According to attorney Nicolle Martin, the owners of a Colorado bakery could face a year in prison for refusing to make a cake for a gay wedding, Jim Hoft reported at the Gateway Pundit Monday.
“The complainants can sue him civilly in the regular courts system or he can potentially be prosecuted by the district attorney for up to twelve months in jail,” Martin told Hoft.
...The Advocate said the Colorado Civil Rights Commission is set to hear the case in September.
Dear Marriage Supporter,
Colorado state senator Pat Steadman, author of the senate version of the civil unions bill, has a message for those who disagree with his views of tolerance and equality because they support marriage:
"[G]et thee to a nunnery, and live there. Go live a monastic life, away from modern society, away from people you can't see as equals to yourself'. . . . Go some place and be as judgmental as you like, go inside your church, establish separate water fountains if you like. But don't tell me that your free exercise of religion requires the state of Colorado to establish separate water fountains."
With Colorado's civil unions bill now headed to the Senate, we have one last chance to stop this dangerous measure.
Consider this:
In 2003, California adopted a civil unions law. Two years later, a California state court judge ruled California's marriage law unconstitutional. By 2008, the state Supreme Court echoed that ruling, finding that civil unions undercut any possible justification for laws recognizing marriage only between a husband and wife.
In 2005 Connecticut adopted a civil unions law. Three years later the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that because of civil unions, Connecticut's marriage laws were now unconstitutional.
In New Jersey, a civil unions law was used to deny tax exempt status to religious organizations that refused to allow use of their property for civil union ceremonies.
And the list goes on . . .
Wherever civil unions are adopted, there is immediate pressure to throw out the "discriminatory" civil unions bill in favor of same-sex marriage. Civil unions aren't a compromise . . . they're a Trojan horse that immediately attacks both marriage and religious liberty.
To make matters even worse, for Senator Steadman religious liberty isn't simply a regrettable casualty in the march for same-sex marriage . . . attacking religious liberty is part of the point!
Gay marriage strategists know that people of faith — people like you and me — are one of the biggest obstacles to a state-imposed same-sex marriage regime. And many of them would like nothing better than to muzzle, isolate, and ultimately silence religious believers — using intimidation and ostracism to closet Biblical views about marriage.
We must draw a line in the sand. I know you understand the stakes. Please take action today. Together we can protect marriage in Colorado, but only if you take action right now.
TAKE ACTION
Please help keep up the pressure with a phone call or email to your state representative today.
Click here to look up the phone number for your state representative.
Use this link to send a short email message to your state representative urging him or her to vote to defend religious liberty and defend marriage, our only civil institution that connects children with parents. Marriage and faith matter!
Finally, forward this email to friends and family throughout the state, or use the buttons below to share on Facebook and Twitter. It's going to take thousands of Coloradans like you working together to preserve marriage in Illinois. Help spread the word today!
Together we can keep up the pressure and save marriage in Colorado! Now is the moment — please join us!
State Senator Pat Steadman (D-Denver), co-sponsor of the Colorado same-sex civil union bill SB11, went to the floor of the Colorado Senate this week and lashed out at people of faith, claiming they want to "establish separate water fountains" for gay people and straight people in their churches and believe "My religion says I can't help [gays]. God told me to hate [gays]."
At another point he says people of faith "don't want gay people sitting on the bus next to them, they'd rather the gays stayed far to the back of the bus, far far away."
Steadman also argues that any person of faith with pro-marriage views should be forced to violate their conscience if they choose to continue operating their business (flower shops, bakeries, restaurants, photographers, banquet halls, etc) after the passage of same-sex civil unions. (He's right about one thing -- this civil unions bill poses a grave threat to religious freedom!)
Here is the transcript -- it is interesting to note how in the first paragraph Steadman claims his bill protects religious liberty (we see this claim made time and time again) and yet it is clear by the end how much he holds religion in contempt (and completely misunderstands it):
"We've written Senate Bill 11 to make sure this separation between religious belief and what's happening here in our state code, in our statutes, in our civil laws are kept separate. For Senate Bill 11 respects religious freedom, this bill does not reach into anyone's church or mosque or synagogue, you can have all the free exercise there that you want. Exercise it as you see fit. But don't let your free exercise run my life. Don't claim religion as a reason the law should discriminate. We have laws against discrimination. Discrimination is banned in employment, and housing, and public accommodations, and so bakeries that serve the public, aren't supposed to look down their noses and one particular class of persons and say "we don't sell cakes to you." It's troubling, this discrimination. And it's already illegal.
