Is it really possible that certain companies continually cater to left wing causes to the point that they punish charities that help the poor simply because they are religious based?
Yes, for sure, that is still going on and also in countries which say they are liberal and want the freedom for everybody, but this seems to be not so for the freedom of religiosity and Judeo-Christian values.
The Christadelphians, last year, did a survey worldwide about the attitude of employers against Christians. Many Christadelphians made it clear they could not make their religious ideas known at work, and several who did, got difficulties afterwards. Many even had to leave their position because their faith was not accepted by their employers.
Lots of believers who keep to certain ethic values are also bullied because of their so called ‘old fashioned’ valued.
Shocking advertisements and classical family values
In several industrialised countries we notice companies who want to unsettle the public in their advertisements to attire attention to their products. Benneton is one of the major companies who makes beautiful posters and does not mind to bring certain issues into debate.
Other companies publicly come against the military, the boy scouts, the Salvation Army, classical family values etc.. For years it was known better not to speak about politics and religion. But know religion has come the topic of stand up comedians. Everything what smells of God and commandment is considered good for spot and laughter. And those who do not like to laugh at the Christians are considered silly.
Intolerance of religions
Though in more than one country the population thinks the intolerance of religions is not “real”, and most often we notice that in countries where there is much Islam-phobia. In the countries were they seem to have behind every corner a dangerous Muslim, they do not mind laughing at the Christians who wants to keep to certain values, like not having sex before marriage, not having intercourse with the same sex, not to do fraudulent acts or stealing.
Religious hostility report
In the United States of America a new 140-page report released by the Family Research Council and Liberty Institute also reveals the similar pattern of hostility toward Christians and Christianity in the US as we can find in Western Europe.
The report was released earlier this week and includes over 600 incidents over a 10-year period.
The States are normally considered to be the most free country where also can be found the free exercise clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution which prohibits the government from interfering with a person’s practice of his or her religion. Though the last few years we have seen many cases where was interfered from higher instances.
The American first freedom is facing a relentless onslaught from well-funded and aggressive groups and individuals who are using the courts, Congress, and the vast federal bureaucracy to suppress and limit religious freedom. This radicalized minority is driven by an anti- religious ideology that is turning the First Amendment upside down. Though also a lot of Americans do not recognise certain laws which do give more openness to general freedom of ways of thinking, which is also part of that first amendment and of the true freedom.
Notwithstanding in 2004, Liberty Institute President and CEO Kelly Shackelford, along with a number of the organization’s clients, testified before the U.S. Senate about the growing religious hostility in America. And we do see that there was not yet called a halt to it, but that it continued to grow in the States and in other industrialised wealthy countries.
Because the opposition insisted these select testimonies were simply isolated incidents, Senators Kennedy and Cornyn asked Liberty Institute to provide additional information, which led to the development of the first “hostilities document.” The shocking number of cases made it clear … hostility to religion was a very real problem, and it affected every age, and every religious group, in every community across the United States.
Cases of religious intolerance
Following U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs‘ policies, a federal government official sought to censor a pastor’s prayer, eliminating references to Jesus, during a Memorial Day ceremony honoring veterans at a national cemetery.
In Barton, city officials told senior citizens at a senior centre that they could not pray before their meals, listen to religious messages, or sing gospel songs because religion is banned in public buildings. After the senior citizens filed a lawsuit, government officials told the senior citizens that if they won the lawsuit their meals would be taken away because praying over governmentfunded meals violates the “separation of church and state.”
Attacks onat the Schoolhouse
Attacks on religious liberty at the school house is the second broad category of religious
hostility chronicled in this survey. These cases primarily involve school officials prohibiting
students or parents from sharing their faith or schools prohibiting teachers from exercising their religious free speech rights. Many of these cases arise because of the misinformation that secularist organizations send annually to school officials, threatening lawsuits should the officials not stamp out all religious expression within the school. While these types of cases have been common for decades, they continue with alarming frequency.
The attacks range from rulings from the judiciary branch to an elementary school student who was physically lifted from his seat and reprimanded for praying before eating his lunch.
Angela Hildenbrand, valedictorian of her class at Medina Valley High, wanted to say a prayer during her graduation ceremony. A fellow student from an agnostic family filed a suit to prevent Hildenbrand from praying. The federal district court judge issued an order prohibiting Hildenbrand from using words like “Lord,” “in Jesus’ name,” and “amen.” The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the ruling and allowed the prayer. On June 6, 2011, Hildenbrand gave her speech, which included a prayer.
Public school officials told Jonathan Morgan, a third-grader in Plano, Texas, that he could not include a religious message in the goodie bags that he was bringing to the “Winter Party” to share with his classmates. School officials prohibited other children at the school from distributing pencils that stated “Jesus is the Reason for the Season” and “Jesus Loves me this I know for the Bible tells me so.”
A government school official ordered another student to discontinue distributing tickets to a Christian drama and to discard the remaining tickets. In a fractured en banc opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit stated that the students are protected by the First Amendment but that their protection was not clearly enough established to award damages against the school officials involved.
Fired because of showing to be a Christian
Not only me, in Belgium had problems at the schools I taught, because I did not hide I am a Christian. After a lot of bullying they just took care of getting me out of the way, by which putting me on retirement was the best solution. The Christadelphian survey showed such things happened in more countries.
Another example shows a Christian couple was fired as apartment complex managers and forced to move because a painting with a Christian reference was displayed in their office.
“It’s a conflict of world views,” Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Council, told FoxNews.com. “These groups want people to check their faith at the door of the public square.”
“America today would be unrecognizable to our Founders. Our First Liberty is facing a relentless onslaught from well-funded and aggressive groups and individuals who are using the courts, Congress, and the vast federal bureaucracy to suppress and limit religious freedom,” said Kelly Shackelford, president of Liberty Institute. “This radicalized minority is driven by an anti-religious ideology that is turning the First Amendment upside down.”
“It’s way beyond anything we had imagined,” Shackelford told FoxNews.com.”It’s so much more prolific than it’s ever been before.”
The Liberty Institute further pointed out that religious liberty is “facing a relentless onslaught from well-funded and aggressive groups” that are using whatever means available to suppress or attack religious freedom.
FRC’s Tony Perkins added, “As dark as this survey is, there is much light. The secularists’ agenda only advances when those who love liberty are apathetic. Let this be a call to stand for religious liberty in the United States.” (Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/report-highlights-consistent-pattern-of-hostility-toward-christians-in-us-80408/#1MYRMBYUFlZTRyD1.99)
Freedom of worship
Many Americans do see a problem in The Obama administration no longer speaking of freedom of religion. They do find it a radical departure to speak now only of “freedom
of worship.” But then they do forget that all sorts of religions and forms of worship do fall under that heading.
All people should have the right to chose their own form of worship. It may be animalism, spiritualism, worshipping several gods or preferring to worship only One God. It is not freedom “only within four walls” that is, that you should be free to worship within the four walls of your home, church, or synagogue, but also when you enter the public square. And there is the problem today that many do not want to see that others have such or such believe and do not mind to be publicly active in their faith. Muslims are hindered when they want to do their prayer on a prayer-carpet at the side of the road or in a parking. Most of the onlookers give the message to active believers to “leave your religion at home.”
According to some, President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have repeatedly echoed this same message in international forums, acknowledging only a right to the “freedom of worship.” This is a misunderstanding or looking at their ideas, from a one sided conservative right wing Christianity.
Liberty Institute and the Family Research Council have joined forces to take a bold stand to protect and restore religious liberty in America. This includes opposing and exposing the escalating efforts by government bureaucrats to regulate religious freedom. So, from the local district courts to the U.S. Supreme Court and in the halls of Congress, they will face each challenge head-on to ensure that their sacred First Amendment rights are protected.
Freedom for all
But they forget that the First Amendment should include freedom for any religious way of thinking, also non-Christian. And according to the Laws of Jesus, his followers should take on a loving attitude also to those who think differently than them. Followers of Christ should also protect those who do not know God and who are in weaker circumstances. They also should let them get to know the Good News of the coming Kingdom of God, not by violence or force but by giving the good example, the good attitude and the right responsiveness.
It is not by forcing people to be confronted with certain Christian symbols, or with annoying disturbing sounds of bell ringing or the shouting from minarets at unreasonable hours that are going to bring people to God. Perhaps many Christians do still want to enter the church as the bell sounds, but they should consider also the other people in town. The same for other believers they should be aware that not all want to know when Muslims do have to go to do their prayer, or when Hindus have to go to there temple.
