Sunday, July 26, 2015

No Gay Marriage? No Tax Exemption

Enough of this shit. Taxing the monstrous fortunes freakazoids collect in the name of their invisible friend is not a violation of the Establishment Clause, but allowing them in the name of their sky wizards to flaut laws others must obey is.

Freakazoids don't want to obey the Constitution?  Fine.  No government money or authority for you.  Discriminate against LGBT, blacks, hispanics, asians, socialists, atheists all you fucking want. All you have to do is give up your precious tax-exempt status.

You don't get to suck from the government teat and kick the government in the balls at the same time.

Brownback's order aims to protect religious leaders who perform marriages and religious groups that provide adoption services, according to the Wichita Eagle.

"We have a duty to govern and to govern in accordance with the Constitution as it has been determined by the Supreme Court decision. We also recognize that religious liberty is at the heart of who we are as Kansans and Americans, and should be protected," Brownback said in a statement. "Today’s Executive Order protects Kansas clergy and religious organizations from being forced to participate in activities that violate their sincerely and deeply held beliefs."

The American Civil Liberties Union of Kansas on Tuesday condemned Brownback's religious liberty order, calling it "unnecessary and harmful."

"As a result of Executive Order 15-05, a homeless shelter that received a state contract or grant could refuse family housing to a gay couple with a child, or a foster care agency could refuse to place a child in their custody with the child’s family member just because the family member was in a same-sex relationship – and the state could not require them to treat all families equally," Kansas ACLU Executive Director Micah Kubic said in a statement. "In addition, singling out just one form of religious beliefs about marriage poses serious constitutional concerns."

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) also issued a religious liberties directive following the Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage. The directive states that Texas agencies should prioritize the First Amendment and ensure that nobody "takes any adverse action against" individuals who are "substantially motivated by sincere religious belief."

The trouble, of course, is that much of the party has already rejected the premise behind the pivot. The Hill reported over the weekend:
Congressional Republicans are coming under pressure to respond to the Supreme Court's ruling on gay marriage when they return to Washington next week.
Religious organizations aligned with the GOP are concerned the government will punish them for opposing same-sex marriage, and want lawmakers to put in place new protections for people with faith-based objections.
The groups are putting their lobbying energy behind the First Amendment Defense Act, a bill that would prohibit the government from retaliating against churches, schools and adoption agencies that only recognize heterosexual marriage.
The "First Amendment Defense Act" -- conservatives really do excel in the bill-naming department -- is not just a hypothetical. The legislation has already been introduced in both the House and Senate -- the lead sponsors are Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), respectively -- and it's actually faring quite well. The House version already has 69 co-sponsors (68 Republicans and one Democrat), while the Senate bill has 21 co-sponsors (all 21 are Republicans).
Note, Sens. Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Lindsey Graham, each of whom are running for president, are among the bill's champions.

No comments: