Wherein we save our breath
"We believe that under this type of legislation, we would begin to see our religious liberties and freedoms erode, unable to share our own testimonies at some point, because of people deeming what we say as hateful or hate speech"
Sentiment to which we tersely reply:
"Oh, well you're wrong."
Now, you may think we're taking the easy way out by offering up such a short, direct a refutation of Mr. Chambers' logic, and in many ways we are. However, after pointing out until we're blue in the face that such protections would not (a) censor speech or thought, despite what the "pro-family movement would have you believe or (b) stifle any religious freedom other than the one in which a gay man is literally beaten with a Bible or cross, we have no problem just flat out saying what more need to say in order to nip these flawed "pro-family" arguments in the bud. In this case, Mr. Chambers: YOU ARE SIMPLY WRONG!
comments powered by Disqus