Religious Freedom Acts, Same-Sex Marriage, And The Forgotten American Right Of Private Property

There was a news article from July, 2014, that was titled “Same-sex people can marry, but reflections another matter.” It went on to critique a local business for respectfully refusing to cater for a same-sex marriage reception, which has always been its policy.

The issue of same-sex marriage legalization isn’t so much the couples themselves, it was the means in which they obtained it, which could affect individual and property rights.

There are better options, but lazy or activist politicians either loved their revenue streams too much or were over-zealous in their support for same-sex couples’ votes. This writer discussed better options in Should the Government be in the Marriage Business?

In the most recent egregious act, the Inqusitr reports that Indiana chose to add a Religious Freedom Restoration Act amendment to their laws. This was in reaction to an Indiana pizza business that was harassed, bullied, received death threats, and are currently closed for the mere mention that they would not cater a same-sex wedding, the International Business Times reported. This was despite the fact the said they would serve a homosexual individual.

Naturally the lefties, Big Ds, and their so-called “news” outlets whipped up a fervor and frenzy over the pizza place, and subsequently the law itself. The problem? Indiana’s alleged solution didn’t even fully protect private property rights, but outrage led to a smear campaign against a law that added a thin extra layer of “potential” or “possible” protections.

It wasn’t even a guaranteed protection, as it made it allowable for a business to have the right to let a court decide whether it violated the potential patrons so-called rights. However, so-called “news” outlets and other groups practically asphyxiated on their lies. Even worse, they might have believed it themselves.

President Obama and the left are making this the 1960s civil rights moment of our time. It is a civil rights issue, but that of private property rights of the American individual.

Private property rights is something that has lost its meaning in our society. I’m sure if you asked an average person what private property rights were, they might bring up your land, home, and personal belongings. What wouldn’t come up would be: your business. However, you don’t lose your rights when you open a business. Period.

The founding fathers and early Americans held these rights as sacrosanct. Thomas Jefferson was one of those people.

“To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father’s has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association — ‘the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.'”

Unfortunately, your “rights” have less and less meaning. It is what happens when we allow our words to lose their meaning through contradictory laws and legislation.

The founder’s left these issues in the citizen’s hands to be the change or make the change. If you disagree with a business, you stop giving them your patronage and tell other like-minded individuals.

Constitutionally, the original Religious Freedom Restoration Act, was itself unconstitutional. This is because it claimed by its own wording that it may violate someone’s religious beliefs, which directly conflicts with the First Amendment’s prohibition of laws that are “impeding the free exercise of religion.”

Regardless, a business is not beholden to us, with the government, they are us. Possession is nine-tenths of the law, until someone has a grievance.

In the case of an Oregon bakery that didn’t want to make a same-sex wedding cake, they were hit with a $150,000 fine. According to the Huffington Post, in New Mexico a photographer tried to utilize it to prevent himself from being forced to provide his service to a same-sex wedding, but he was told their Religious Freedom Act did not apply.

The nonsensical claim that says someone’s business is a “public accommodation” is a farce. The government is public property, as we pay taxes to it. One’s private property rights protect them from such a notion, as they do not require us to go to their establishments.

To avoid obligatory R-word, and subsequent accusations of discrimination, not serving a latte or Mocha to a homosexual person, means you’re a jerk, or possibly a bigot. If a Jewish deli does not want to cater a Neo-Nazi themed wedding, that is okay. You can not go into a that same deli and demand a BLT. If a homosexual baker does not want to serve a straight pride bash, they have the right not to. In short, you do not have to participate in any event that you might find morally repugnant, no matter who you are.

Ironically, the dirty “C” word known as Capitalism would do more for same-sex individuals, without harming private property rights. When a business choses to make a decision that is contrary to their customers, despite their property rights, they can lose business or close entirely.

Therefore, just as big Ds and lefties attacked Walmart for their so-called lack of a “living wage,” Walmart responded to the market and raised their wages. This is how the American society was meant to operate, not by torch-wielding mobs, lodging death threats and law suits.

[Image Via Creative Commons]