So, what to say to those who claim that religion requires them to discriminate? I'll tell you what I'd say: "Get thee to a nunnery!" And live there then. Go live a monastic life away from modern society, away from people you can't see as equals to yourself. Away from the stream of commerce where you may have to serve them or employ them or rent banquet halls to them. Go some place and be as judgmental as you like. Go inside your church, establish separate water fountains in there if you want, but don't claim that free exercise of religion requires the state of Colorado to establish separate water fountains for her citizens. That's not what we're doing here."
Watch the video for yourself:
Please continue to take action and urge your state representatives to oppose same-sex civil unions by opposing SB11!
Keep checking our Advocacy Center to see what you can do to protect marriage in 2013
An important news story by Patrick Condon in the Associated Press confirms what we have been highlighting for a long time -- Republicans who betray their base on marriage place their political future in serious jeopardy:
As some Republicans in the Minnesota Legislature weigh whether to support legalizing same-sex marriage, an analysis of gay-marriage votes from other states shows that GOP lawmakers who backed it often faced consequences, including loss of their seats.
... Republicans inclined to back gay marriage face risks.
"It was largely responsible for my loss," said Jean White, a former Republican state senator in Colorado whose 2011 vote for civil unions became an issue in a primary challenge by a fellow Republican...
According to roll call votes, in the eight times nationwide that state legislatures voted for gay marriage, just 47 Republicans bucked the party line out of many hundreds who voted against it.
Of those 47 Republicans who voted yes starting in 2009, 21 are in office today.
In New York, one of four Republican senators who supported gay marriage is still in the Legislature. One lost a primary, one retired, and one lost the general election after narrowly winning a bitter primary.
A New Hampshire Republican representative lost a primary after her 2009 vote for gay marriage, and in Maryland the former Senate Republican leader relinquished his leadership post when he started working with Democrats on a gay-marriage bill that passed last year.
"I got a lot of flak, a lot," said that senator, Allan Kittleman. He's planning to leave the Senate this year to run for a county office instead.
In Washington, which passed gay marriage in 2012, two of six Republicans who backed the bill are no longer in office.
Please take action before the weekend and contact your representatives in Colorado demanding the protect marriage and religious freedom:
Civil unions for same-sex Colorado couples have cleared the state Senate for a third and possibly final time.
The Senate approved civil unions 21-14 without debate. All Democrats voted for the legal recognition for gay partners. Republican Sen. Ellen Roberts of Durango joined them. The other 14 Republicans voted no. (AP)
Dear Marriage Supporter,
Gay marriage activists have introduced a new civil unions bill in Colorado, one that includes no protections for faith-based adoption agencies whatsoever!
Moments ago, the bill passed the Senate Judiciary Committee on a party line vote, fast-tracking the measure for consideration by the full Senate.
"If this law passes, there is going to be a great persecution of the faithful," said Msgr. Thomas Fryar of the Catholic Archdiocese of Denver. "We cannot allow that."
We completely agree, and so do the people of Colorado, who voted in 2006 to reject same-sex domestic partnerships by six points and voted to affirm marriage between one man and one woman by a margin of 55% to 44%!
Now gay marriage activists are attempting to undermine the clear will of Colorado voters and threaten religious freedom. This civil unions bill is nearly identical to the sort of bill that courts in California and Connecticut used to demonstrate that the state no longer had any justification for marriage — concluding that civil unions were an unconstitutional and discriminatory "separate but equal" status which these activist judges used as an excuse to redefine marriage!
Your legislators need to hear from you right away — click here to oppose S.B. 11!
This bill is a huge threat to religious freedom and pro-marriage individuals like you.
If anyone should have a say on marriage, it should be the people of Colorado who have already so clearly spoken out on this issue when given the chance to vote on it — marriage should not be decided by activist judges or legislators that can be bribed and bullied by powerful interest groups funded by gay millionaires and billionaires.
Marriage belongs to the people because when marriage is redefined it affects everyone.
Just last summer a Christian bakery owner in Lakewood, CO was subjected to thousands of emails and threats from gay marriage activists after they refused to provide a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. The owner said at the time: "We would close down that bakery before we closed our beliefs".
