GoFundMe shuts down another donations page for a Christian business owner accused of discrimination?

posted at 5:21 pm on April 27, 2015 by Allahpundit

The question mark’s in the headline because they haven’t commented yet on where the page went or why, but you can guess what happened if you read Jazz’s post yesterday. A GoFundMe page for a different Christian-owned business, Sweet Cakes by Melissa in Oregon, was yanked down by GFM because there are discrimination charges pending against the owner and it’s GFM’s policy not to raise money “in defense of formal charges of heinous crimes, including violent, hateful, or sexual acts.” Politely refusing to cater a gay wedding is, evidently, now a “heinous crime.” But that raised a question: If charity for Sweet Cakes was verboten, why wasn’t it also verboten for Barronelle Stutzman, the Christian florist from Washington who’s also facing discrimination charges for declining to provide the flowers for a longtime gay customer’s marriage ceremony? With help from Dana Loesch, the GoFundMe page for Stutzman had apparently already reached six figures. And now suddenly it’s gone, likely the next victim in GFM’s left-appeasing policy of treating discrimination allegations about a religious business owner’s objection to gay marriage as too heinous for a respectable business to tolerate.

I take it this is GFM’s way of atoning to liberals for sponsoring the fabulously successful donations drive for Memories Pizza, which reached nearly a cool million dollars before it ended. What happens, though, if the charges against Stutzman are dropped and she goes back to being merely a target of the left instead of a target of the state? Reinstating the page will irritate gay-rights activists; maintaining the suspension will alienate conservatives. Weird trap for a business to set for itself, especially since Samaritan’s Purse is already angling to fill this specialized niche in the market.

There’s a little bit of hope out there for some, but not all, Christian business owners, though:

Speech is speech! At least we have the settled for the moment, anyway, for this one case. The circuit court for Fayette County in Kentucky has ruled that the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission erred when it determined that a Christian T-shirt company discriminated when it refused to print shirts for a gay pride event.

In 2012 a Lexington, Kentucky, gay organization filed a complaint against Hands On Originals, a shirt company who wears its Christianity right on its site, if not on its sleeves (sorry, couldn’t resist). The organization asked for Hands On Originals to make shirts for their 2012 gay pride festival. The shirt company declined, because they didn’t support the message the group wanted printed. The group then accused the company of violating the county’s public accommodation laws, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

The response from Hands On was that they weren’t discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. They were refusing to print a message with which they disagreed.

That’s the winning ticket. Turn this into a free-speech issue rather than a free-exercise issue and you’re more likely to win. The Supreme Court’s said before that laws of general applicability typically override an individual’s demand for an exemption on religious grounds, but judges are always leery of cases where the state tries to compel an individual to endorse a specific message. The tricky part for businesses like Sweet Cakes and Stutzman’s flower shop is that baking cakes and arranging flowers arguably aren’t a form of expressive activity, notwithstanding the creative element involved. Placing a message on a t-shirt is. Likewise, a Christian photographer may be on firmer ground than Stutzman insofar as choosing what to photograph and composing the shot are more widely regarded as a form of artistry, which courts might treat as expressive for First Amendment purposes. If you want Christian businesses to have a right of refusal on gay weddings, start thinking less in terms of faith and more in terms of speech.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

A woman beaten to death by her husband for going outside without his supervision….

women stoned if they won’t don and wear a burkha…

children of Christian beliefs/families who are kidnapped and molested by numerous muslim males…

HOW IS ANY OF THAT any different than what the Hmsxl movement is doing to Americans who “refuse to participate in ‘gay’weddings”…and the businesses such as “gofundme” that is assisting in that process? How is that any different than the behaviors mentioned above?

All these activities exact a punishing severity to the point of death — or loss of livelihood, destruction of a business or individual’s ability to support themselves, maintain their business — to those who hold opinions that don’t mesh with the more violent among us. In the US, the Left is the more violent among us.

Lourdes on April 27, 2015 at 8:02 PM

No hate, please.

Cindy Munford on April 27, 2015 at 7:47 PM

http://i.imgur.com/18HIUns.png

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:03 PM

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:03 PM

Perfect.

