RECENT  POSTS:  » Court upholds Houston's Equal Rights Ordinance » Maggie Gallagher won't toast you while you trap your spouse in sin » NOM pre-spins its likely low #March4Marriage attendance » 'Children of gays' lawyer to SCOTUS: Ban same-sex marriage so bisexuals will marry heterosexually » Audio: Ryan T. Anderson says sexual orientation speaks to content of character; links it to sadomasochism, polyamory » WHOA: FRC 'reediting' all those heinous fasting-for-marriage prayers I've been showing you!! » Man who dedicates his life to fighting marriage equality, gay parenting: 'I don't work to harm others' » FRC's eighth day of fasting-for-discrimination: Uses passage about forced drowning to condemn gay parents » NOM: Marriage is some creepy number that looks like it's about to behead one spouse » Desperate anti-gay movement's latest attempt to dehumanize: Gay unions harm straight kids  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

10/11/2013

Video: Latest PR campaign in religious right's push to sell discrimination as 'religious freedom'

by Jeremy Hooper

The Odgaards wanted to offer marriage services to everyone but gays, flouting state nondiscrimination law. Here is a fluff video, produced but the Becket Fund, addressing everything but that reality:

Notice they keep using the words "religious ceremony," both in this video and the court documents they just filed, to refer to the gay couple's plans. But don't buy the spin. The fact of the matter is that the Odgaards have been operating a public venue that they offered up to all kinds of heterosexual couples regardless of that couple's personal faith or choices (e.g. divorce and remarriage, interfaith unions, marriages with premarital children, etc.) that might conflict with the Odgaard's own views. And in fact, I can't find any evidence that the gay couple in question was seeking a religious ceremony, per se.

This is just the latest attempt to pretend that identifying as religious gives you a pass to discriminate against certain kinds of consumers on the basis of their sexual orientations. It doesn't and it never will. And it shouldn't.

Pagebreak-348

**Oh, and I'd still like to know why Mr. Odgaard compared our president to a guy with a big bull ring in his nose.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails