When an explicit constitutional right comes into conflict with something that isn’t a constitutional right at all, the constitutional right must take precedence in every case.
- Bryan Fischer
It is an indisputable fact of modern life that every advance of the homosexual agenda comes at the expense of religious liberty. Every time the gay agenda advances, religious liberty is forced into retreat. It is a zero sum game.
The homosexual lobby is like a Leviathan, devouring everything in its path and crushing any resistance to its dictatorial demands. The insatiable lust for total, repressive domination of our culture from the forces of homosexual totalitarianism is creating intense conflicts between the gay agenda and religious liberty.
Wedding vendors are bearing the brunt of the fascism of the homosexual movement. Baker Jack Phillips was found guilty of discrimination by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission for politely declining to use his artistic talents to create a message that promotes homosexual “marriage.” Even the Supreme Court refused to recognize that Phillips’ own civil right to the free exercise of his Christian faith was being demolished.
So while a Colorado baker can refuse - politely or otherwise - to produce cakes with Bible verses on them, the same baker will be punished if he refuses to produce cakes in support of sexually deviant behavior.
Pew Research indicates that Americans are so hopelessly confused about the Constitution and sexual morality that just 48% of them believe that bakers have a First Amendment right to the free exercise of their faith. More Americans - 49% - believe that special “rights” granted exclusively on the basis of abnormal sexual behavior are of greater importance than the Constitution itself.
Here is the simple truth: according to the Founders’ Constitution (not the one mangled by the Supreme Court) when religious liberty comes into conflict with homosexual “rights,” religious liberty wins every time. Every single time. This is for this one reason: the right to the free exercise of religion always trumps “rights” based on sexual deviancy. The right to the free exercise of religion is an explicit constitutional and God-given right. Engaging in homosexuality, on the other hand, is not.
When an explicit constitutional right comes into conflict with something that isn’t a constitutional right at all, the constitutional right must take precedence in every case. (Just because the Supreme Court says homosexuality is a right doesn’t make it so. The Court has no constitutional authority to make law, according to Article I, Section 1.)
The federal government is flatly prohibited by the First Amendment from “prohibiting the free exercise” of Christianity. (However you understand the meaning of the word “religion” in the First Amendment, Christianity is obviously included.) The federal government includes the Supreme Court. So when the Supreme Court told Jack Phillips he had no right to the free exercise of religion, it was the Supreme Court which violated the Constitution, not Jack Phillips.
Engaging in homosexual conduct is not a constitutional right. You can read the Constitution front to back, left to right, right to left, upside down and in Sanskrit and you will not find one mention of homosexuality in the document anywhere. Yet you can’t even make it through the first provision in the Bill of Rights without facing a plain, unambiguous declaration by the Founders that religious liberty is the pre-eminent civil right that government has a sacred duty to protect.
Further, it is impossible that engaging in homosexualily could ever be a moral, civil, or constitutional right at all, let alone a civil right on par with or superior to religious liberty. That’s because the source of every one of our civil rights, according to the Founders, is the Creator. God is the one who has endowed us with all of our civil rights. It is impossible that God would ever grant human beings the “right” to engage in sexually deviant behavior. It is utterly contrary to his design for humanity, for sexuality, and for the family.
What’s at stake here is whether we will be a constitutional republic governed by the Constitution and the rule of law or a banana republic governed by the rule of sexual anarchists. It’s a time for choosing. Let us choose well.