And last week over 200 marriage supporters like you rallied at the state capital against this civil unions bill pointing out that this new legislation includes no legal protections for child placement agencies like Catholic Charities and other groups that only place children with married couples, i.e., with a mom AND dad, where kids do best!
Your legislators need to hear from you right away so they know you oppose S.B. 11!
I need you to do two things immediately:
I know I can count on your help. Thank you!
This report was filed last week:
State legislators will once again debate a bill that would allow for civil unions in Colorado.
State Sen. Pat Steadman (D - Denver) confirmed to 9NEWS political reporter Brandon Rittiman Thursday that he is introducing the Colorado Civil Unions Act. The bill will get its first hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee next Wednesday.
Senate Bill 11 would "authorize any 2 unmarried adults, regardless of gender, to enter into a civil union."
Last year, the Colorado House failed to vote on a civil union bill before the end of a special session of the legislature. (9News.com)
Vincent Carroll doesn't name the ideology Tim Gill and Pat Stryker are pushing -- though we know it is redefining marriage -- but Carroll does point out that Gill and Stryker have a long record of supporting political outfits that specialize in "character assasination":
[Pat Stryker is] still happily sends big checks to groups whose abiding purpose is to smear men and women running for office with outrageous accusations largely unrelated to reality.
She has done this for a number of years without any apparent second thoughts, so why should this election be different?
Americans say they're disgusted by over-the-top political ads, but that's hard to believe. Otherwise the perpetrators' reputations would pay a price. Yet they rarely do.
Stryker is a respected member of the civic establishment in northern Colorado. No one in her social circles would probably dream of calling her out for contributing to the debasement of political discourse — any more than anyone similarly situated in metro Denver would call out Tim Gill, another of Colorado's richest citizens associated with the same ultra-attack outfits.
The single sleaziest political mailer sent to voters in both 2008 and 2010 in Colorado — and several of the sleaziest in 2006 — was produced by groups financed in part by Stryker and Gill.
The one in 2008 falsely claimed a judge had found that a Republican candidate for the state House "posed a threat and imminent danger" to an unnamed "victim." The 2010 mailer was if anything wilder, claiming that an aspiring Republican House candidate "wants to bring all of America's nuclear waste to Colorado" in a scheme so reckless it could blow the state "off the map."
... Meanwhile, mailers against state Rep. Ken Summers, produced by the Stryker- and Gill-backed Coalition for Colorado's Future, portray him as someone with a soft spot for rapists and perpetrators of domestic violence.
Over the past five years, the second- and third-highest individual Colorado donors to political campaigns have been Gill and Stryker (Congressman Jared Polis is No. 1). And more power to them for commitment to their causes.
It's hard to get too starry eyed about this idealism, however, when year after year they consent to the tactics of the gutter.
A cake shop protest organized by local gay groups over the weekend turned out to be a flop, with barely a baker’s dozen worth of individuals showing up to the event. The protest was organized after it was reported that the owner of the Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood refused to bake a “rainbow-layered masterpiece” celebrating a gay couple’s upcoming nuptials. The protest was anticipated to have a “massive” turnout.
After the gay couple described the cake that they wanted to order, bakery owner Jack Phillips told them that it was against his personal faith to supply cakes for gay weddings. He cited principles laid out in the Bible as his reasons for refusing their request. Phillips also made it clear that his store would never turn away anyone for being gay or lesbian and that he had no problem baking cakes for other events like birthday parties or graduations.
At the scheduled time of the protest on Saturday, approximately fourteen middle-aged men and women gathered across the street from the bakery with signs and balloons to protest the store. Standing with posters that read “Open Your Heart” and “Gays, Let Them Eat Cake,” the protest lasted for about an hour. Only five people had RSVP’ed to attend the protest on the event’s Facebook page.
... on one of the protest sites, a man named Thom Seehafter called for the use of a modified form of water-boarding to be used against the owners of the bakery.
“These business owners should have their heads held under water in a toilet,” he wrote.
Others resorted to name calling, referring to the owner as “ugly”, “anti-gay and anti-shower”, a “tool”, and claiming that he “looks like a pervert.” Some even called for “his human rights to be taken away.” Harassment techniques were also encouraged, with a plea sent around for everyone to “kick it up a notch” and to call the bakery to yell “shame on you” three times into the phone.
During the protest, a group of nearly fifty individuals, ranging from a two year old to a woman in her nineties, crowded around the store to buy cookies, cakes, and other pastries.
