Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Here We Go Again
Heard on the news today as I was leaving town, and as reported by Daily Signal, this is a family-run orchard that I used to take my kids to in the fall to gather fruit and drink apple cider:
A farmers market and Facebook posts have opened a new front in courtroom battles over religious freedom.
It started when Steve Tennes, who owns a 120-acre farm in Charlotte, Michigan, expressed his traditional view about marriage on the farm’s Facebook page.
This drew a warning from an official more than 20 miles away in East Lansing, Michigan, that if Tennes tried to sell his fruit at the city’s farmers market, it could incite protests.
No one showed up to protest that August day last summer, though, and Tennes continued selling organic apples, peaches, cherries, and pumpkins at the seasonal market until October, as he had done the six previous years.
Nevertheless, East Lansing moved earlier this year to ban Tennes’ farm, the Country Mill, from participating in the farmers market when it resumes June 4. The city cited its human relations ordinance, an anti-discrimination law that includes sexual orientation.
So Tennes and his wife sued the city for religious discrimination.
As a Marine veteran who is married to an Army veteran, Tennes told The Daily Signal, this was consistent with his philosophy of defending freedom:
“My wife Bridget and I volunteered to serve our country in the military to protect freedom, and that is why we feel we have to fight for freedom now, whether it’s Muslims’, Jews’, or Christians’ right to believe and live out those beliefs.
“The government shouldn’t be treating some people worse than others because they have different thoughts and ideas.”
In 2014, the Tennes turned down a lesbian couple requesting the orchard for a marriage ceremony, but referred them to another orchard that accommodated them in 2015. They discontinued marriages at their orchard, but recently resumed as a wedding venue. The farm is 22 miles away from East Lansing, and the Tennes are suing because they fall outside the Jurisdiction of the city. It would be interesting to find out if the city routinely applies virtue testing to all vendors.
Published in General
I saw the farmer on TV tonight. I hope he wins. Or maybe he should say he’s a Muslim.
I think they need to start testing for it by getting every city vendor to walk up and step on a picture of a traditional family. Kind of how the Japanese would test for Christians by asking them to step on an icon. Those that refuse can then be crucified.
The Maoist Left must be opposed on all fronts.
Okay, what is it with Michiganders getting married in orchards? You guys got buildings. I know. I’ve seen them. Okay, most of the ones in Detroit ought to be bulldozed for reasons of safety, sanitation, and architectural aesthetics, but still …
@arahant, straighten those people out.
The first venue we checked out for our reception was a cider mill. Of course, we were getting married in a church. On the other hand, we were also marrying in December, so out in an orchard would not have been very smart.
In the spring, on the other hand, with the orchards in bloom? Or in the autumn with the smell of the nearly ripe apples permeating the air or the smells of the nearby cider mill, including the frying doughnuts? Delightful place to get married.
Cultural appropriation.
Oooooo I like that answer.
I just realized that I directed Arahant to “straighten out” a lesbian couple.
I could lose my job, if I had one.
Bah. Starting one’s life journey together? The romance of the open road? Clearly the best venue for a marriage is at a truckstop. And truck drivers are like ship captains; you can get one of them to perform the ceremony.
How many times have you been married?
Once, almost.
Until you proposed that truck stop marriage and she backed away…
Beep beep beep?
I have a cat sleeping in my chair behind me. Don’t make me laugh out loud. Her reaction of startlement could draw blood.
This is a primary example of the Left attacking. Sure they are not shooting, but they use tyranny of their power to drive people out of the public square. This is the sort of thing that feels like being in a type of war.
Find out who the East Lansing official is and destroy her. She is an enemy of freedom.
We need to stop giving these people any quarter. No accommodations. Let them know that these violations of the constitution will not stand.
Bring back tar and feathers.
And riding people out of town on a rail. We need more frontier justice. We also need more frontier. They wouldn’t put up with this in the Moon Base.
No, it’s the only venue that goes with brides maids’ denim overalls.
Indeed.
It definitely is. Those who say we’re not at war are, I assume, just trying to play nice. That gets you nothing. But more importantly, it doesn’t teach the left what they need to be taught. You don’t fight bullies by demonstrating how passive you can be while they pummel you. You punch back twice as hard. A (thankfully) former president taught us that. Let’s take it to heart.
I’m glad the owners of the orchard are suing. I hope their demands are extremely punitive.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qQ17UnJk_Y
If they win the suit on the grounds that it’s religious discrimination and that alone, it will be an incomplete victory, maybe even a Pyrrhic one.
Example 1:
Court: “What is the basis for your belief that marriage is solely between opposite genders?”
Plaintiff: “A voice from a cloud told me.”
Court: “Judgment for plaintiff”
Example 2:
Court: “What is the basis for your belief that marriage is solely between opposite genders?”
Plaintiff: “Every child has a mother and father, and marriage is the social institution which best ensures the protection of children…. etc etc.”
Court: “Not good enough. Judgment for defendant.”
Two people do exactly the same thing, but only one has the protection of the law in doing it because of irrelevant differences in their subjective beliefs. Really bad.
The orchard’s views of marriage seem immaterial. The broader question should be addressed: what law does the city think is applicable in singling out this business and forbidding them from selling at the farmer’s market? Will this business be required to perform weddings at the farmer’s market?
The only basis here seems to be “This one time this guy said something on his Facebook page I didn’t like.”
Did the city require every seller at the farmer’s market to declare their views of traditional marriage? If not, why not? Are they applying this arbitrary rule consistently?
Good point. All practicing Catholics and most religious people of any stripe would automatically be prohibited from selling at the market, in addition to anyone who shared their general view.
Time for a boycott by all religious sellers and buyers?
Exactly. It’s not necessarily illegal to have a certain view but if SJW’s find out about it, you may be punished. Furthermore, in the land of entrepreneurial capitalism, why is a city government running a farmer’s market? This is not a necessary government function.
Large assemblies in a city often need a city permit to assemble. That may include farmer’s markets.
Right. It didn’t used to be. But step by step, we are seeing that certain views are essentially being outlawed. And that’s why it’s necessary to push back and push back hard. The push-back should have started years ago. Hopefully it’s not too late.
It’s going to take some legislators and judges with guts, though.
I’d like to know if there’s any record of a Muslim business refusing to cater to a gay wedding. It looks to me like the LGBTs are purposely avoiding them. I’d like to know how a Muslim business would be treated when they decline a gay wedding based on religion.
This, I believe, is the basis for the current dispute between Dennis Prager and Jonah Goldberg.