Also for public places, there should be the general open places for the public where no one is confronted with symbols which could be offensive for them. And as such in certain public places it is better to have no religious symbols at all. But on the other hand people who come to live in certain areas should be aware that in that area can be a certain tradition. Those traditions should also be recognised and given the proper value.
Also it should be allowed, and nobody should object, that in the institutions of specific religious organisations there shall be religious symbols. In case people object to those religious symbols, they do not have to go to those institution with a religious background.
Nobody compels somebody to go to a Catholic college where the pupils have to wear a uniform and crosses are on the wall of every class. In case a girl wants to wear a headscarf and this is not allowed by that school, she can not complain. Nobody constrains her from going to an other school. If somebody objects the crosses on the walls, they too do not have to go to that school and can go to an other institution to get their education.
It is for that reason that the government has to take care that there are also neutral schools and hospitals, where all sorts of people, believing and non-believing, can find the proper education and treatment. It is in such public places that the state has to take care that everybody, no matter of which religious conviction, can get the proper care and best treatment any civilian should be able to get in a free state. Understandably in those places it is best that no religious symbols would be placed on walls or cupboards. Nobody may feel offended by certain pictures or statues.
It is also in such institutions that the caretakers or educators should have an open mind and not force their ideas on the others. Though they also should be left free to openly speak about their way of thinking. Only as this freedom is given, than there would be open-mindedness and freedom of speech and freedom of religion. When people are sanctioned because they openly talk about their faith or when they may not do certain movements characteristic to their faith, than there is no religious freedom.
Public school officials prohibiting students from handing out gifts because they contained
religious messages is not given the right of free speech nor of religious freedom. Everybody should be able to speak out and to present his case. Christians but also Muslims should be able to give handouts or to distribute leaflets with a presentation of their faith or an invitation to come to one of their religious events. Therefore it can not be that a public school official prevented a student from handing out flyers inviting her classmates to an event at her church.
In case a university wants to be a public university and not a private college it can not ban a Christian organization because it required its officers to adhere to a statement of faith that the university disagreed with, like a public university’s law school did. Any union should be able to work freely and adhere to certain rules, inclusive religious codes.
But in a protestant school nobody can oblige the protestant school to accept Catholic or other faith groups in their premises. So it should be acceptable that no other faith flyers are handed out in the property of the protestant school. But when they are handed out on the public street, that school can not protest to it. Once on public grounds the freedom of speech should have priority.
In case the protestant school or a Muslim school wants to receive public funding they also should allow other faith groups in their school as long as the other believers do accept to be present in all the obligated activities in that school. (In such instance the Muslims cannot refuse the mixed swimming classes, if the school does not want to offer those.)
In a public school should be offered more than one religion, and the teachers giving those religious classes should give a religious education according the laws of freedom and respect for others. In case a religious teacher does want to teach more fundamentalist teachings, not in accordance with the constitutional laws, the government should have the right to fire such a teacher. As such the federal government can, for their public institutions, tell churches and synagogues which pastors, rabbis and imams it can hire and fire. At other religious places naturally they would never have such rights.
Public places and symbols
In case people would like to see crosses or stones with the ten commandments in public places they should also be aware than that totempoles, Buddha’s and other religious statues and pictures would have the same right to be shown to the general public.
Several American Christians do want to deprive other believers, natives and especially Muslims of their freedom of religion as they try to stop them building mosques or as they attempt to pass laws against them. though they seem not to object to the Hindu temples, which in certain European countries do take on huge proportions.
People should also be aware that they can choose where to go and where to shop.
More Christians should unite to let those shops, who do not like Christians, know that they in such circumstance also do not need the money from Christians.
Shops and Christian values
The popular department store chain JC Penney found itself in the middle of controversy earlier this year when it formed a partnership with popular talk show host Ellen DeGeneres. The comedian is a lesbian and some groups, like One Million Moms (OMM), felt that, as a result, she was a poor spokesperson, role model and personality for the company to select. Monica Cole, the director of the group, said, ”We have heard back from men and women — not just moms — saying they will no longer shop there at JC Penney, as long as Ellen DeGeneres is their spokesperson.”
Lowe’s Home Improvement
TLC’s controversial program “All American Muslim,” was apparently intended to introduce American society to mainstream Islamic adherents. Instead, it caused a firestorm after a conservative group, known as the Florida Family Association, began pushing companies to pull their sponsorship from the program.