Cindy Munford on April 27, 2015 at 8:07 PM

A woman beaten to death by her husband for going outside without his supervision….

women stoned if they won’t don and wear a burkha…

children of Christian beliefs/families who are kidnapped and molested by numerous muslim males…

HOW IS ANY OF THAT any different than what the Hmsxl movement is doing to Americans who “refuse to participate in ‘gay’weddings”…and the businesses such as “gofundme” that is assisting in that process? How is that any different than the behaviors mentioned above?

Lourdes on April 27, 2015 at 8:02 PM

For starters…no one is being killed. I know that’s just minor difference, but still…

Frankly, the radical Christians have more in common with the radical Islamists, who believe a particular religious faith should be legislated through the state, and that it trumps everything.

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:08 PM

Perfect.

Cindy Munford on April 27, 2015 at 8:07 PM

;)

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:09 PM

Frankly, the radical Christians have more in common with the radical Islamists, who believe a particular religious faith should be legislated through the state, and that it trumps everything.

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:08 PM

Marriage is a bedrock institution that contributes to society.

Gay “marriage” contributes nothing to society.

Augustinian on April 27, 2015 at 8:13 PM

Marriage is a bedrock institution that contributes to society.

Gay “marriage” contributes nothing to society.

Augustinian on April 27, 2015 at 8:13 PM

Like divorce?

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:15 PM

Marriage is a bedrock institution that contributes to society.

Gay “marriage” contributes nothing to society.

Augustinian on April 27, 2015 at 8:13 PM

Like divorce?

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:15 PM

I’m not a big fan of divorce – and neither is Christ.

No fault divorce was the love-child of the Leftists. The very same Left that is pushing Gay ‘marriage”.

So your point is……?

Augustinian on April 27, 2015 at 8:20 PM

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:08 PM

So say thy buttered

Curious

When you get it in the A on your wedding night will that be considered the consummation of marraige ?

Mr Soames on April 27, 2015 at 8:23 PM

Like divorce?

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:15 PM

If your moral justification for gay “marriage” is the dysfunctional non-institution of divorce – then your moral bankruptcy is complete.

Augustinian on April 27, 2015 at 8:23 PM

I’m not a big fan of divorce – and neither is Christ.

No fault divorce was the love-child of the Leftists. The very same Left that is pushing Gay ‘marriage”.

So your point is……?

Augustinian on April 27, 2015 at 8:20 PM

Conservatives and Christians don’t get divorced? That’s news to me.

And a pox on you for making me even remotely defending Leftists.

My point is, as you side-stepped the main point anyway by bringing up SSM, is that you make blanket statements when there are clearly many exceptions…like only “one man one woman” marriage is a “bedrock of society” yet many only lead to divorce, which by any definition doesn’t contribute to society…unless you’re a divorce attorney. And how do you know gay marriage doesn’t or won’t contribute to society? If you answer, please try to stay on point.

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:26 PM

If your moral justification for gay “marriage” is the dysfunctional non-institution of divorce – then your moral bankruptcy is complete.

Augustinian on April 27, 2015 at 8:23 PM

That’s not my argument at all. READ my comments!

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:28 PM

It’s not hate to preach the Gospel from God’s Word. Non believers cleverly call the scriptures racist and hateful yes the devil uses these terms to get people off Christ’s message of salvation.All the politicians who support Gay marriage are scared of being called bigots and racists and would ignore what the scriptures. Christ agrees with all scripture in both the new and Old Testament since he is part of the Godhead. He did say “Go and sin no more”.
.

garydt on April 27, 2015 at 8:30 PM

Meanwhile, there are campaigns at GoFundMe for gang bangers and felons of all types.

For example, google ‘Superstar Felon Jeremy Meeks Raises Enough Money to Hire Top Lawyer’:

News broke today that the felon with the famous mugshot, Jeremy Meeks, has officially raised enough money to purchase a well respected lawyer to represent him in court and Meeks also will be stylin’ in court, raising enough money to rock a Tom Ford Suit to his trial. It’s been reported that Meeks is planning to beat his case and is working on starting a career, still no word as to what exactly he will be doing but we can only imagine it will be something dealing with modeling. The money that the thirsty women across the world raised thru GoFundMe has also provided Meeks with the opportunity to hire a more than capable agent to help get his career started.

