Hmmm...I thought churches didn't have to worry about performing gay marriages...what about this...

[Derideo_Te]

They are a church that did not apply for tax exempt status. They pay taxes.

Therefore they were running a for profit business.

 

[JakeStarkey]

That's why the business can't discriminate, because it is doing public service.

 

[depotoo]

Seems it is a wedding chapel-
http://touch.towleroad.com/all/2014-05-hitching-post-1.html#1

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Looks like another overreaction from the right

Looks like another non-issue from the right.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Seems it is a wedding chapel-
http://touch.towleroad.com/all/2014-05-hitching-post-1.html#1

Judging by the website it was definitely being run like a business.

Packages The Hitching Post

They even offered discounts to the military.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

They are a church that did not apply for tax exempt status. They pay taxes.

Therefore they were running a for profit business.

How could they be making a profit at those prices.

 

[AmericanFirst]

It is all supposed to be about tolerance of other people...except when that means leaving religious people alone...the first attempts to go after churches are happening and are being beaten back...but this is just the start...like when the lawyers wanted the sermons of ministers...but then they backed off...for now...how about this threat...?

The PJ Tatler Idaho City Threatens to Jail Ministers for Not Performing Gay Weddings

Coeur d’Alene officials told the Knapps privately and also publicly stated that the couple would violate the city’s public accommodations statute once same-sex marriage became legal in Idaho if they declined to perform a same-sex ceremony at their chapel. On Friday, the Knapps respectfully declined such a ceremony and now face up to 180 days in jail and up to $1,000 in fines for each day they decline to perform that ceremony.

“The city somehow expects ordained pastors to flip a switch and turn off all faithfulness to their God and their vows,” explained ADF Legal Counsel Jonathan Scruggs. “The U.S. Constitution as well as federal and state law clearly stand against that. The city cannot mandate across-the-board conformity to its interpretation of a city ordinance in utter disregard for the guaranteed freedoms Americans treasure in our society.”

The should be able to refuse and the also should lose their tax exempt status in doing so

Wrong socialist.

 

[Katzndogz]

If that's the ad gays have the use of the chapel only. They still need to get someone to perform the ceremony because the minister doesn't get paid. He works for tips. He has the absolute freedom to refuse to perform the marriage. The chapel is the business. Get someone else.

 

[shart_attack]

They are running a business, not a religion.

Hence they fall under business law and must not discriminate.

Try telling that to the congregants of a mosque, BITCH.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Hmmm...I thought churches didn't have to worry about performing gay marriages...what about this..."

This is an example of your ignorance of the law.

 

[shart_attack]

"Hmmm...I thought churches didn't have to worry about performing gay marriages...what about this..."

This is an example of your ignorance of the law.

Aaaaaaaaaand this is an example of why you just might be the most insipid hack of a poster in the history of Internet message boards.

 

[Katzndogz]

Gays gonna lose this one. They can rent the chapel. That's as far as they get.

 

[bodecea]

They are running a business, not a religion.

Hence they fall under business law and must not discriminate.

Try telling that to the congregants of a mosque, BITCH.

Huh?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

It is all supposed to be about tolerance of other people...except when that means leaving religious people alone...the first attempts to go after churches are happening and are being beaten back...but this is just the start...like when the lawyers wanted the sermons of ministers...but then they backed off...for now...how about this threat...?

The PJ Tatler Idaho City Threatens to Jail Ministers for Not Performing Gay Weddings

Coeur d’Alene officials told the Knapps privately and also publicly stated that the couple would violate the city’s public accommodations statute once same-sex marriage became legal in Idaho if they declined to perform a same-sex ceremony at their chapel. On Friday, the Knapps respectfully declined such a ceremony and now face up to 180 days in jail and up to $1,000 in fines for each day they decline to perform that ceremony.

“The city somehow expects ordained pastors to flip a switch and turn off all faithfulness to their God and their vows,” explained ADF Legal Counsel Jonathan Scruggs. “The U.S. Constitution as well as federal and state law clearly stand against that. The city cannot mandate across-the-board conformity to its interpretation of a city ordinance in utter disregard for the guaranteed freedoms Americans treasure in our society.”

The should be able to refuse and the also should lose their tax exempt status in doing so

They're for profit stupid, which means they aren't tax exempt.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

If you are in public business, you can''t refuse to serve any of the public because you don't like their lifestyle.

We'll see. I hope this goes to SCOTUS. I believe that it could unravel the travesty known as public accommodation laws.

 

[Katzndogz]

The minister is protected. Hobby Lobby case set the precedent. He has Bill Clinton's Religious Freedom Restoration Act behind him. They will have to rent the chapel but the minister cannot be compelled to perform the ceremony.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

What about mosques refusing to give in to the homofascist agenda? I want the homos to try that so we can watch them get blown up.

 

[ABikerSailor]

If they are a for profit organization (like many of the wedding chapels in Las Vegas), then they should have to perform marriages for anyone who can afford to buy their services.

If they are a regular church (with regular services other than just weddings), and have a non profit clause, then leave them alone.

Besides.............................there are many churches who are willing to marry gay couples, why get in a hassle with one that refuses?

And...................if gay marriage is legal in that state, and the "chapel" that is a for profit business refuses, they should be prosecuted.

If you're against gay marriage, then don't marry a gay person.

 

[TrueMan]

To force someone who believes strongly that the marriage of two people of the same sex is wrong is tyranny in it's most foul and evil form. Too much for the democratic state, that we are supposed to be.

 

[AmericanFirst]

If they are a for profit organization (like many of the wedding chapels in Las Vegas), then they should have to perform marriages for anyone who can afford to buy their services.

If they are a regular church (with regular services other than just weddings), and have a non profit clause, then leave them alone.

Besides.............................there are many churches who are willing to marry gay couples, why get in a hassle with one that refuses?

And...................if gay marriage is legal in that state, and the "chapel" that is a for profit business refuses, they should be prosecuted.

If you're against gay marriage, then don't marry a gay person.

Just because it is legal doesn't mean you can force a Church to perform gay marriages, just means to do so isn't against the law. It is still the free will of the pastor to decide. But then libtards hate free will when it comes to forcing their perversion down everyones throat.