Star Parker, the self-described former “welfare queen” turned B-list Christian right celebrity, seems to be a very confused person. On the one hand, she says Gov. Brewer was right to veto the right to discriminate bill because it’s wrong to discriminate:
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer was right to veto S.B.1062, which would have amended the Arizona Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
The bill, per most interpretations I’ve read, would have given broad discretion to business owners, because of their religious convictions, to refuse to do business with anyone associated with homosexual lifestyles.
Religious freedom is about protection of your right to practice your religion and not being forced to violate it.
However, the right to religious freedom does not mean the right to write-off and marginalize into non-existence a whole class of citizens whom you don’t like or agree with.
Under Jim Crow, the problem whites had with blacks was not what blacks thought or did, but that they existed. These laws were designed to relegate one class of citizens to separate and unequal status, simply because of who they were.
Such actions have nothing to do with freedom and everything to do with bigotry and racism.
Hmmm. That’s an unexpected and rare coherent thought from Parker. But then she turns right around and contradicts herself:
But, unfortunately, the failure of this poorly conceived Arizona bill will be misinterpreted. Some will incorrectly claim that this means it is not a violation of religious freedom to force a business owner to provide a product or service for activity that is against his or her religious convictions. That is incorrect.
Would anyone question the refusal of a black vendor to sells sheets to the local Ku Klux Klan chapter? Or a Jewish merchant refusing to sell the poster board for a Neo-Nazi rally? Or refusal of a Christian video service to make a pornographic film?
So why is it not perfectly clear that the religious freedom of a Christian merchant is violated if that merchant is forced to bake a cake or prepare a flower arrangement for a same-sex marriage, which is not only as personally repugnant to that vendor as any in the cases above, but is also a clear and literal violation of the scripture that defines the faith of these individuals?…
It is critical that Christians draw the line and continue the struggle and not allow religion or religious freedom to be compromised. Individuals or businesses forced to supply goods or services for activities against the precepts of their faith must refuse and call forth their protection under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Um. What? But you just said…huh? Oh, and this is a war on Christians, blah blah blah.