Gideon7 on April 27, 2015 at 8:31 PM

Lots of talk out and around on other sites today about Christians going ‘underground” if SCOTUS rules in favor of SSM.

lineholder on April 27, 2015 at 8:42 PM

lineholder on April 27, 2015 at 8:42 PM

They should go full militia style

And I will be there

Mr Soames on April 27, 2015 at 8:54 PM

Conservatives and Christians don’t get divorced? That’s news to me.

And a pox on you for making me even remotely defending Leftists.

My point is, as you side-stepped the main point anyway by bringing up SSM, is that you make blanket statements when there are clearly many exceptions…like only “one man one woman” marriage is a “bedrock of society” yet many only lead to divorce, which by any definition doesn’t contribute to society…unless you’re a divorce attorney. And how do you know gay marriage doesn’t or won’t contribute to society? If you answer, please try to stay on point.

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:26 PM

Of course they do. And divorce always constitutes a failure on some level of the sanctity of marriage. Your ridiculous reasoning is tantamount to citing life as the leading cause of death – which it is indirectly by pure default out of predicated necessity.

And what exactly does gay “marriage” contribute to society? Nothing. And it never will. Because it wasn’t manufactured to contribute anything. It was contrived to specifically take away the exclusive founding premise of the union of the two separate and complimentary sexes united to become one and to bring forth life. And that paradigm gives social stability by the very nature of our design even if the couple is childless. All homo-unions do is diminish that sacred union in order to “normalize” the depravity of homosexuality by lowering and destroying the very definition of morality.

Augustinian on April 27, 2015 at 9:27 PM

If your moral justification for gay “marriage” is the dysfunctional non-institution of divorce – then your moral bankruptcy is complete.

Augustinian on April 27, 2015 at 8:23 PM

That’s not my argument at all. READ my comments!

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:28 PM

On the contrary – that is exactly your point. Your follow-up comments verify it.

Augustinian on April 27, 2015 at 9:29 PM

If you want Christian businesses to have a right of refusal on gay weddings, start thinking less in terms of faith and more in terms of speech.

I never could figure out why a caterer can’t just say there are certain types of events that they specialize in and certain events that they don’t. Be it traditional or same sex marriages. I’m sure if I wanted to open a catering business and chose only to cater same sex weddings, that would okay.

Plus, as an black woman, I wouldn’t even think of asking someone to cater my wedding or photograph it, who didn’t like blacks or who I thought was a racist. I’m not going to sue to get someone who hates me to be at my wedding. That’s what I don’t get about these lawsuits. Are the plaintiffs really saying they want these businesses, that don’t support their union, to be at their wedding ceremonies?

sydneyjane on April 27, 2015 at 9:40 PM

Selwyn Duke authored a great article on how to deal with this problem. Every part of your service should scream Christianity. This means uniforms, jewelry, actions (praying before and after the service at the location – publicly, even asking the participants to join in, etc.) Donating part of the proceeds to a pro-life lobby, and telling the customer that will be done. Telling the customer you will advertise thanking them for helping out the pro life lobby with their purchase. This is simply brilliant. The gays will run from this. The New York hoteliers are proof, they can’t even talk with Ted Cruz.

Awilson on April 27, 2015 at 9:43 PM

My point is, as you side-stepped the main point anyway by bringing up SSM, is that you make blanket statements when there are clearly many exceptions…like only “one man one woman” marriage is a “bedrock of society” yet many only lead to divorce, which by any definition doesn’t contribute to society…unless you’re a divorce attorney. And how do you know gay marriage doesn’t or won’t contribute to society? If you answer, please try to stay on point.

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:26 PM

Can you procreate with your partner, JetBoy?

NOMOBO on April 27, 2015 at 10:06 PM

Frankly, the radical Christians have more in common with the radical Islamists, who believe a particular religious faith should be legislated through the state, and that it trumps everything.

