|
|
The
views expressed
on this page are soley those of the author and do not
necessarily
represent the views of County News Online
|
The Daily Signal
Government to
Farmers: Host Same-Sex Wedding or Pay a $13,000 Fine
Leslie Ford & Ryan T. Anderson
August 19, 2014
Should the government be able to coerce a family farm into hosting a
same-sex wedding?
In a free society, the answer is no. Family farms should be free to
operate in accordance with the beliefs and values of their owners.
Government shouldn’t be able to fine citizens for acting in the market
according to their own—rather than the government’s—values, unless
there is a compelling government interest being pursued in the least
restrictive way possible.
But the New York State Division of Human Rights doesn’t see things this
way. On August 8, it fined Cynthia and Robert Gifford $13,000 for
acting on their belief that marriage is the union of a man and woman
and thus declining to rent out their family farm for a same-sex wedding
celebration. The Human Rights Commission ruled that “the nature and
circumstances of the [Giffords’s] violation of the Human Rights Law
also warrants a penalty.”
This is coercive big government run amok.
Here’s the back story. In 2012, Melissa Erwin and Jennie McCarthy
contacted the Giffords to rent the family’s barn for their same-sex
wedding ceremony and reception. Cynthia Gifford responded that she and
her husband would have to decline their request as they felt they could
not in good conscience host a same-sex wedding ceremony at their home.
The Giffords live on the second and third floor of the barn and, when
they host weddings on the first floor, they open part of the second
floor as a bridal suite.
The Giffords have owned and operated Liberty Ridge Farm in
Schaghticoke, New York for over 25 years. Like many small farm
families, they often open the farm to the public for events like berry
picking, fall festivals, and pig racing.
They also open their home for weddings and receptions. When the
Giffords host weddings, they are involved in every aspect of the
wedding planning and celebration: they greet and drive guests in their
farm trolley, decorate the barn, set up floral arrangements, arrange
fireworks displays, and provide catering. As the Human Rights
Commission ruling even points out, “the only wedding-related service
Liberty Ridge Farm does not offer is providing the official for the
wedding ceremony.”
As many brides know, planning a wedding requires hours of careful work
to organize in order to pull off the celebration—hours during which
family businesses operating venues like the Giffords’ actively
participate in the weddings they host. The Giffords believe that as
free citizens running a business, they should have the right to decline
to participate in an event that does not reflect their values.
Unfortunately, New York’s Human Right’s law (Executive Law, art. 15)
creates special privileges based on sexual orientation that trump the
rights of business owners. Because the Giffords’ family farm is open to
the public for business, New York classifies it as a “public
accommodation” and then mandates that it not “discriminate” on the
basis of sexual orientation.
Of course the Giffords were not engaging in any insidious
discrimination—they were acting on their belief about the nature of
marriage. They do not object to gay or lesbian customers attending the
fall festivals, or going berry picking, or doing any of the other
activities that the farm facilitates. The Giffords’ only objection is
to being forced to abide by the government’s views on sexuality and
host a same-sex wedding. The Human Rights Commission has now declared
this historic belief about marriage to be “discrimination.”
The Giffords must pay a $1,500 mental anguish fine to each of the women
and pay $10,000 in civil damages penalty to New York State. If they
can’t pay in 60 days, a nine percent interest rate will be added to
that total. Like Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop, the Giffords
must also institute anti-discrimination re-education classes and
procedures for their staff.
The question before all citizens is whether this law and this fine are
just. Should the government be able to force family businesses to
betray their consciences and participate in ceremonies that violate
their beliefs? Should the government be in the business of
“rehabilitating” consciences or “re-educating” its citizens to change
their moral beliefs about the definition of marriage?
Government should not create special legal privileges based on sexual
orientation and gender identity. Instead, government should protect the
rights of Americans and the associations they form to act in the public
square in accordance with their beliefs. The Giffords’ case illustrates
the growing conflict between religious liberty rights and laws that
grant special privileges based on sexual orientation and gender
identity. In a nation founded on limited government and religious
freedom, government should not attempt to coerce any citizen,
association, or business into celebrating same-sex relationships.
Read this and other articles with links and photos at The Daily Signal
|
|
|
|