Best Buy, the popular electronics store, faced backlash from gay activists for allegedly supporting a PAC that gave funds to Tom Emmer, an opponent of gay marriage. Emmer ran for governor of Minnesota in 2010 and served in the House of Representatives from 2005 to 2011.
“Best Buy has also been found to have donated 100,000 to the same PAC as Target,” reads a Facebook page created by Towleroad, a gay rights web site. “A PAC which supports Tom Emmer, an opponent of equal LGBT rights.”
The popular discount retail store caught the ire of Christians in 2004 when it abruptly banned the Salvation Army from ringing bells and collecting funds outside of its then 1,300 stores. The move purportedly left the organization, which serves the poor and those in need, without many millions of dollars it had previously collected at the stores.
The move was widely viewed as an attack against a cultural tradition. Thousands of faith leaders stepped up to the plate to call for a boycott of the retail chain, with many pledging — and urging their congregations to do the same — not to shop at Target.
Over the years, tempers have simmered, as it seems Target has loosened its policy a bit regarding Salvation Army bell ringers. Today, the company promotes its ongoing partnership with the organization on its web site, writing:
Target proudly supports The Salvation Army as it serves more than 30 million people across the United States each year. Some of our year-round efforts include grants to local chapters, volunteerism and in-kind donations to help those that need it most. Target also partners with The Salvation Army to support its disaster relief efforts in communities across the country.
Supporting the right shops
As a child we learned from parents to support our Christian brothers and sisters and to prefer shopping in shops owned by Christians or those who did an effort to let God be know to the world. Sometimes we did not understand it so much because we saw other cheaper shops. At that time we also did not think so much about the values they had to keep or the values which were not so much respected by the cheaper shops. But soon we learned that respect to nature and people was more important than to create cheaper products at the cost of others.
Shops wanting to make a difference
While attaching a specific religious view to a product or service certain shops today still like to make a difference. And they should earn the support of those who believe in the Judeo-Christian values.
Forever 21 is a clothing store that was founded by Don and Jin Chang, devout Christians who moved to America from Korea in 1981. The small store they opened in Los Angeles in 1984 has grown into a mass business comprised of hundreds of locations across the globe.
On the bottom of each bag, shoppers will find “John 3:16,” the popular Bible verse that reads, “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”
It is getting time that companies will go well beyond merely mentioning God. Norm Miller, chairman of Interstate Batteries, dares to discuss his faith and salvation publicly and encourages everyone to accept Jesus Christ as personal saviour — a central tenet of the Christian faith.
Tyson Foods, Inc. (NYSE: TSN), founded in 1935 with headquarters in Springdale, Arkansas, is one of the world’s largest processors and marketers of chicken, beef and pork, as well as prepared foods. The company provides products and services to customers throughout the United States and more than 90 countries. Tyson employs 115,000 Team Members at more than 400 facilities and offices in the U.S. and around the world.
Tyson Foods strives to give back to the communities where it does business. The company’s community outreach donations provide millions of dollars each year to a host of causes from children and family shelters to libraries, community parks and recreation areas.
Through its Core Values, Code of Conduct, and Team Member Bill of Rights, Tyson strives to operate with integrity and trust and is committed to creating value for its shareholders, customers and Team Members. The company also strives to be faith-friendly, provide a safe work environment and serve as stewards of the animals, land and environment entrusted to it. For more information about Tyson Foods’ efforts to operate responsibly, take a look at the Tyson Foods 2009 Sustainability Report.
If people are saddened after the loss of a loved one or coping with a family emergency, these individuals are brought in to pray and assist those in need with coping.
John H. Tyson, the current chairman of the company, is a born-again Christian who believes his values shouldn‘t be pushed to the side when he enters Tyson’s doors.
According to a Jewish employee it is a non-discriminating company which continue to uphold their values and morals and who will not bend to outside influence either.
They hired people knowing they might be of another faith without prejudice and got burned for that. (See also: http://www.joplinglobe.com/local/x1415458439/Dispute-resolved-with-Somali-workers-at-Tyson-plant-in-Noel)
You cannot image how far some want to go.
Western U.S. burger chain In-N-Out has printed citations of Bible passages on cups, wrappers and other pieces of packaging since at least the late 1980s. For instance, “John 3:16″ appears on the bottom of soft drink cups, a reference to the Bible passage…
Hobby Lobby, an Oklahoma City-based crafts store chain that very-openly embraces Christianity. Like Chick-fil-A, the company closes its more than 500 stories on Sundays and vocally mentions God on its web site.