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:08 PM

Frankly, fascist totalitarians like you have and your ilk have more in common with the radical Islamists, who believe a particular ideology should be legislated through the state, and that it trumps everything.

besser tot als rot on April 27, 2015 at 11:07 PM

is that you make blanket statements when there are clearly many exceptions…

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:26 PM

LOL. Your lack of self awareness is amazing.

besser tot als rot on April 27, 2015 at 11:09 PM

Conservatives and Christians don’t get divorced? That’s news to me.

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:26 PM

It is really quite funny to watch you whine about someone misstating your argument and then you go full strawman like that.

besser tot als rot on April 27, 2015 at 11:11 PM

And a pox on you for making me even remotely defending Leftists.

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:26 PM

Still in the moby closet?

besser tot als rot on April 27, 2015 at 11:13 PM

Augustinian on April 27, 2015 at 9:27 PM

Again with the “because baby-making” defense. I hate to break it to you, but nobody getting married is required to bring forth life. Nor does anyone need a marriage to make a kid. Nor does a marriage guarantee a couple will be good parents, or raise a good kid into a productive adult. One look at Baltimore right now proves that. Heck, you don’t even have to have sex to get pregnant anymore.

Is the biological processes of making a baby your best…and apparently only…reason to say gay marriage wouldn’t contribute to society?

JetBoy on April 28, 2015 at 12:14 AM

Can you procreate with your partner, JetBoy?

NOMOBO on April 27, 2015 at 10:06 PM

Is it asolutely necessary that I be able to?

If so, then women who can’t bear children should be prohibited from marrying. Same with men who are sterile. And if married man gets a vasectomy, or a woman gets her tubes tied, their marriage license should be immediately revoked.

Not to mention, I have yet to see a marriage license that requires any couple to have even one kid. But maybe I missed it…and you’ll show me one.

JetBoy on April 28, 2015 at 12:18 AM

Again with the “because baby-making” defense. I hate to break it to you, but nobody getting married is required to bring forth life. Nor does anyone need a marriage to make a kid. Nor does a marriage guarantee a couple will be good parents, or raise a good kid into a productive adult. One look at Baltimore right now proves that. Heck, you don’t even have to have sex to get pregnant anymore.

Is the biological processes of making a baby your best…and apparently only…reason to say gay marriage wouldn’t contribute to society?

JetBoy on April 28, 2015 at 12:14 AM

I clearly cited the intrinsic morality that Natural marriage contributes beyond child bearing:

…the exclusive founding premise of the union of the two separate and complimentary sexes united to become one and to bring forth life. And that paradigm gives social stability by the very nature of our design even if the couple is childless.

Augustinian on April 27, 2015 at 9:27 PM

And I never stated offspring as a “requirement” I cited it specifically as a desirable and vital component for marriage. After all, some couples are incapable of reproducing. And yes natural marriage has always been and always will be the best possible paradigm for children – because the two sexes are not interchangeable. And no, homo-unions do not provide that stability regardless of all the conveniently timed reams of propaganda that’s been produce over the last recent years by the progressives of social “scientism”.

But see – you’re citing the same old argument of lowered standards that you always do. You have to point to the growing dysfunction and moral rot in a decaying society and play off of that lowered bar of expectations in order to elevate homo-unions by contrast in an artificial “wholesomeness” that relies solely on the bargaining down of all moral safeguards. Because that’s all you’ve got.

And oh and BTW – what EXACTLY is Catholic in your reasoning? All you’re doing is justifying an intrinsic evil, an abomination, a sin against nature itself. And oh yeah, you’re also advocating that this rot be afflicted on to children:

“Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. Woe to the world because of things that cause sin! Such things must come, but woe to the one through whom they come! If your hand or foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter into life maimed or crippled than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into eternal fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into fiery Gehenna.” – Matthew 18:6-9

I’ll tell you again: stop fostering these lies. Stop advocating this destruction. Get your sorry @ss to confession ASAP and give your desires and stubborn self-centeredness fully over to Christ. Time will betray you. You do not know when your end will come, and for gods-sake don’t let the reaper catch you in the complacency of the devil. It will be hard – but it is necessary:

“Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the road broad that leads to destruction, and those who enter through it are many. How narrow the gate and constricted the road that leads to life. And those who find it are few.” – Matthew 7:13-14

Turn around while there is still time. Don’t put it off.

Augustinian on April 28, 2015 at 12:45 AM

Is it asolutely necessary that I be able to?

If so, then women who can’t bear children should be prohibited from marrying. Same with men who are sterile. And if married man gets a vasectomy, or a woman gets her tubes tied, their marriage license should be immediately revoked.

Not to mention, I have yet to see a marriage license that requires any couple to have even one kid. But maybe I missed it…and you’ll show me one.

JetBoy on April 28, 2015 at 12:18 AM

If children aren’t relevant to marriage – then what IS relevant to it?

And why shouldn’t incestuous couples be allowed to marry and adopt as well? Or polygamous couples? Why shouldn’t pederasts be allowed to enter into unions? If all that matters to unions is desire – then why should the homosexuals have special privileges designated for their unnatural desires and not everyone else? All desires should be equally good since desire apparently justifies itself. Even if the desire is antithetic to our natural design, like same-sex desire.

Augustinian on April 28, 2015 at 12:54 AM

Augustinian on April 28, 2015 at 12:45 AM

The gate is narrow, that’s the key point. There are many false teachers that will twist the very words in front of your eyes in the scripture and claim it really doesn’t mean what it says. There are many who pass thru the broad gate, lying to themselves that they’re worthy enough for God to ignore this or that favorite sin. The second greatest trick by Satan is convincing people they are saved while claiming a certain sin to be a sacred sin. Here’s looking at Pelosi and Tea Kennedy, vis a vis abortion. Unless he had a deathbed conversion of his heart (unlikely as he was attended to at death and no one’s claimed he converted before passing) and repented he’s burning in he’ll for eternity just as much as any villain of history.

AH_C on April 28, 2015 at 1:16 AM

Wow.

So basically, GoFundMe is refusing to provide a service to a minority.

Um…

rasqual on April 28, 2015 at 1:33 AM

“… which, if my CCD classes woefully misinformed me …”

BINGO! We have a winner. If you’re like most Catholics of your generation (and it appears you are), the “Catholic education” that was the substance of your CCD classes was wholly lacking.

ProEcclesia on April 28, 2015 at 8:24 AM

“… which, if my CCD classes woefully misinformed me …”

BINGO! We have a winner. If you’re like most Catholics of your generation (and it appears you are), the “Catholic education” that was the substance of your CCD classes was wholly lacking.

ProEcclesia on April 28, 2015 at 8:24 AM

Sad, but unfortunately all too true…..

“All the evils of the world are due to lukewarm Catholics.” ~ Pope Saint Pius V

“All the strength of Satan’s reign is due to the easygoing weakness of Catholics.” ~ Pope Pius X

Augustinian on April 28, 2015 at 8:47 AM

Unmitigated Fascist bastards.

rplat on April 28, 2015 at 8:50 AM

What surprises me is how people who have no religious life, give absolutely NO allowances for other peoples’ religious sensibilities.

LilyBart on April 27, 2015 at 5:46 PM

I do.

I count myself as an agnostic. Your religious principles have no value whatever to me.

But to me, that’s the entire point. They don’t have to have any value to me, because they’re not mine. “Value” is an entirely subjective judgment. If I think your house is an ugly firetrap in a neighborhood that you couldn’t hire me to spend time in, that doesn’t make it okay to burn it down. The fact that it has no value to me has no bearing on things whatsoever.

But if I think they shouldn’t be allowed, then I’m no different from those who burned people at the stake for heresy, or those who behead people for apostasy. And if I keep my mouth shut and let it go because it isn’t my beliefs at stake, then I am no different from those who stand and silently watch when someone is being stoned to death for having been raped.

I don’t know if I’ll have to answer to God someday. One of the reasons I have as little fear of death as I do is because I look forward to finding out. What I do know is that I have to put up with the opinions of the guy I see in the mirror, and… yeah, it’s important to me that I be different from the people I described in the paragraph above.

GrumpyOldFart on April 28, 2015 at 9:11 AM

Frankly, the radical Christians have more in common with the radical Islamists, who believe a particular religious faith should be legislated through the state, and that it trumps everything.

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:08 PM

It’s not the Christian business owners who are behaving like “radicals” in these cases, it’s the gays. The gays are the ones deliberately targeting Christian business owners and then filing lawsuits against them, so that they can use the power of the state to force their secular beliefs down the Christians’ throats. It’s the gays who think that their beliefs trump everything, including the First Amendment rights of Christian business owners.

AZCoyote on April 28, 2015 at 10:54 AM

I just want to let it start to spread that there is a crowdfunding site under construction to fund *exactly* these things. I’m working on it as we speak.

I’ve gotten sick and tired of the double standard and putting my money where my/our mouth is. Stay tuned.

BeatArmy on April 28, 2015 at 11:15 AM

Frankly, the radical Christians have more in common with the radical Islamists, who believe a particular religious faith should be legislated through the state, and that it trumps everything.

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:08 PM

ALL Christians are called to be “radical”. Because Our Savior intended for the Faith to be counter-cultural just like Him:

“I have come to set the earth on fire, and how I wish it were already blazing! There is a baptism with which I must be baptized, and how great is my anguish until it is accomplished! Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division. From now on a household of five will be divided, three against two and two against three; a father will be divided against his son and a son against his father, a mother against her daughter and a daughter against her mother, a mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.” – Luke 12:49-53

Augustinian on April 28, 2015 at 11:19 AM

Franklin Graham’s group, http://www.samaritanspurse.org/article/christian-couple-faces-135000-fine/ is stepping up as are other conservative groups.

This double standard is just awful. Pull together.

You know, if Christianity were totally lousy, no one would bother to go after Christians. Why is it that so many are afraid of Christians? Think about it.

MN J on April 28, 2015 at 11:59 AM

The gate is narrow, that’s the key point. There are many false teachers that will twist the very words in front of your eyes in the scripture and claim it really doesn’t mean what it says. There are many who pass thru the broad gate, lying to themselves that they’re worthy enough for God to ignore this or that favorite sin. The second greatest trick by Satan is convincing people they are saved while claiming a certain sin to be a sacred sin. Here’s looking at Pelosi and Tea Kennedy, vis a vis abortion. Unless he had a deathbed conversion of his heart (unlikely as he was attended to at death and no one’s claimed he converted before passing) and repented he’s burning in he’ll for eternity just as much as any villain of history.
AH_C on April 28, 2015 at 1:16 AM

This past Sunday my Methodist pastor declared that Jesus isn’t THE way, he’s just OUR way, and Christianity isn’t meant to be exclusive, and any -ism is just as good.

Nutstuyu on April 28, 2015 at 12:12 PM

Nutstuyu on April 28, 2015 at 12:12 PM

That reminds me of Jesus’ words:

And every one that heareth these my words, and doth them not, shall be like a foolish man that built his house upon the sand, And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell, and great was the fall thereof.

…and there shall be one fold and one shepherd.

He said to him: Feed my sheep.

…and upon this rock…

And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell not, for it was founded on a rock.

pannw on April 28, 2015 at 12:33 PM

This past Sunday my Methodist pastor declared that Jesus isn’t THE way, he’s just OUR way, and Christianity isn’t meant to be exclusive, and any -ism is just as good.

Nutstuyu on April 28, 2015 at 12:12 PM

“Everyone who acknowledges Me before others I will acknowledge before My heavenly Father. But whoever denies Me before others, I will deny before My heavenly Father.” – Matthew 10:32-33

Leave that church.

Augustinian on April 28, 2015 at 12:33 PM

This past Sunday my Methodist pastor declared that Jesus isn’t THE way, he’s just OUR way, and Christianity isn’t meant to be exclusive, and any -ism is just as good.

Nutstuyu on April 28, 2015 at 12:12 PM

And so the obvious question; will you be returning to listen to other sermons your pile-of-mush-minister has to give?

earlgrey on April 28, 2015 at 12:37 PM

Frankly, the radical Christians have more in common with the radical Islamists, who believe a particular religious faith should be legislated through the state, and that it trumps everything.

JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:08 PM

What constitutes a “radical Christians” exactly? Is Barronelle Stutzman a “radical Christian”? Are the owners of Memories Pizza “radical Christians”? Am I a “radical Christian” for putting God first? I guess I can’t fully be a “radical Christian” because I stopped turning either cheek, especially dealing with a guy who is proof that some men are inferior, endowed by their Maker with dim wits, impermeable to reason with such an asinine comment.

Yes, yes, yes, we “radical Christians” are just like “radical Muslims” that destroy/bomb/hang/burn/stone/shoot all those who disagree with them. If only Christians were as bad as you say, the 200+ million of us in America would have at least a 5% radical element. That would equal about 10-11 million “radical Christians” in America, which is about the population of Ohio or enough to have 200,000+ in each state, all trying to legislate our beliefs through the state. For some strange logical reason, as someone who follows such matters, I don’t see it happening at all! Somehow these in your face radicals are hidden in plain sight or something. I guess that’s what you read over at Salon, Mother Jones, Daily Kos, and the Huffington Post.

This is similar to someone blaming the gun for a shooting, not the person wielding the gun. 380 million guns in the ownership of over 100 million Americans. Doesn’t it seem amazing how anyone survives in America with that many guys out there? Since it’s the guns and the gun owners who do all the shooting, I don’t see how anyone survives a gun show with so many guns and gun owners in such a small place.

Btw, this “radical Christian” supports your right to continue sounding like a MSNBC host pontificating about we radicals.

CommieJuice on April 28, 2015 at 12:58 PM

Need conservative talk radio to start mentioning “Samaritan’s Purse”

olesparkie on April 28, 2015 at 1:51 PM

What constitutes a “radical Christians” exactly?

CommieJuice on April 28, 2015 at 12:58 PM

Jesus, The Christ.

The First Century Galilean in the Age of Tiberius.

Rumor has it He was a bit of a counter-cultural rabble-rouser.

Augustinian on April 28, 2015 at 2:19 PM

“If you want Christian businesses to have a right of refusal on gay weddings, start thinking less in terms of faith and more in terms of speech.”
So much for the First Amendment. Just carve out the parts you don’t like. See what’s left of the rest of the Constitution with that approach! Remember what the Founders said about “endowed by our Creator [not the state] with certain unalienable rights.” Typical hypocritical antiChristian bigotry.

russedav on April 28, 2015 at 2:50 PM

I take it this is GFM’s way of atoning to liberals

I’m thinking that those two guys are Liberals.

But, here at HA, we always must make the assumption that anyone involved in a successful business is a die-hard Conservative.

Dr. ZhivBlago on April 28, 2015 at 3:29 PM

Frankly, the radical Christians have more in common with the radical Islamists, who believe a particular religious faith should be legislated through the state, and that it trumps everything.
JetBoy on April 27, 2015 at 8:08 PM

You let your slip show on that one

Mr Soames on April 28, 2015 at 7:58 PM

Political correctness is a mile wide but only an inch deep. We need to fight it, ignore it, punish anyone who follows it. It will crack.

The proper way to take out Gofundme is to stop using it. Open up another one and use them.

They want war, give them war.

archer52 on April 29, 2015 at 3:52 AM

I don’t know if anyone has written about this since I haven’t read all the comments but Gofundme has the nerve to send me emails updating me on a campaign that they kicked off their site.

Cindy Munford on April 29, 2015 at 5:01 PM

So, we’re not even allowed to show support to these brave business owners? Alinsky said to divide and separate those you wish to defeat.

I think I’m reading some of the Hot Air “Conservatives” agreeing with Alinsky methods.

Fight these thugs in the Gay Rights movement on every front. Sick and tired of the lies.

hawkdriver on April 30, 2015 at 3:05 PM