OUR GOVERNMENT: BLUDGEONING ITS WAY TO A NEW MORAL STANDARD

January 23, 2014

We are quickly moving into a brave new world in which traditional Judeo-Christian values are not only being marginalized, they’re being criminalized.  A new civil “right to take offense” is now being granted to those who have declared war on traditional values.  But our government is going far beyond that. Not only are they granting a subjective right to the offended, but such offense is being criminalized and codified into law. 

 
Being offended by the words or actions of another is nothing new.  As long as there are different cultures and different belief systems, there will be things said and done by some which will offend the sensibilities of others.  But the fascists that have seized the reins of government have raised being offended to a new level.  Now, in the holy name of ending discrimination, they have turned offending another into a crime.  Not only that, but the crime can be committed in the passive response of the criminal party simply expressing their offense at the actions of the offender.  If that sounds contrived and strained and weird, perhaps it’s because it is.  But that is exactly what is occurring in this country.

Aaron and Melissa Klein owned a bakery called Sweet Cakes by Melissa.  Last year they were approached by a lesbian couple, Laurel Bowman and Rachel Cryer, about baking a cake for their gay wedding.  The Kleins, who are Christians and oppose same sex weddings, refused.

Highly offended, Bowman and Cryer filed an official complaint with the government citing discrimination.  The Bureau of Labor and Industries in the state of Oregon, based upon the Oregon Equality Act of 2007, ruled that the Kleins had violated the civil rights of the gay couple by denying service based upon their sexual orientation.  The Kleins have been given the opportunity to settle with Cryer and Bowman, if they refuse to do so the Bureau has threatened to bring formal charges and prosecute them. 

 
This case has frightening implications for moral conservatives.  Allow me to enumerate a few…
 
One, the state is now clearly seen as having the right to compel an individual to do that which violates his or her conscience in order to ensure the “rights” of another individual are not violated.  Religious conviction is not a justification for refusing to offer services under the Oregon Equality Act of 2007.  While religious organizations are exempted, individuals are not.  So the Klein’s right to express their conviction that same sex marriage is wrong by refusing to make a cake celebrating such is trumped by the same sex couple’s demand that the cake be made.  By statute moral conviction is now being removed from the market place.
 
Two, there is increasing effort via legislation to geographically limit the expression of traditional Judeo/Christian religious convictions.  Religion is free to be expressed within the confines of a house of worship, but the beliefs associated with that religion must remain there.  They are no longer free to be expressed in public, particularly if their expression would offend the sensibilities of those who sneer at such convictions.  In a very practical sense, the government has effectively ordered the Kleins to cease practicing their faith when they open the doors of their business. 
 

Three, the first amendment right of freedom of expression is being trumped by such legislation.  The Kleins are no longer free to practice their faith.  That freedom has been stripped from them in the name of civil rights.  They no longer can run their bakery as they choose.  They no longer have the right to refuse service based upon strongly held private conviction.  Such convictions are now not only moot, they are criminalized.

 

Four, actions are being criminalized which produce no real harm, only offense.  Where is the harm in refusing to bake a cake for a gay couple?  There is no monopoly on baking cakes.  The couple can simply drive to another store and have the cake baked for them.  Their right to have a wedding cake has not been infringed.  Yet, because they feel they have been discriminated against, the refusal to bake the cake based on religious conviction is now not seen as merely rude but criminal.

 

Five, the Kleins had done nothing overt to discriminate against or offend anyone.  There were no signs in their windows refusing service based upon sexual orientation.  They were executing no public agenda which would indicate or encourage discrimination against anyone.  Clearly, their convictions were being practiced quietly and passively.  They had no agenda to offend.  Yet, when placed in a situation where their private convictions offend this gay couple, their beliefs are criminalized.

Six, there clearly is an agenda here, and it is not on the part of the Kleins.  They were not the aggressors in this situation.  Cryer and Bowman were the ones with the agenda.  They could have blown off what they saw as the narrow-mindedness of the Kleins and gone somewhere else to purchase their cake.  Instead, they chose not only to be offended, but to punish and intimidate by bringing charges of discrimination.  The state has now handed the right to bludgeon into submission those who have deep seated moral convictions which run contrary to the new amorality now in fashion.  Once again, such disagreement has now been criminalized.

 

Seven, many of those with traditional Judeo/Christian values, along with Muslims, are being faced with real moral dilemmas.  When encountering in-your-face demands for service such as the Kleins received, what will they do?  Will they simply accede to the demands?  Will they lie – “Sorry we’re so busy our schedule simply won’t allow us to accommodate your order” - and violate their conscience?  Will they shut down their business, as the Kleins, in the fall out since their case became public, have been forced to do?  

Cases such as that of the Kleins clearly illustrate some of the implications of the culture war for millions of people in this country.  There is an ongoing effort to force adherence to a new amoral code.  Increasingly, many Christians, and others with similar moral persuasions, are finding themselves marginalized, and even criminalized, for their beliefs.  Unless Christians and others begin to actively speak up and seek legislative remedy, they may well find themselves, like the Kleins, one day facing criminal charges simply because of what they believe.