Posts

The TN Democratic Party Exposes Religious Liberty Gibberish

Last week I said that a religious liberty that means religious neutrality is impossible. And this week the chair of Tennessee’s Democratic Party proved me right.

The proof came in the form of a letter from the party’s chair, Mary Mancini, to the chief executive officer of Cracker Barrel wanting to know her thoughts concerning a certain church in Knox County that was using one of Cracker Barrel’s local restaurants for an event of some kind that the church had entitled “Small Town Soul Winning.” Ms. Mancini made it clear a church was involved and that her concerns arose out of one of the sermons from that Knox County church that had contained statements “against the LGBTQ+ community.”

I have no objection to her posing the question or even being upset on behalf of many within her political constituency. I did not hear the pastor’s entire sermon, but such portions as I did hear and later read sure seemed to miss the Gospel mark both in content and tenor.

But theological dissection of what was said and how it was said is not my purpose today. Rather it is to further the point made last week that there is no such thing as religious neutrality.

I harp on this hoping that some folks—even on “my side” of the sexual ethic question—will think more deeply about the true scope of religious liberty in a pluralistic society vis-a-vis a religious liberty that is essentially pluralism (and polytheistic) in its worldview.

Cracker Barrel’s Response Invites a Civil Rights Complaint

Upon receipt of the letter, Cracker Barrel’s CEO said the business disagreed strongly with the pastor’s statements and the church would “not be permitted on site.” That is where the law of religious liberty parading as religious neutrality was broken.

If the pastor and church were so inclined, it would be legally appropriate for the church and pastor to file a claim against Cracker Barrel and hold it liable for its actions for the same reason claims were filed by citizens in other states against Christian baker Jack Phillips and floral designer Barronelle Stutzman because they refused to provide custom services. And, unlike these Christians, Cracker Barrel is probably not being asked to provide any unique custom services to the church, just its regular “beans and cornbread” type menu. Follow the logic.

Why Wedding Cakes and ‘Pinto Beans and Cornbread’ Are the Same Thing

Jack Phillips was civilly prosecuted for violating a state law making it “a discriminatory practice and unlawful for a person, directly or indirectly, to refuse, withhold from, or deny to an individual or a group, because of . . . creed, . . . sexual orientation, the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of a place of public accommodation.”

Mr. Phillips did not refuse to design a cake for the two men who wanted to purchase one “because of their sexual orientation,” but because of his religious beliefs about the nature of marriage. Those beliefs prevented him from creating something that celebrated as a marriage that which he could not, in good conscience, depict as marriage.

However, the argument against Phillips goes like this: The reason you won’t make the cake is “because of” your beliefs about “sexual orientation,” and therefore you would not have denied them wedding services “but for” your views regarding “sexual orientation.” I think that syllogism is flawed, but the courts have bought it.

Now consider the church. It is an organization with a “creed,” which, like Colorado’s law, is found among those things against which discrimination is prohibited under Tennessee’s civil rights law, Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-21-501. I know Cracker Barrel would say it didn’t “discriminate” because of the church and pastor’s creed, but because their speech was hateful. However, if the “but for” argument works against Mr. Phillips, it works for the church and pastor and has to be applied to Cracker Barrel.1

Has SCOTUS Weighed In Against Cracker Barrel?

Actually, that last thought reflects what the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission said in dismissing the claim against Mr. Phillips: The government can’t apply one standard to one commercial vendor under its law and apply a different standard to a different commercial vendor. The U.S. Supreme Court said in Mr. Phillips’ case that “the difference in treatment between Phillips’ case and the cases of other bakers who objected to a requested cake on the basis of conscience and prevailed before the Commission” was in “indication of hostility” against religion in violation not just of a statute, but the First Amendment’s provisions regarding religion.

So, if a “but for” legal standard is to be applied to determine if there is discrimination based on sexual orientation, it also has to be applied to determine if there is discrimination on the basis of creed.

I think Cracker Barrel would have a hard time referring to a church and its pastor’s statements in a sermon and then arguing the church’s “creed” had nothing to do with denying it service.

I think it’s clear that the Tennessee Democratic Party and Cracker Barrel do not believe in religious neutrality and, I suspect, the party will put as much economic pressure on vendors like Cracker Barrel as they can in support of its constituents. The Cracker Barrels of the world do obeisance to their perceived monetary gods, because they can’t be neutral, either.

Religious Neutrality Is Not the Answer

Christians need to think a moment about what has happened: It was a sermon preached inside the four walls of a church that got this church excluded from receiving services from Cracker Barrel.

That Christians might disagree with the theology and tenor of the sermon preached is not the point. Rather, the point is that those Christians who want to retreat from the so-called “culture wars” and trust for their protection in a liberty law grounded in religious neutrality need to think again.

Christians of all people should know that trusting in the law to save them has never worked.2

NOTES

1. No doubt, defenders of Cracker Barrel would say this was not just a meal but an “event” and the restaurant didn’t want to be associated with the event. But is not a wedding and reception an event? Of course.

2. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision yesterday preventing the removal of the Peace Cross in a public space in Bladensburg, Md., does not change this point about religious liberty. That decision involved the Establishment Clause, which involves different constitutional issues.

Related Post:


David Fowler served in the Tennessee state Senate for 12 years before joining FACT as President in 2006. Read David’s complete bio.

FACT-RSS-Blog-Icon-small Get David Fowler’s Blog as a feed.

shape of United States filled in with American flag on striped background with words national news

Converse ‘Pride’ High Tops Promoted by ‘Drag Kid’

Converse has enlisted 11-year-old “drag kid” Desmond Napoles to be one of six LGBT spokesmen for its latest rainbow-arrayed high-top sneakers for June’s “Pride Month.”

