Judge Napolitano: Is social conservatism bad for America?

The Judge had Andy Levy on for a discussion on how social conservatives are really into big government because they want to legislate their moral values on everyone else. Andy Levy focuses on gay marriage, so I will as well. We’ll leave corporatism out for another day.

If you are a reader of this blog, you know that I believe gay marriage is a sin (as are many things nonetheless) against God and therefore I can’t and won’t support it. I know this will offend some of you, but please don’t take it personally. I’m sure those of you who are gay are great people, I just can’t support the lifestyle. Now Andy Levy agrees with the Judge that the government should have no say in regulating who marries whom, and in principal I agree. But in practice this has consequences.

When being gay became a civil right, it opened the door for legal battles over discrimination. Some of you know that I’ve photographed weddings in the past and there’s no way I’m photographing a gay ceremony. For one, it grosses me out to see two guys together, and also, as I stated above, I can’t partake in it in any way because of my religious beliefs. And that’s the brunt of the problem. As long as I can be discriminated against because I don’t want to photograph gay ceremonies, then I have to fight for the right to be free to photograph who I want without legal retribution, and that means the government stepping in to regulate. Call that big government if you want, but that’s where I stand.

If it weren’t a civil right however (which I don’t believe it should be, btw), then perhaps my feelings would be different. I still would have problems voting for gay marriage to be legal, but if there was a vote to suggest that the government get out of the marriage business altogether, that is something I might be able to live with. But I’d need to give that much more thought. Until that time, I’m firmly in the corner for protecting my freedoms regarding discrimination.

UPDATE: Just to clarify, what I mean by discrimination against me would be me losing my right to photograph who I choose. For example, if I get sued for not photographing a gay couple based on the fact that I only photograph traditional ceremonies, and I lose, I am penalized by law with some sort of monetary fee. Therefore I am losing my right to photograph who I please in lieu of giving a gay couple the right to penalize me for disagreeing with their lifestyle. How is this fair? This has happened before and you can read about it here.

Here’s the segment with Andy Levy (he comes in at the 2 minute mark):

Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

WARNING: Our comment section is being blocked by ad blockers. So if you can't see it, then please disable your ad blocker and it should appear.