NOTE: As a lifelong openly gay man whose mother & father were told by a Medical College Dr. in Charleston, SC in the late 1960's their son was a homosexual, I believe I have the perfect position to comment on this disgusting and clear effort to force acceptance and agreement rather than tolerance.
I have opined over the past few years on what I consider a radical gay agenda to force approval and acceptance by gay's who seem to believe life is only worth living if they are somehow approved of by those who they see as bigoted or ignorant. Perhaps I have managed to live the past 53 years of my life never knowing what it meant to be in a closet because I chose to live my life as I chose regardless of what others might have thought. I can honestly say that if I was ever discriminated against in employment, housing, etc I never knew it. I always got every job I sought and I always lived where I wanted to live. Never in 53 years did it ever occur to me that I could only be whole and happy if everyone else approved of or agreed with how I lived.
In my teen years in the 1970's while placed in VisionQuest I admit I was treated somewhat differently than the other kids because I was openly gay, but I don't look at it as being discriminated against, I see it for what it was: here you had a fairly new organization formed to deal with "troubled" youth in a different manner than locking them up. It just so happened I was the first openly gay kid to come into the program and they simply didn't know what to expect and/or how to react at first. I may have been treated somewhat differently at first in VisionQuest, but I was never discriminated against nor was I excluded from any aspects of the program (except of course being able to sleep in the Tee Pee like the other kids on the Wagon Train from Elfrida to Denver, but that was more because staff didn't know what to expect.) Considering the time and the place, I have to say Bob Burton, his ten gallon hat and staff did pretty good for a first of its kind placement.
This article is more a warning to Christians and anyone else who might not approve or agree with the gay life but who do not discriminate against it but who because of their constitutionally protected freedom of religion and speech might find themselves the next target of the radical gay agenda of using litigation to force you into submission (no pun intended).
Laurel and Rachel Bowman-Cryer are the poster girls for the radical gay agenda that claims to promote tolerance when in fact it demands submission, approval and adherence. These women are just the latest gay couple who filed discrimination complaints under local and State civil-rights laws in their State of Oregon who have been granted money for their alleged "mental" suffering over a Baker refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding on grounds of their religious belief marriage is between a man and woman.
Examples of symptoms claimed to be caused by bakers include “acute loss of confidence,” “doubt,” “excessive sleep,” “felt mentally raped, dirty and shameful,” “high blood pressure,” “impaired digestion,” “loss of appetite,” “migraine headaches,” “pale and sick at home after work,” “resumption of smoking habit,” “shock” “stunned,” “surprise,” “uncertainty,” “weight gain” and “worry.”
From the below linked articles it is clear the DailyMail has found yet another champion in it's anti-christian campaign. Funny how a News organization from the very country that persecuted people of faith and resulted in the founding of America in order to allow the freedom to worship, practice religion would label Melissa and Aaron Klein as anti-gay.
Although this case began in 2013, it was only this past January when the Oregon Administrative Law Judge Alan McCullough had ruled the Klein's had discriminated against Bowman-Cryer's. Fridays recommended award of $135,000 to them is still not final, turns out the Oregon State Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian who has publicly celebrated, been awarded by and promotes the very LGBT group Basic Rights Oregon who target businesses by way of boycotts, protests, intimidation, harassment, litigation and social media campaigns to put them out of business should the owners dare stand by their religious convictions which are contrary to BRO's agenda.
Look, I have friends who like me are gay and have been their entire lives. From teenager to beyond senior citizen, some who like me believe marriage as it is defined from the beginning of time, is between a man and a woman. At the same time we also believe that Government should not hinge any benefit on one being married over someone who is not. If people had really addressed the issue of Social Security, Insurance Companies, the IRS etc establishing benefits for married citizens that unmarried citizens were not entitled to we would not be having this conversation to begin with.
It is important however for people to pay attention to the recent award issued to Bowman-Cryer's. If you don't, if you continue to think that you do not have to fight for and articulate your religious freedom and rights the next one to be sued may very well be your Pastor and/or Church who is sued. I can see the coming of those who are motivated not be belief of exclusion, but by the promise of being paid bringing suit against a minister and/or church becoming the next in this challenge to remove religious freedom and the right to speech and expression. More and more we see radical liberal speech and expression ruled protected under the US Constitution including the stomping on and burning of our nations flag, while conservative speech and expression including religious speech and expression being classified as hate speech subject to civil and criminal action under the recent influx of State and Municipal civil rights laws established by a few.
Life and art sometimes mimic one another. Just a couple weeks before the awarding of $135,000 to the Bowman-Cryer's the CBS drama The Good Wife had an episode where the character Diane Lockhart was hired by a conservative think tank to represent a gay client in a mock trial where a same sex couple was suing a Bakery owner for refusing to provide them a wedding cake. The baker when on the stand said she simply said she could not provide the wedding cake because she did not believe in same sex marriage in her religious belief and teaching. Lockhart in cross asked these questions:
How many times does Jesus condemn homosexuality in the bible?
Bakers response: none
How many times does Jesus condemn divorce?
Baker 4 (or 40 I really can't remember)
Lockhart then ask the baker, so divorce is condemned according to your faith and religious beliefs right?
Lockhart: So do you also refuse to provide wedding cakes for clients who have previously divorced?
The Good Wife as in real life tries to argue that anything written in the Old Testament from Leviticus 20:13 or Sodom & Gomorrah are somehow voided in the New Testament. I do not agree with that argument and Christians will have to articulate their argument better if there is any hope of stemming this tidal wave that is washing away Religious Freedoms across the Nation.