Desmond, who goes by the moniker “Desmond Is Amazing,” was featured in several news stories last December that argued he was being exploited by getting paid to dance in a gay nightclub in New York City.

Yet on its promotional website for the new shoe collection, Converse showcases a photo of all six LGBT representatives sporting sneakers, and down in front is young Desmond, posing suggestively in a shoulder-baring outfit and wearing heavy makeup.

Even some LGBT supporters were outraged with this new campaign. Said one person on Twitter, “It’s really painful trying to advocate for LGBT positivity when you see ACTUAL child sexualization lumped into it like a tumor. Whatever clueless executive signed off on this should be ashamed.”

On its website, Converse, which is owned by Nike, said, “Converse is committed to supporting movements for positive social change and amplifying youth voices as they spark progress to build the future they believe in.”

“Social change” or “progress” should not be made by exploiting children in order to celebrate and advance forms of sexual expression that deny and degrade the beauty of the sexual complementariness that exists by God having created us male and female.

Converse began its “Pride” sneaker collection in 2014. Proceeds from this merchandise go to support LGBT charities It Gets Better Project and Out MetroWest as well as a Boston-based medical organization called Fenway Health that specializes in helping those with same-sex attractions and HIV/AIDS research.

News Sources:

NOTE: FACT provides links to external websites for educational purposes only. The inclusion of any links to other websites does not necessarily constitute an endorsement.

Get News Stories in Your Inbox Every Week

Get more news snapshots like this one by subscribing to our weekly Five Minutes for Families email.

shape of United States filled in with American flag on striped background with words national news

Microsoft Unveils New Push Toward ‘Gender-Inclusive’ Language

Through the use of its artificial intelligence-driven “Ideas” feature, Microsoft unveiled an upcoming fall version of its cloud-based Microsoft Word Online program that will make suggestions for users to revise any language not deemed “inclusive” or “gender-neutral.”

In a recent company blog post, under the heading “Better Word Documents,” Microsoft dedicates a small paragraph to highlight this new change: “Other intelligent suggestions include . . . advice on more concise and inclusive language such as ‘police officer’ instead of ‘policeman.’”

On the surface, this change might seem innocent, but Christians need to appreciate that the desire of many is to obliterate all distinctions between the two biological sexes.

News Sources:

NOTE: FACT provides links to external websites for educational purposes only. The inclusion of any links to other websites does not necessarily constitute an endorsement.

Get News Stories in Your Inbox Every Week

Get more news snapshots like this one by subscribing to our weekly Five Minutes for Families email.

shape of United States filled in with American flag on striped background with words national news

SCOTUS to Decide Whether Civil Rights Act Covers LGBT Workplace Discrimination

Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. But what does “sex” mean in Title VII?

LGBT activists and those in the LGBT community want the U.S. Supreme Court to redefine the word to include sexual orientation and gender identity, thus providing homosexuals and “transgenders” a new legal cause of action against their employer based on an allegation of some kind of discrimination without that change being made and approved by Congress.

And the U.S. Supreme Court recently agreed to take up three cases on this subject: Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia and Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda, and one concerning a “transgender,” R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. All three will be argued in the fall with a decision likely by June 2020.

John Bursch, an attorney with Alliance Defending Freedom, said of the cases, “Neither government agencies nor the courts have authority to rewrite federal law by replacing ‘sex’ with ‘gender identity.’”

News Sources:

NOTE: FACT provides links to external websites for educational purposes only. The inclusion of any links to other websites does not necessarily constitute an endorsement.

Get News Stories in Your Inbox Every Week

Get more news snapshots like this one by subscribing to our weekly Five Minutes for Families email.

Screenshot of the No Gay? No Way! website campaign.

Amazon Pulled into ‘No Gay? No Way!’ Campaign Targeting Tennessee Legislature

Many Tennesseans have been excited that Amazon will have a major hub in Nashville, creating 5,000 new jobs in our state, but is there a downside to having this well-known company in our state? Unfortunately, yes.

Because Amazon has been vocal about its pro-LGBT stance, it has been pressured by national “No Gay? No Way!” campaign to fight back against legislation that the campaign thinks discriminates against the LGBT community in Nashville. In a letter to the Glamazons, the LGBT employee advocacy group at Amazon, the campaign states, “The time is now to demand Amazon publicly condemn these anti-LGBT bills and fight to repeal existing state laws that discriminate against you and your families. Amazon has done this in Texas, and the threat [of anti-LGBT laws] in Tennessee is just as real.” Then on April 2, the campaign flew a plane with a banner saying, “Amazon HQ2: No Gays? No way!”

The “No Gay? No Way!” campaign focuses on preventing pro-family bills (what they call the “slate of hate”) such as Family Action of Tennessee’s Business Protection Act (SB 364 / HB 563) and School Protection Act (SB 1499 / HB 1274), and bills that look out for the religious beliefs of adoption and foster care agencies.

Amazon responded to the campaign’s pressure tactics by saying, “Amazon has a long history of supporting equality and we’re opposed to laws that discriminate or encourage discrimination.”

This campaign should remind us to pray that our state legislators will not be swayed by the perceived economic influence of businesses like Amazon.

News Sources:

NOTE: FACT provides links to external websites for educational purposes only. The inclusion of any links to other websites does not necessarily constitute an endorsement.

Get News Stories in Your Inbox Every Week

Get more news snapshots like this one by subscribing to our weekly Five Minutes for Families email.