NY Nazis Fine NY Couple $13,000 for not hosting Sodomite Wedding on Their Own Property – Then They Ordered Them to do This
A New York couple has been fined $13,000 for refusing to host a sodomite wedding on their own property, but that is just one of the Nazi-like injustices that were handed down by the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. They also ordered the couple to attend “re-education training classes” to brainwash them regarding the Bible’s teaching that marriage is between a man and a woman.
Robert and Cynthia Gifford are Christians, and when they were approached by Melisa McCarthy, who wanted to have a wedding with her female partner on the Gifford’s property, and was politely told that because of their Christian convictions regarding marriage, they do not host such deviant acts on their property.
The couples’ Liberty Ridge Farm is the site of their home, which is also a barn that they built. The Giffords have often used the first floor and the backyard to host weddings and Mrs. Gifford is the wedding coordinator for those events.
Alliance Defending Freedom, who represented the couple, provided the background to what took place.
“On Sept. 25, 2012, Melisa McCarthy called Cynthia Gifford, inquiring about the use of the farm for her upcoming same-sex ceremony,” read the press release from ADF. “Because of her Christian faith’s teachings on marriage, Cynthia politely told McCarthy that she and her husband don’t host and coordinate same-sex ceremonies but left open an invitation to visit the farm to consider it as a potential reception site. Instead, McCarthy and her partner filed a complaint with the Division of Human Rights.”
I stand by the Giffords with just one exception. I can’t understand why they would not host a sodomite wedding, but then would allow for a reception to celebrate that very perversion of marriage. However, it is their property and they can discriminate as to who is allowed on it and who is not. My goodness, that is basic property rights!
According to the press release, the couple were found guilty of “sexual orientation discrimination.” They were then fined $10,000 plus $3,000 in damages and ordered to go through re-education training.
ADF Legal Counsel Caleb Dalton, who argued before the court on behalf of the couple in Gifford v. Erwin said, “All Americans should be free to live and work according to their beliefs, especially in our own backyards. The government went after both this couple’s freedom and their ability to make a living simply for adhering to their faith on their own property. The court should have rejected this unwarranted and unconstitutional government intrusion, so we will consult with our client regarding appeal.”
The appeals court is engaging in government coercion and is clearly violating the First Amendment, which not only protects the right to discriminate (at the foundation of the right to peacefully assemble is the right to discriminate as to who you will and will not assemble with), but specifically states that no laws are to be written in regard to the free exercise of religion, specifically the Christian religion.
ADF has argued in the past that the First Amendment specifically prohibits the government from forcing anyone to salute a flag, and since it does that, it most certainly prohibits the government from coercing individuals into hosting sodomites from engaging in a mockery of marriage.
“We had hoped that the court would recognize that the government has clearly gone too far,” said co-counsel James Trainor. “The Constitution prohibits the government from forcing anyone to help communicate messages that conflict with their core beliefs about marriage. The Giffords welcome all people to the farm, but not all messages or events.”
According to the first reply brief that was filed with the court by ADF on behalf of the Giffords read, “Law does not require the Giffords to coordinate or host every event that a person…requests. For example, if the infamous Westboro Baptist group asked the Giffords to host an event that would express their false message that God hates people in same-sex relationships, the Giffords would not be discriminating based on religion if they declined the event because they did not want to host expression that violates their belief that God loves everyone…. The statute does not require that they treat all messages equal.”
The criminal actions of government and courts regarding these issues of sodomites and their perversions needs to be dealt with; and it needs to start with the impeachment of judges like those on the appeals court and the reinstitution of the law against sodomy to deal with it as a crime, as our forefathers did, instead of masking it as “sexual orientation.”
For more on this story, please check out the Gifford v. Erwin resource page at ADF.