Fayetteville Group Responsible for Phone Calls

Current Events, , , ,

We have been asked if Family Council orchestrated or paid for automated telephone calls made in Fayetteville earlier this week pertaining to the “nondiscrimination” ordinance the Fayetteville City Council adopted at its Aug. 19 meeting.

Just to clear things up, Family Council did not pay for the calls, nor did we have anything to do with the making of the calls.

As you know, Family Council has been a strong and vocal opponent of the Fayetteville nondiscrimination ordinance.  We are glad that numerous individuals, churches, and other groups in Fayetteville were active in the effort against the ordinance.  We are glad that our policy briefs, letters, blog posts and other material were used by so many different individuals and groups.

Apparently, a Fayetteville group made automated calls directing people to a website that automatically linked people to one of our blog posts on the ordinance.  This caused some people to believe we were responsible for the calls.  This was not the case.

READ MORE

Fayetteville City Council Ignores Voters, Passes Unpopular Ordinance

Current Events, , , ,

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, August 20, 2014

At 3:20 AM Wednesday morning, the Fayetteville City Council passed the controversial Chapter 119: Civil Rights Administration ordinance creating special protections based on sexual-orientation and gender identity. The vote was 6-to-2, with aldermen Martin Schoppmeyer and Justin Tennant voting against the measure.

Family Council President Jerry Cox released a statement, saying, “This is another example of government officials thinking they know better than their citizens. The People of Fayetteville turned out in droves to oppose this proposal. Alderman Tennant suggested referring the ordinance for a popular vote this November to let the people decide for themselves if this would be good for Fayetteville. Other members of the council said this ordinance is not the kind of thing voters should get to decide. I wonder what makes them think citizens are qualified to vote for lawmakers, but not for laws.”

Cox said even with last-minute amendments offered by the council, the ordinance is still bad. “You’re talking about a proposal that by nature expands government and elevates the rights of some citizens over others. You can’t amend something that flawed enough to make it acceptable. Businesses and people of faith still face the threat of criminal prosecution under this ordinance, and taxpayers are still bound to see their local government grow. Regardless of the intentions of the city council and City Attorney’s Office, this proposal is a lawsuit waiting to happen, and the courts will be the ones who have the final say on how it is interpreted.”

Cox said he is grateful to aldermen Schoppmeyer and Tennant who voted against the proposal. “They recognized how flawed this ordinance is, and they stood up for their constituents. That takes courage. I appreciate their actions, and I am sure a lot of other people do, too.”

Cox said his group will continue to monitor the situation in Fayetteville and any consequences that arise as a result of Chapter 119. “The ordinance is extremely unpopular; it infringes First Amendment constitutional rights; it might even conflict with state law; and it’s going to open people in Fayetteville to the possibility of criminal prosecution. With all of that in mind, I imagine some Fayetteville residents are going to try to repeal the ordinance, and others will want to file a lawsuit to clarify its constitutionality. One thing is certain: This fight is far from over.”

###

READ MORE

NY Farmers Fined for Refusing to Host Same-Sex Wedding

1 CommentCurrent Events, , , , , ,

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.

READ MORE