It occurs to me that our nation is morally and mentally upside down on the issue of what is ridiculously referred to as "civil rights".
There are of course no such things as "civil rights" as no right can be totally enforced in a "civil" manor. Neither are there rights of a so called "civilization". There are only natural rights and property rights. The first set of rights are a prerequisite to human existence and the second to human interaction. "Black rights", "women rights", "immigrant rights" "LGBTG rights" etc. are all artificial constructs of, or perhaps logical subdivisions of natural and property rights.
Why then do a have a segment of our society that enjoys in manufacturing "rights" solely as a method of enforcing their particular world view on others? I'm not a fan of same sex "marriage". I won't try to hide my objection to the issue or my negative view on the matter.
Neither will I hide my utter contempt for the people promoting LGBT tyranny. For generations any non heterosexual relationship was viewed in a range that went form slightly askew to evil and perverse. Today we are told that all peoples preferences in all matters should be treated with respect and tolerance. The principle of "what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their homes" should be private is repeated in a tone and fervor resembling holy rite.
Be ye tolerant of those whom do things ye do not. Be ye compassionate of which ye find reprehensible. Be ye a good sport and turn ye a blind eye. Thou shalt not appear even slightly judgmental of things in the popular culture. It is it's own religion.
When a man decides to marry a man, we are told that it is a good thing. Why? Blank out. There is no good answer. Something about love and civil rights and mumbled unintelligent platitudes.
The one and only thing we are told we can object to, is someone who objects to celebrating or at least facilitating the event. So what happens if a person who believes its impossible for a man to marry a man says they are unwilling to provide flowers or a cake or perform the ceremony?
That person is treated as some sort of evil, oppressive villain. Cart them off to court! Take away their home! Steal their bank account! Off with their head! DO IT NOW!
Gleefully done in the name of tolerance and a diverse society.
Some old lady bakes cakes and decorates them real pretty, or she is real good at arranging flowers. She also has a honestly held religious/philosophical belief that marriage is (as it has been defined for millennium) only between a man and a women. Because it violates her faith she says she can't take the job.
She loses the profit from the sale. She also may lose the customer as a client in the future because until the gay marriage that person used her services. Other people may hear of her stand and decide to take their future business elsewhere to someone they view as less bigoted.
She wasn't a bad sport about it. She turned the job down and helped the client find someone to do what they wanted. She wasn't unkind or impolite. She was true to her principles.
Free trade can only occur when a willing seller finds a willing buyer. What if one is unwilling, for any reason? In that case a transaction can only occur under violence or the threat of violence.
Is that what the LGBT community wants? Men with guns forcing little old ladies to bake cakes and arrange flowers. Is the florist's hand trembling because she fears going to hell or is it because the SWAT team is pointing guns at her to enforce a court order?
Make no mistake about it, all laws are enforced at the point of a gun.
Is that the kind of "civil" rights Americans want?