Tearing Down the First Amendment
By CarlKnittel
@CarlKnittel (692)
United States
December 3, 2008 4:37pm CST
McKinley v. eHarmony is yet another attack on the free exercise clause of the constitution. This decision forces a company founded by Christians on Christian principles to provide services that many Christians will see as immoral, un-biblical and wrong. The court, effectively, decided that Christians have nor right to uphold their morals and religious principles in business. It also removes our right to do business with businesses that uphold our values.
A more detailed commentary can be found at: http://hubpages.com/hub/Tearing-Down-the-First-Amendment
The short form is this. McKinley was upset that eHarmony didn't cater to gays so he sued them and got the court to force a Christian founded company to open a secondary sight serving homosexuals.
Here's my question. If the objective is to "preserve the rights" of individuals why is the end result the elimination of specifically enumerated constitutional rights?
Why don't I have a right to be offended at organizations that cater to people who oppose my values but they have a right to prevent me from offending them? Finally, how does the right to do something result in the requirement of others to support that thing even if they find it immoral or unethical?
if this wasn't a proverb it should be: "Just because it's legal doesn't make it right."
2 people like this
3 responses
@CarlKnittel (692)
• United States
6 Dec 08
The near super majority combined with the Republicans being more comfortable as an ignored minority has given them a great deal of courage but conservatives still make up over 60% of the country.
To Bad less than 40% of the country votes.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
6 Dec 08
I don't know about conservatives making up 60% of the country. During the election I consistently read the Rasmussen Reports polls and Democrats always came out with the plurality. Currently the polling says 41.4% democrats, 33.8% Republicans, with 24.7% not being from either party. Now I do believe that in reality the majority are more for fiscal conservatism, but they still don't identify themselves as Republicans.
@Maggiepie (7816)
• United States
3 Dec 08
[b]In point of fact, it isn't legal, Constitutionally speaking. I mean, we're also guaranteed the right to associate with whom we please! And if I choose not to associate with someone, NO LAW is supposed to make that happen--ESPECIALLY considering the right to freedom of religious practice!
Sigh...welcome to the USSA....
Maggiepie[/b]
2 people like this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
5 Dec 08
It's just another example of whiners who only understand force. eHarmony offers a service and reserves the right to limit what they offer.
This would be the same as a judge ordering coke venues to offer pepsi products because some people just don't like coke products.
If someone wants to offer a dating site open to both heterosexual and homosexual, or just homosexuals, that is their right. eHarmony should enjoy those same rights.
Freedom works both ways!
1 person likes this
@CarlKnittel (692)
• United States
6 Dec 08
Strangely enough, The same company that pokes fun at eHarmony for rejecting so many potential clients has has offered it's services to homosexuals for years. So have many other dating sites. These folks aren't satisfied unless everyone is forced by law to not only accept them but promote their views as superior.
There is a reason why those who promote liberal views compare their opponents to Holocaust deniers.
Funny how Hypocrite's, Holocaust deniers, crooks, evil and all those other names are routinely applied to conservatives while the liberals see evil as relative, Hypocracy as impossible for them(since they don't espouse any morals or ethics to be accused of breaking) and the holocaust deniers as constituents(when they are citizens)and potential allies and trading partners(when they are foreign leaders)
They use the words that only have meaning to the people they are labeling with them. We're dumb enough to listen and vote in the folks who hate us as a "protest vote" towards members of our own movement.