Thaddeus Baklinski of LifeSiteNews:
The owner of a cake shop in Lakewood, Colorado said that, following a refusal to provide a wedding cake for a homosexual couple his business has more than doubled.
Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, told local media that this wasn’t the first time he had turned away homosexuals seeking wedding cakes, but it is the first time his stand for Christian principles has resulted in so much media attention and some death threats.
Phillips explained that since 1993 the family owned and operated business has refused about half-a-dozen requests for same-sex wedding cakes. However, on Sunday he said he was forced to call police because of several death threats over the latest refusal.
The situation developed on July 19 when two homosexuals entered the shop and announced they were getting “married” in Massachusetts and wanted to order a wedding reception cake for their reception in Colorado. When Phillips refused, one of the pair, 28-year-old Dave Mullins, is reported to have said, “F*** you and your homophobic cake shop,” and directed an obscene gesture at the owner before leaving.
Karla Dial at CitizenLink:
More than 300 people turned out on the west side of the Colorado Capitol building today for a rally celebrating another victory for marriage, after state lawmakers killed a bill seeking to establish same-sex civil unions.
Legislators and pastors alike spoke at the gathering, urging pro-family advocates — who wore white T-shirts proclaiming “Loving All, Protecting Marriage” — to continue to stay vigilant and active.
Though a committee voted the bill down 5-4 along party lines Monday, it could re-emerge in a different form as long as the Legislature remains in a special session, which Gov. John Hickenlooper called after the civil-unions bill failed to reach the House floor for a vote last week.
... State Rep. Robert Ramirez said that for every email or phone call he received from constituents asking him to pass the civil-unions legislation, he received 35 from people asking him not to.
Gay-rights activists gathered Monday at the Colorado Capitol for a special legislative session to consider civil unions said they were fired up to lobby for a measure that died on a Republican maneuver last week – but skeptical the matter would fare better in the special session.
Hundreds of activists wearing red and waving signs greeted lawmakers returning to Denver for the special session, which was called by Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper last week to reconsider what he called “a fundamental question of fairness and civil rights.”
... Conservatives sought to portray the special session as a waste of taxpayer money. As they have before, Republicans describe the measure as a proposal for gay marriage, rather than civil unions.
Please click here to learn more about the rally we are encouraging our supporters to attend later today!
Dear Marriage Supporter,
Governor Hickenlooper has called a special legislative session to address civil union legislation, and Colorado Family Action is hosting a Rally for Marriage at the State Capitol in Denver tomorrow! Please make an effort to come to the Capitol over the lunch hour tomorrow to show your support for marriage.
As recently as 2006, the people of Colorado voted to reject civil unions and affirm marriage. Now Governor Hickenlooper is trying to pressure the legislature to pass this dangerous bill.
This is exactly the sort of bill that courts in California and Connecticut used to demonstrate that the state no longer had any justification for marriage—concluding that civil unions were an unconstitutional and discriminatory "separate but equal" status.
Your legislators need to hear from you tomorrow! Please join Colorado Family Action and make a powerful statement at the Capitol tomorrow!
| WHAT: | RALLY & PRAYER FOR MARRIAGE |
| WHEN: | TUESDAY, MAY 15th, 2012 |
| WHERE: | WEST STATE CAPITOL STEPS (200 E COLFAX AVE, DENVER 80203) |
| TIME: | 12 NOON-1PM |
Please, marriage is fundamental to our society, and this civil unions bill represents a serious threat to the future of our marriage laws. Please do whatever you can to free up an hour tomorrow afternoon.
Democrats pushing for Colorado civil unions worried Friday about the bill's fate after a pointed warning from the Republican House speaker about legislators attacking the motives of opponents.
The bill calling for legal protections for gay couples similar to marriage passed with a 6-5 vote late Thursday in the GOP-led judiciary committee that rejected the same legislation last year.
... McNulty said Senate Democrats took months to move the bill to the House and did it on purpose to force a decision within the final days of the legislative session.
"I think that there are those in the Democratic Party that want to make sure that this issue is a political issue in November," he said, referring to the upcoming election.
Democratic Rep. Daniel Kagan, a member of the House Judiciary Committee that passed the bill, urged Republicans to schedule the necessary hearings on the bill.
"We're here to do the work of the people, and the people very much want us to make a decision on civil unions. It's not a trivial matter," he said.
