Understanding the Amendments to the Fayetteville Ordinance

A Further Analysis of Chapter 119

Overview: On August 20, 2014, the Fayetteville City Council passed asexual-orientation and gender-identity nondiscrimination ordinance (Chapter 119). Proponents of the ordinance added two amendments to the proposal in an effort to alleviate some concerns over the measure’s unintended consequences. The amendments, however, fail to address many of the flaws in the proposal.

Church Property Amendment

Amendment 1: “Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to require any religious or denominational institution or association to open its tax exempt property or place of worship to any individual or group for any ceremony or meeting, except for any activity or service that is supported in whole or part by public funds.”

Analysis: This amendment partly addresses one of the many ways Proposed Chapter 119 restricts religious liberty in Fayetteville. It generally prevents church property from being used, for example, for a same-sex wedding or reception. However, it fails to address the following:

  • Churches still face the threat of prosecution. This amendment does not exempt churches altogether. At best, it exempts church property. Churches can still be forced to employ a gay or transgender person for “secular” job positions (e.g. bookkeeper, receptionist, etc.). Even with this amendment,a church still faces the threat of criminal prosecution simply for wanting to employ people who share and abide by the faith that church proclaims.
     
  • Ministers still face the threat of prosecution, individually. This ordinance affects ministers who officiate weddings or ceremonies for non-church-members, because they are offering a public service. This amendment protects church property, but not the ministers employed by the church. This means ministers could still be forced to perform same-sex ceremonies on non-church property (e.g. a park, private wedding chapel, etc.). This opens ministers to the possibility of prosecution simply for declining to perform a ceremony contradictory their religious convictions.
     
  • Businesspeople are still open to prosecution. Across the nation, florists, bakers, photographers, wedding venue owners, and similar businesspeople have faced litigation and prosecution for declining to take part in same-sex ceremonies. This amendment does not protect religious businesspeople who object to hosting or serving in a same-sex ceremony.
     
  • Private schools are not exempted. This amendment does not protect a private school’s ability to employ people who share its religious views or safeguard any of its other religious liberties. 

(more…)

NY Farmers Fined for Refusing to Host Same-Sex Wedding

A couple who owns a farm in New York has been fined $13,000 for refusing to host a same-sex wedding ceremony two years ago.

The Times Union writes,

“The operators of a well-known agro-tourism farm in Schaghticoke have been fined $13,000 by the state for their refusal almost two years ago on religious grounds to host a same-sex wedding ceremony.

“The Human Rights Commission concluded that Robert and Cynthia Gifford, who operate Liberty Ridge Farm, violated the rights of Jennifer and Melissa McCarthy who had the right to marriage under New York’s 2011 passage of same sex marriage.

“Cynthia Gifford in 2012 told the couple she would have a problem allowing their wedding ceremony on the farm due to her Roman Catholic religious beliefs.”

Here we have private property owners who run a business–in this case, a farm–being fined by the government for declining to open their property up for an event that violates their religious beliefs–a same-sex wedding ceremony.

This is the kind of situation that almost inevitably comes up any time government begins writing special rights and privileges into the law based on sexual-orientation. In this case, the so-called “right” of a same-sex couple to get married is trumping a family’s First Amendment right to freely practice their religion as well as their property rights and any rights they have as business owners to choose with whom and how they engage in commerce.

Even though Arkansas does not recognize same-sex marriage, if cities begin passing so-called “nondiscrimination” ordinances like the one currently up for consideration in Fayetteville, churches, family businesses, business owners, private schools, and others could face criminal prosecution and expensive court battles simply for declining to open their property for same-sex ceremonies or receptions as this family in New York did.

No one should be fined or otherwise penalized for declining to have a part in something they find morally objectionable.

Do You Watch ‘Game of Thrones’?

John Stonestreet with the Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview recently recorded a one-minute commentary on the way “Christians twist themselves into pretzels in order to be ‘relevant.'”

One of the ways Stonestreet points out Christians do this is by watching popular television shows like ‘Game of Thrones’ that contain unprecedented levels of nudity and violence.

Listen to his commentary below.

[audio:http://www.thepointradio.org/images/content/breakpoint/audio/point/2014/TPT507082014.mp3|titles=John Stonestreet – Culture, Christians and Holiness]

So we want to know: Do you watch ‘Game of Thrones’? Leave us a comment on Facebook or on our blog.