Dustin Siggins On Christian Persecution By State

January 26, 2016 2

Christian Persecution Coming To A Town Near You

Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – “Basically this is just a continuation of the same story, that is, if you’re in business, it doesn’t matter what your business is, and you conduct any of that business in public, be aware that someone is going to traipse into your place of business at some point in time, present themselves as homosexuals seeking to marry, and then is going to demand that you provide services to them if you provide that sort of thing to people that are about to be wed.” Check out today’s transcript for the rest….

Begin Mike Church Show Transcript

Mike: I don’t have to cringe thinking that a producer is cringing every time I hear the C word.

Dustin Siggins: Catholic, Christian?

Mike: That’s right. Yes, sir, every time I hear the C word, Catholic, I’m not worried about somebody going, [mocking] “Dude, you gotta stop bringing that up.” Anyway, this story that you guys have been covering for a while, I myself have been covering it. This couple from Upstate New York who run a bed and breakfast of some sort and then have some kind of a reception hall area that they rent out. A couple of years ago a lesbian couple approached them to host their sodomitical marriage or whatever you wish to call it, gay marriage or whatever. These people said: No, we’ll do your reception, but we’re not going to do the actual event. We’re devout Catholics. The Magisterium actually means something to us. We’re not opposed to you, but we don’t want it here on our property. Instead of just taking the invite to do the reception there, the lesbians decided to keelhaul the couple in front of the New York Human Rights Commission. Dustin can tell you the rest.

Siggins: Sure. They went to the Division of Human Rights, I think it’s called, which in 2014 issued a decision saying that the Catholic couple had illegally discriminated and that decision was recently upheld by a court. As I understand it, the argument by the state is that – let me start over. The Catholic couple argues that this was done on their property.

[private FP-Monthly|FP-Yearly|FP-Yearly-WLK|FP-Yearly-So76]

While they did make a profit off of it, they have hired gay people. They have had a birthday party for a gay couple’s adopted child. They have not shown discrimination against sexual orientation. But because it was on their property, they didn’t want this particular business. The argument by the state, as I understand it, is that because they profit off of this, it is therefore a public accommodation, and therefore, even if it is on their property, they cannot just decide who they will and will not serve on the basis of orientation.

To be fair, I have not looked into the actual discrimination statute. I suspect that it’s similar to the one in Oregon, which I did look into. They said you cannot discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. The couple in Oregon, the clients, Melissa and Aaron Klein, had served the individuals who were same-sex attracted, but declined to serve their chosen relationship’s chosen ceremony. The state refused to make a distinction in Oregon, and I suspect that that’s what’s happening in New York as well.

Mike: Basically this is just a continuation of the same story, that is, if you’re in business, it doesn’t matter what your business is, and you conduct any of that business in public, be aware that someone is going to traipse into your place of business at some point in time, present themselves as homosexuals seeking to marry, and then is going to demand that you provide services to them if you provide that sort of thing to people that are about to be wed. This is going to affect photographers, florists, bakers, convention halls, dress designers, clothing shops, you name it.

Siggins: It’ll affect everybody. Public accommodation, as I understand it, means that you are opening your business to the general public. Even though it’s privately-held property, you are getting a permit. There are other things associated with that; therefore, you are not allowed to “discriminate.”

Mike: Dustin, remember back in 2010 or 2009 when Senator Rand Paul made it through the primary and was about to enter the general election. He was invited on MSNBC by Rachel Madcow. He was sandbagged because he had said something about the implementation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Siggins: Yeah. He didn’t like the public accommodation –

Mike: That’s right, and that’s what we’re talking about here.

Siggins: At LifeSiteNews, we distinguish between race, which is an immutable characteristic, and chosen relationships with same-sex attractions. One may or may not be able to control attraction, just like anybody else who’s heterosexual, but we all can choose to – I’m a 30-year-old virgin. I’ve definitely chosen to not act on my heterosexual attractions.

Mike: How’s your big brother Steve Carrell?

Siggins: Ha ha ha. Actually, I’ll tell you, ever since I was 20 years old going to school in public education, I was telling people that I was going to be the 80-year-old virgin and I’ll make a movie and make lots of money off of it. It was going to be a G-rated version of the 40-year-old virgin. Seriously, on its face, the core of the argument that we can’t choose, that the LGBT community makes, to quell that argument – this is my own personal opinion. This is not a LifeSiteNews opinion. They obviously cannot control their libido, to take a line from Mike Huckabee. If gay couples say “we can’t control,” then how can heterosexuals have been controlling since the dawn of time? Otherwise, every single guy and every single woman would be having sex with everyone who walked by on the street. Obviously we have some level of control as human beings. To be able to say we can’t control by definition says your community lacks self-discipline, by definition.

[/private]

Mike: [mocking] “No, no, Mr. Siggins, that’s not what it says. It says that your community is overabundant – you know what? You’re discriminating. You stole all the self-control from us homosexuals. We would have had some but you guys took it from us.”

Siggins: I’ve never heard that argument before but okay.

Have you tried the all new Veritas Radio Network yet? You can listen to the Mike Church Show LIVE weekdays 8-11 CST. The show is easier to access than ever before. But Veritas Radio isn’t JUST Mike Church, try the exclusive shows by Brother Andre: ReConquest, David Simpson’s True Money, The Mark Kreslins Show, My Story of America with Michael T George, Reverse Deception with Gregory Carpenter and The Constitution Hour with Kevin Gutzman. Help us continue our search for TRUTH by signing up for a Founders Pass Membership today!

Mike: That’s because it’s fatuous and silly and you probably won’t. This is precisely why – you might remember, if you’re old enough to remember this. You say you’re 30 so you’re probably not. Back in the 1990s when liberals were empowered by and were feeling their oats at the time, they began an assault on the celibacy and the unisex status of Roman Catholic clergy. Why don’t you open it up to women? Number two, come on, you guys are a bunch of clowns. You can’t be celibate. Nobody can say no for their entire life, etc., etc., etc.

Well, we know that while it is a struggle, we know that this is something that can be done. We know this because we have a litany of hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of people, especially sisters and brothers that devoted themselves to religious orders and spent their entire lives in cloistered monasteries. Were there some that were unable to resist? Yes, because we’re fallen man and sin is going to be committed. Did some of them? Yeah. So, what does that mean? That’s why it’s a challenge, dummy. It’s not easy to do. You have to open yourself up and be able to accept the grace to not go there.

End Mike Church Show Transcript