• Kentucky Man Takes a Stand: Says Religious Freedom Applies to Business Too

    Summary Surge: A Kentucky business owner challenges his state’s “Fairness Ordinance” on Religious Liberty grounds.

    Huzzah! Another blow struck for religious liberty in the “land of the free”.

    Here are the details from The Associated Press:

    A Kentucky print shop owner who refused to make a gay pride T-shirt argued before the Kentucky Supreme Court that he shouldn’t be compelled to promote messages that go against his religious beliefs.

    Blaine Adamson is proprietor of Hands-On Originals in Lexington. Lexington’s Gay and Lesbian Services Organization approached him about placing an order for T-shirts for the city’s 2012 Gay Pride Festival. He declined the business because its design featured the text “Lexington Pride Festival” wrapped around the number five, which celebrated the event’s fifth year.

    The city’s fussbudget Human Rights despots … err …Commission said Adamson’s refusal violated its gay-rights fairness ordinance.

    On Friday, the high court heard an attorney for the T-shirt maker argue that the First Amendment protects Adamson from having to print that message. The Human Rights Commission argued the T-shirt maker cannot pick and choose who it wants to serve in the Lexington community.

    The Court is set to issue a ruling at a later date.

    Adamson said after the hearing with the high court that the T-shirt he was asked to print “goes against my conscience.”

    Last time I checked, here in the USA people are still allowed to entertain conscience objections toward matters that trouble us, right? What am I missing here?

    “I will work with any person, no matter who they are and no matter what their belief systems are,” Adamson said. “But when I’m presented with a message that conflicts with my faith, that’s just something I cannot print, that’s the line for me.”

    Ray Sexton, executive director of Lexington’s Human Rights Commission, denominated the high court’s finding “a critical decision.”

    “Can we use religion to legally discriminate against people based on sexual orientation and gender identity?” Sexton tendentiously asked, ominously predicting a ruling against the commission could grease the skids for businesses to discriminate on other grounds.

    The Human Rights Commission ordered Adamson in 2012 to print the shirts and attend diversity training.

    Good grief – it that doesn’t send shivers down liberty-lovers’ spines, what will?

    Adamson appealed and won rulings from the circuit court and state court of appeals. The appeals court said in 2017 the printing business was subject to the city’s fairness ordinance but nothing in that ordinance prohibits a private business “from engaging in viewpoint or message censorship.”

    Oh. What’s the problem then?

    Mixed message, much?

    Those not out of their minds over all-things-LGBTQ or obsessed with squashing any annoying Christians who want to actually live-out their faith ought to be able to do the judicial math: The First Amendment – and common, human decency – protect individuals’ choices, business or personal. This principle ought especially apply to those motivated by religious convictions. Prayerfully (am I allowed to use that word?), this Kentucky litigation will join the mounting selection of cases reaffirming that viewpoint.

    Image: Adapted from skeeze from Pixabay 

    Trending Now on Daily Surge

    Send this to a friend