Now you get my point. Even television is taking on litigating these very challenges and the more they do the more people you are going to see coming out of the walls or closets (my attempt at humor) to force people into either participating in same-sex weddings or pay them big judgments and go out of business.
In addition to the Klein's beings judged as having discriminated against the Bowman-Cryer's, the radical LGBT agenda and groups (which use social media and TOS complaints to target people who do not agree with them) filed TOS complaints with Go Fund Me claiming that the Sweet Cakes by Melissa GoFundMe page was being used to raise money for an illegal activity which resulted in GoFundMe removing the page. If you attempt to donate on the GoFundMe link this is what you get.
“After careful review by our team, we have found the ‘Support Sweet Cakes By Melissa’ campaign to be in violation of our Terms and Conditions. The money raised thus far will still be made available for withdrawal.While a different campaign was recently permitted for a pizzeria in Indiana, no laws were violated and the campaign remained live. However, the subjects of the ‘Support Sweet Cakes By Melissa’ campaign have been formally charged by local authorities and found to be in violation of Oregon state law concerning discriminatory acts. Accordingly, the campaign has been disabled.”
GoFundMe removes the Sweet Cakes campaign but still to this date allows the multiple GoFundMe pages that benefit the family of Michael Brown including the mother and step-father who on nationwide television stood atop a car and called for protesters to "Burn this bitch down," after which many people had their homes, businesses and vehicles burned.
In reviewing all the anti-Klein coverage of this matter I can't help but wonder how people can say they do not have to agree with the Klein's religious belief and that is protected opinion but that the Klein's belief's are discrimination. The Owner of Mac! Mac and Cheesery in Portland posted this on the business Face Book page February 1, 2015.
In addition here is yet another FB post by the owner of Mac & Cheesery with this one pointing out "protected classes" status. Cheryl Cryer (Rachel's mother) makes it a point to thank them for publicly announcing they would refuse service to Klein
If there is any doubt that opposing the radical gay agenda or not doing as the gay community groups think you should has consequences just look at the recent cancelling of events at a gay owned hotel because the owners met with Texas Senator and Republican candidate for the 2016 Presidential nomination Ted Cruz.
AIDS charity Broadway Cares canceled a May 10 event set to be held at the hotel's club, 42 West, because of the meeting, they said in a release."We cannot in good conscience hold an event at a venue whose owners have alienated our community," they said in a statement.
Broadway Cares posted this on its site
Broadway Bares Solo Strips Canceled
A message from Executive Director Tom Viola:
It is with regret that we have decided to cancel this year’s edition of the Broadway Bares Solo Strips fundraiser, which was scheduled for May 10 at the NYC club 42West. We cannot in good conscience hold an event at a venue whose owners have alienated our community, as reflected in an April 23 New York Times story and an April 24 follow-up post.
We do business with and accept fundraising support from a variety of people across a wide spectrum of political and religious affiliations. The rich diversity of our community makes what we do together so special. It is a rare instance where the actions of a donor negatively impacts us as an organization and potentially jeopardizes our relationship with others whose support is integral to our success. But when it does occur, in a way that’s blatantly against all we stand and work for, we can’t pretend it doesn’t come with consequences. Silence is not a neutral position. It is complicit.
This is not about partisan politics or punishment. This is about doing what’s right to ultimately ensure that our commitment to the men, women and children we serve cannot be questioned.
Ticket purchasers are being contacted by email. If you have questions about your Broadway Bares Solo Strips tickets, please contact Cat Domiano at email@example.com.
If you’ve ever been to Fire Island Pines, one of the leading gay utopias on the planet, you know that there isn’t much to do. There’s only one commercial center with a couple of stores, a bar, and a hotel.
And yet, in less than 24 hours, over 4,000 people have said they’re going to boycott it. The reason? It’s owned by Ian Reisner and Mati Weiderpass, the self-described “prominent NYC hotel owners” who recently hosted a “fireside chat” with Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz.
There are so many in the gay community who do not approve of or support these types of financial blackmail and efforts to destroy anyone's livelihood because they might no hold the same beliefs and opinions as us. Or worse, because they dare take a chance on opening a dialogue with those who don't agree with us in efforts to come to a better understanding of each other.
Mark my words, continue to sit back and think this is just a regional issue or that it somehow does not affect you or your freedoms and you will find yourselves playing catch up in defending your freedoms and your rights to belief, faith, and practice. Yes regardless of what they say there is a well funded, organized radical gay agenda and groups determined to get their way regardless of how many people, businesses and organizations they have to destroy to get it. Opposing same-sex marriage does not make one anti-gay; that's like saying every non-kosher restaurant is antisemitic. Broadway Cares decides damn the aids crisis and its charities mission, what really matters is to make a point they don't like Ted Cruz and don't want anyone who is gay business owner meeting with him or their business doing business with him. Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't all those calling for boycott of The Out insisting that a business of public accommodation refuse admittance of an individual based on his religion belief not the same thing alleged in Oregon?
Updated April 27, 2015 @ 8:56AM ET
In thinking about this matter I keep getting hung up on something that is minor yet I think worthy of asking a question about. In a traditional marriage between a man and a woman, if the wife chooses to include her maiden name she hyphenates it with her married name at the end right? Well in the above case it appears that Rachel Cryer and Laurel Bowman or at least in the case of Laurel has in the act of marriage legally changed her name by adding "Cryer". See Rachel Cryer-Bowman would be the same if it were the wife in a man/woman marriage. Laurel Bowman however would not and from a name changing stand point could not add Cryer to her name without a legal name change. To make Cryer-Bowman the last name Laurel would under normal circumstances have to make a legal name change through the Courts and provide that legal name change order to Social Security and the IRS, DMV etc.