There are natural rights. There are Constitutional rights. And then there are so-called rights bestowed by the government. When the latter interferes with the former, then an injustice emerges. The collective does not own the goods and services of the individual, nor their conscience. An individual possesses the right to refuse service, even if the reasons seem discriminatory to us.
Now this also means that an individual who enters into a contractual relationship for employment must adhere to the agreed upon terms. This also presupposes that business entities have the right to publish a detailed job description with the terms and stipulations of such employment. An employee can choose to work for said employer or not.
This is freedom, even the freedom to be restrictive in how one conducts business and to whom they rent or sell their property to. If a homosexual wants to only hire homosexuals for their gay bar, that’s their prerogative. If a Christian only wants to photograph weddings of their choosing, then that’s their prerogative. Do we want to bind the Christian photographer to do a pornographic photo shoot in the name of justice?
It’s a sad day when new legislation is needed to make clear what has already been assumed. Or when legislation is introduced in the name of justice to bind the conscience, goods, and services of the individual to the collective – or else! This is real bullying, when you get the strongest guy with the weapon to do your bidding.
So-called religious exemption laws, also, are unnecessary if we were following the rule of law as already stated, which affords such freedoms to the religious and non-religious alike.
Adding the words of sexual orientation as a protection in human rights that outlaws the right to refuse business is a great injustice. Such summoning of the magistrate’s sword in administering punitive justice is a form of reverse discrimination that far exceeds the individual photographer’s refusal to take pictures of a ceremony.
This statist impulse by the political left – and right – leads to a dictatorial spirit that limits the rights of the individual. For the government to use their punitive authority to be the thought police for certain collectives will not end well. We need to distinguish between our lobbying the hearts and minds of people via freedom of speech, seeking the voluntary consent of individuals, and lobbying the government to stand up for us and threaten the livelihood of those who disagree with us. The magistrate is not a mercenary in this matter. The magistrate is a protector of humans rights for all by allowing them the freedom to act according to their dictates, so far as a person’s life and property aren’t unjustly taken.
© 2014, Rick Hogaboam. All rights reserved.