As TheBlaze recently reported, Hobby Lobby’s owners are also preparing to build a Bible museum in Washington, D.C., just blocks away from the National Mall. The museum, which is currently being organized, planned and designed, will provide visitors with thousands of Biblical artifacts along with a better understanding of the Old and New Testaments.
Attacks on Religious Liberty in the Public Arena
Attacks on religious liberty in the public arena is perhaps the most widely recognized form of religious hostility in the United States today. These cases traditionally include challenges to praying at legislative assemblies, challenges to publicly displaying crèches (nativity scenes) or menorahs, and challenges to displaying the Ten Commandments in courthouses. Since the first edition of the Family Research Council and Liberty Institute survey, however, secularism has pushed the boundaries of religious hostility in the public arena into new areas in which personal religious freedom was heretofore left inviolate.
For example, secularists are now challenging memorials to fallen soldiers and veterans if those memorials include religious imagery, such as a cross. As of this writing, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has held that two veterans’ memorials that include crosses in California violate the Establishment Clause. Even ten years ago, successful challenges to veterans’ memorials because they are in the shape of a cross were unthinkable. The many crosses in Arlington National Cemetery, in Normandy, and in veterans’ cemeteries around the nation were widely accepted as fitting symbols of the sacrifices made by so many for this country. Religious freedom is the allowance of any religious symbol on a tomb, and the liberty to have graves in a graveyard like the person personally wants according his beliefs. In a churchyard or on the private grounds of a Buddhist temple you can expect that the graves would only be in the form of that religious group. In a public cemetery all the grave should be able to be presented in the from according the will of the people, with or without crosses, fishes, stars, suns, or other religious symbols.
That the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs instituted a policy that effectively
mandated that funerals for veterans at national cemeteries be secularized, stripped of any reference to God or the veteran’s faith, even when it was the express wishes of the veteran and his family that he be given a religious funeral is not respecting the religious freedom of the person who wanted to give his life for his country.
On the other hand you could say it would be right to have first a secular service, given by the Department of Defence for the soldier, whereby no one would have to face offensive actions or symbols. As such any person knowing the soldier would be able to be at the remembrance service without having to be confronted with actions which would be against his religion or his thinking. Then the person and their family could be given full respect for the man he or woman this soldier was. Afterwards the families can have their religious service with the symbols and actions like they like them. It is totally out of bounds that Government officials told grieving families, that wanted a religious funeral, that the service could not reference God. This is restricting the religious freedom and it is not respecting the soldier his beliefs, nor the families beliefs. Rightly a federal district court held that the government could not dictate prayers at memorial services and funerals, and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs agreed to change its policy at all national cemeteries to allow the families’ wishes regarding religious content to be followed. So if the soldier is a Christian he should be able to have a Christian burial. A Muslim burial when he is a Muslim, etc..
Problem of the report
Several Americans do find their Judeo-Christian values are in danger and that the Obama government does not want to respect their freedom.
they often forget that religious freedom should really mean that everybody can have his or her own faith and may believe what they want and also may carry or use symbols they want to wear or want to show to others.
Reading the report you can not avoid the impression that it seems to be written by the “angry white man” who do not want to accept that a healthy democracy must include a separation of Church and State, tolerance for other views and other religions, and the protection of minorities.
Christians in the first place should follow their Master, the Jew Jesus from Nazareth (Jeshua), who preached peace and wanted to see a world full of love. He was against intolerance and wanted his followers to show the world that they were willing to stand above such intolerance. He made his followers aware that they should respect all people around them, because they are all creatures of the One and Only God, the Elohim Hashem Creator of heaven and earth.
If you believe in a higher power, you should know that we are all “God’s children”. Than you should also be prepared to accept all other people, no matter that they do have an other faith. Judgement does not belong to men, but to the only begotten son of God, Jeshua or Jesus.
It is not right only to like to see your own preferred religious symbols and not to accept others their symbols.
It is also not right to go for a government which does not protect the right of religious freedom to other believers. Such freedom may at certain places and certain circumstances, bring some restrictions, but those shall be necessary not to offend any other believer.
Please do read:
Chick-fil-A isn’t the only company willing to share its Christian faith with the world. While attaching a specific religious view to a product or service holds the potential to turn a portion of consumers off, some business leaders and companies stick to their values and intentionally include them in their packaging and messaging. Some of these brands include: Forever 21, Interstate Battery, Tyson Foods, In-N-Out Burger and Hobby Lobby.
Here Are 7 Other Faith-Related Boycotts Against American Companies (in Addition to Chick-fil-A)
Yesterday, TheBlaze brought you five companies that join Chick-fil-A in promoting Bible-based values. Despite the fury coming from both sides of the gay marriage debate, this isn’t the first time that faith has played a role on a massive push for widespread spurn against businesses.
Also do find:
- Fear and protection
- Religious Practices around the world
- Judeo-Christian values and liberty
- Liberal and evangelical Christians
- Christian values and voting not just a game
- Which back voters in the US wants to see
- Leaving the Old World to find better pastures
- Built on or Belonging to Jewish tradition #1 Christian Reform
- Built on or Belonging to Jewish tradition #2 Roots of Jewishness
- Built on or Belonging to Jewish tradition #3 Of the earth or of God
- Built on or Belonging to Jewish tradition #4 Mozaic and Noachide laws
- Worship and worshipping
- Alleged Hostility toward Christians in the USA is Nothing but Far Right Media Manipulation (02varvara.wordpress.com)
A recent report issued by Family Research Council and Liberty Institute claims that Christians are under assault in the USA. On the surface, it looks like a seemingly-alarming serious survey focusing on human and religious rights abuse. However, scratch the surface, and its hidden agenda and manipulation of facts become obvious. The subject of this report, and its coverage by Fox News and the rightwing media may not exactly fall into the category of “media bias”, but it does fall into the category of bias and the clever promotion of secret agendas and hate.
The report attacks secularism, homosexual rights, abortion, but nowhere does it mention attacks (and even murders) on members of the Muslim Faith, which the authors see as a “Fanatical Religion”. Who authored and funded the “report” is very important, as it shows that the report was biased from its very creation and was designed to support pre-planned positions and reach false conclusions which were known from its inception. The Family Research Council, or FRC, purports to support “traditional family values”, something few could speak out against, but how they’ve chosen to go about it is questionable, and promotes the intolerance and marginalising of minorities and all other religions, even Orthodoxy, which they view as not being “real”.
- Report: Christians Victims of ‘Hostility’ From Gov’t (foxnews.com)
The goal of the report is to raise awareness of these incidents to promote the appointment of judges “who are sensitive to the Constitution,” said Kelly Shackelford, president of the Plano, Texas-based Liberty Institute. The report was presented in Tampa just ahead of next week’s Republican National Convention.+
According to Shackelford, the hostility can lead to violence, as in the case of the Aug.15 shooting at the Family Research Council headquarters, in which a gunman allegedly said he disagreed with the group’s beliefs before shooting an employee in the arm. He also cited the Aug. 5 shooting deaths of six people at a Sikh temple near Milwaukee.
- Survey reveals increasing hostility in US towards religion (catholicnewsagency.com)
Although these cases indicate a significant increase in religious hostility in the U.S., the report’s authors said, those who stand up for religious freedom “are winning” in court.“As dark as this survey is, there is much light,” they noted.
- Boycotting because one doesn’t like another’s freedom to speak? (onemorecup.wordpress.com)
Boycott is to not do or buy something as protest; to not take part in an event, or to not buy or use something as a protest.
This brings me to my real assertion of despicable behavior. Why would anyone want to hurt a person’s business because all that person did was to state something that he has a human, civil, natural, and protectedright to do? This is absolutely crazy! Therefore it seems to me that these activists are doing exactly what they are protesting about. However I state this with stipulation: a human being in the U.S.A. has the right to say what they want to say…period.
+Any subsequent retribution such as to boycott a person’s well-being, livelihood, moreover, to look to harm or injure this person’s service within the community (hiring employees, producing a job, issuing paychecks) in these rough economic times is the equivalent of a hate crime.This is a real to life debate that members of the same-sex marriage community need to hear. It is not a question of “eww, he said what…” (simply exercising his right) and others within that community are looking to injure him, those who work with him, is criminal. The 14th Amendment is for everybody – not those who are seeking a new status or protectionism from their alternative lifestyles. This includes those who may disagree with same-sex unions.