Tammy Bruce is a gay conservative woman who really ought to be ashamed of herself. In a column in the Moonie Times (owned by a man who openly advocated purging all gay people from the face of the earth), she attacks the “GAYstapo” (get it? How clever!) for wanting to violate religious freedom. And she’s got some terrible arguments.
As a gay conservative woman, I supported Arizona’s religious freedom bill, which was just vetoed this week by Gov. Jan Brewer.
I supported it because it embodied the values every American civil rights movement stood for: the freedom to live our lives without being punished for who we are.
Can she really be this ignorant of history? The civil rights movement fought like hell to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964 — you know, the one that forbids businesses from discriminating on the basis of race, religion, gender and other prejudices. The bill you’re supporting is the exact opposite of what the civil rights movement fought for.
This bill, like others across the country, was thought necessary because of the emergence of business, large and small, being attacked by the gay left for either espousing Christian values or acting on their Christian faith. Ranging from a bakery to a photographer, individuals were being sued for refusing to violate their religious beliefs.
Having been a liberal “community organizer” in my past, I immediately recognized the strategy being employed. This is an effort to condition the public into automatically equating faith with bigotry.
Nonsense. It equates the demand for the right to discriminate against gay people as bigotry. And that is exactly what it is.
Under these rules, freedom of conscience is squashed under the jackboot of liberals, all in the Orwellian name of “equality and fairness.” Here we are dealing with not just forcing someone to do something for you, but forcing them in the process to violate a sacrament of their faith as well.
If we are able to coerce someone, via the threat of lawsuit and personal destruction, to provide a service, how is that not slavery? If we insist that you must violate your faith specifically in that slavish action, how is that not abject tyranny?
So then we must have been living under “slavery” and “abject tyranny” for the last half a century, right? After all, federal law for the last 50 years has “coerce[d] someone, via the threat of lawsuit and personal destruction, to provide a service” to women, black people, Christians and Jews and many more even if it violates their religious beliefs. OMG! We’re all slaves! Seriously, how does someone say something this stupid with a straight face?