious belief, and to this day we make room for the exercise of conscience. We are generous to Muslims in particular. Around the country they have fought successfully to wear their headscarves on the job. Employers have provided them on-site prayer rooms. The federal government has forced employers to allow Muslim employees to be exempted from driving trucks that deliver alcohol (http://volokh.com/2013/06/02/eeoc-cla... consumption of same violates their religious beliefs—though I haven’t read yet that employers have been forcing them to drink it). We have had conscientious objector exemptions from the draft for decades, and for this you don’t even have to be religious, just pacifist. We have religious exemptions for parents who choose not to vaccinate their children, even though you can make a convincing argument that this risks the health of the children. But we won’t let conscientious Christians abstain from participating in homosexual marriage ceremonies according to the tenets of their faith.
What’s odd in all this is how bald the hatred of Christians is and how our government collaborates with what can only be called a “hate crime”—the government’s term, not mine. Which brings me back to the City of Coeur d’Alene. It errs greatly when it forces any religious person to violate his/her conscience to push forward its social engineering goals. It is a foolish thing to write laws that force good people to sin against their beliefs. It contradicts logic. It is the stuff that starts revolutions.
I have some experience in this. When I was searching for a graphic artist to design the cover of my first book, The Lesson, a Christian romantic comedy, I found a particularly talented one, from New York, whom I contacted by phone. As soon as I gave him a thumbnail summary of the story, he told me that he would not work with me under any circumstance—he didn’t want to work for a Christian. Did I threaten to sue? Complain to the Federal Trade Commission? Of course not. I recognize the gentleman’s right to create or refuse to create works of art for whomever he chooses, so that his own dearly held values are not violated.
And really, I wouldn’t want ANYONE who doesn't value my story to design my book cover. Would you?
What’s interesting about this case is the glaring prejudice against Christians and Christians alone―not members of other religions―that permeates every angle. To date I have not read about homosexuals testing the law—and that’s what they’re doing, testing the law—anywhere in the United States by demanding to be married (or to purchase a wedding cake or floral or photography services) from a Muslim-, Jewish-, or Hindu-owned business. These others are not the target, because nonbelieving homosexuals who set these traps don’t really want to be married in a church, synagogue, or mosque; they aren’t interested in a religious ceremony of any flavor. Their singular goal is to harass Christians and put them out of business, exactly like the Nazis set out to do to the Jews in 1930s Germany.
America has a long history of accommodating religious belief, and to this day we make room for the exercise of conscience. We are generous to Muslims in particular. Around the country they have fought successfully to wear their headscarves on the job. Employers have provided them on-site prayer rooms. The federal government has forced employers to allow Muslim employees to be exempted from driving trucks that deliver alcohol (http://volokh.com/2013/06/02/eeoc-cla... consumption of same violates their religious beliefs—though I haven’t read yet that employers have been forcing them to drink it). We have had conscientious objector exemptions from the draft for decades, and for this you don’t even have to be religious, just pacifist. We have religious exemptions for parents who choose not to vaccinate their children, even though you can make a convincing argument that this risks the health of the children. But we won’t let conscientious Christians abstain from participating in homosexual marriage ceremonies according to the tenets of their faith.
What’s odd in all this is how bald the hatred of Christians is and how our government collaborates with what can only be called a “hate crime”—the government’s term, not mine. Which brings me back to the City of Coeur d’Alene. It errs greatly when it forces any religious person to violate his/her conscience to push forward its social engineering goals. It is a foolish thing to write laws that force good people to sin against their beliefs. It contradicts logic. It is the stuff that starts revolutions.
I have some experience in this. When I was searching for a graphic artist to design the cover of my first book, The Lesson, a Christian romantic comedy, I found a particularly talented one, from New York, whom I contacted by phone. As soon as I gave him a thumbnail summary of the story, he told me that he would not work with me under any circumstance—he didn’t want to work for a Christian. Did I threaten to sue? Complain to the Federal Trade Commission? Of course not. I recognize the gentleman’s right to create or refuse to create works of art for whomever he chooses, so that his own dearly held values are not violated.
And really, I wouldn’t want ANYONE who doesn't value my story to design my book cover. Would you?
Published on October 21, 2014 10:26
•
Tags:
alcohol, christian, christian-basher, christianity, coeur-d-alene, conscience, conscientious-objector, discrimination, donald-knapp, evelyn-knapp, freedom-of-religion, hindu, hitching-post-wedding-chapel, homosexual, homosexuality, islam, jewish, knapp, muslim, objection, objector, religion, religious, religious-discrimination, religious-freedom, religious-liberty, romantic-comedy, separation-of-church-and-state, the-lesson, virginia-hull-welch
No comments have been added yet.
BooksontheBeach
Bringing you book value from the sunny sands of Virginia Beach--reviews, discussions, tips about what's good in print.
Bringing you book value from the sunny sands of Virginia Beach--reviews, discussions, tips about what's good in print.
...more
- Virginia Hull Welch's profile
- 18 followers
