Your Church opposes gay marriage. Gay marriage is legalized in your state. So your church gets labeled a "hate" group and shut down. Maybe you think you're God and don't care about the Church but I'd say that negatively affects the people who attend and work at that Church.
You personally oppose gay marriage and get sued by some tool as a hate criminal for "hurting their feelings" and YOU have to pay damages.
Please cite even a single incident of either of these events ever happening please.
I'd certainly say Patricia Mauceri, who was fired from her acting job this morning because she wouldn't say God created gays as they are, is feeling an adverse effect of the promotion of gay "marriage." Given she wasn't sued but as I said before, her freedom of speech has certainly been violated.
She was fired from her acting job (according to Google and her publicist) because she refused to play a character who approved of gays...
...so they found someone else to play that character instead. No, that's not Freedom of Speech. The government was not involved in any way, so it can't be.
And you're arguing that this is an inevitable slippery slope toward enforcing that everyone must believe that homosexuality is OK...?
She played this character for a number of years from my understanding. It's not like it was some new gig she refused. She even tried to negotiate with the producers so she could be friendly toward the gay character, she simply wouldn't utter the line that God created gays to be gay and was fired.And that could've happened regardless of whether or not gay marriage was legal anywhere (and I'm assuming this was in California, where gay marriage is not legal currently.) So this is a total red herring. It has absolutely nothing to do with gay marriage.
So let me get this straight, as long as you aren't Congress (since they are the only ones explicitly mentioned by the first amendment) then in your opinion you can restrict freedom of speech to your hearts' content?
Yes. Can Dave Leip ban people from this site? He is restricting free speech in doing so.
Apparently Lief (and Alcon) are unfamiliar with the fourteenth amendment, that the Supreme Court of the United States has repeatedly held prevents state and local governments from abridging the rights enumerated in the first amendment.
Do you need me to cite some of the major decisions?
Have your heard of the due process clause?
Another red herring. We're talking about a private institution here, not any state or local government.
