Homosexuality or liberty -- America must choose since we can't have both

By Bryan Fischer

Follow me on Twitter: @BryanJFischer, on Facebook at "Focal Point"

America will have to choose between homosexuality and religious liberty, because we cannot have both.

To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, American cannot endure, permanently, half-straight and half-gay. We are going to have to choose.

More proof comes from New Mexico, where a state appeals court has issued a ruling that, yes indeed, Christian photographer Elaine Huguenin must pay what is essentially a fine of almost $7,000 for politely declining to photograph a lesbian commitment ceremony.

In 2006, Ms. Huguenin was approached by a lesbian, Vanessa Willock, who asked her to photograph a commitment ceremony she wanted to stage with her partner. Ms. Huguenin politely declined, citing her deeply held conviction that marriage is exclusively the union of one man and one woman.

Ms. Willock, by the way, was readily able to find another photographer.

But that was not enough for Ms. Willock, who like every other homosexual activist in America, will not be content until every Christian is punished, silenced and sent either to his room or to jail for refusing to embrace the homosexual agenda.

Willock complained to the New Mexico Civil Rights Commission, and got the commission to assess attorney's fees in the amount of almost $7,000.

The decision was appealed, and on the last day of May the New Mexico Court of Appeals upheld the 2008 ruling. It has now become a criminal offense in America to act on a sincerely held Christian belief that natural marriage is a sacred institution.

This all happened in a state, by the way, where lesbian partnerships have precisely zero legal status of any kind whatsoever.

The judge who issued the ruling explicitly stated that Ms. Huguenin would be well within her rights to refuse to photograph a KKK ceremony, since white supremacists are not a "protected class." But she dare not refuse to photograph lesbians, who have not just equal rights but extra-special, super-duper rights under politically correct discrimination policies.

So now we have a court — not just a human rights commission but a tyrannical judge in a black robe wielding his gavel like a hammer — ordering a private business person to violate her most deeply held beliefs and experience a severe penalty if she is unwilling to cravenly capitulate.

Rulings like this, if not overturned and repudiated forthwith, signal the end of the First Amendment. Essential constitutional rights this photographer has, unalienable rights bestowed on her by her Creator, have been thrown in the shredder by this judge.

Freedom of religion? Gone. Freedom of association? Gone. All in the interests of promoting the normalizing of aberrant sexual behavior.

Bottom line: America must choose between homosexuality and liberty because we cannot have both. Every advance of the homosexual agenda comes at the expense of religious liberty. If gay marriage becomes the norm, it will be the end of the First Amendment. It will become a legal nullity.

There will be no freedom of religion. If your religious values conflict with the precious agenda of advancing sexual deviancy, your religious values will mean nothing. In fact, you will punished, as Elaine Huguenin was, for holding them and and acting on them.

Freedom of speech — gone. You will not even be allowed to speak in defense of natural marriage and in opposition to the normalizing of homosexual behavior.

I have written before that not all discrimination is bad. Discrimination for the wrong reasons is bad, but discrimination for the right reasons is good. This is the standard Martin Luther King, Jr. set for us when he looked forward to the day his children would "live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

So even for Rev. King, discrimination on the basis of character is perfectly proper and consistent with the goals of the civil rights movement.

Sexual conduct is one of the expressions of the "content of character."

We must allow Americans — as individuals, in their churches, in their businesses, and yes, in their public policy — to discriminate on the basis of immoral sexual behavior. Since homosexual conduct is immoral sexual behavior — the standard legal term for it is "the infamous crime against nature" — it is an appropriate object of ethically proper discrimination. Americans must be allowed to discriminate on the basis of sexually aberrant behavior, or freedom itself will soon become just a distant memory.

Freedom of the press — gone. You will not be allowed to express criticism of homosexuality in print. It will be a hate crime and you will be silenced and worse for expressing a time-honored moral value.

Freedom of association — gone. You will be told that you must do business with those who engage in sexually dangerous practices, you must use your time, talent and treasure to promote their agenda, and you will be punished if you refuse.

America, it's homosexuality or liberty. In fact, it's homosexuality or the Constitution. Take your pick. We can't have both.

(Unless otherwise noted, the opinions expressed are the author's and do not necessarily reflect the views of the American Family Association or American Family Radio.)

© Bryan Fischer