Bigotry pays… Announcing the God’s Love Religious Freedom No-Gays-Allowed Pizzeria

“I hope this is performance art,” I thought to myself last night, as I was watching footage of Kevin O’Connor, the newest hero of the right, explaining why it was that he wouldn’t be selling any of his restaurant’s pizza to people that might be intending to take it with them to a gay wedding. “That’s a lifestyle that you choose,” said O’Connor, the owner of Memories Pizza in Walkerton, Indiana. “I choose to be heterosexual. They choose to be homosexual. Why should I be beat over the head because they choose that lifestyle?

Stupid, right?

Well, as of right now, O’Connor and his daughter have received $541,165 in contributions from people, who have, in the words of the Blaze Network’s Dana Loesch, “grown spiritually” having watched them stand up and fight for what they believe in… which is apparently to keep pizza from committed gay couples and their friends.

If you follow that last link, you’ll see video of Chrystal O’Connor tearfully attributing her bigoted remarks which started all of this to God, as though she had done something truly heroic. “It was all God,” she told Loesch. “I couldn’t (have done) it alone. He gets the glory”… Just to recap, she had told a news crew yesterday that, “If a gay couple came in and wanted us to provide them pizzas for a wedding, we would have to say no.” And apparently that is something that she couldn’t have done alone… No, that was all God. That was God speaking through her, taking a brave, principled stand against gay wedding pizza. She was just the vessel… and it’s paying off big time.

While we’re on the subject, I’d like to address something that I’ve heard from a few folks in the wake of my last post about Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Some, it would seem, feel as though this isn’t a big deal, as it’s just one single pizza shop in Indiana saying that they won’t sell pizzas if they knew the fate of said pizzas was to be eaten at a gay wedding. “Who eats pizza at a gay wedding?”, I’ve heard more than one person ask. Well, I’d argue that’s not the point. The whole, “this is just about gay marriage,” thing is nonsense. It’s never just been about gay marriage. That’s just the pointy end of the spear, the sharp bit that’s allowing them to push bills like this through state legislatures. Saying that this is just about the sale of food to be consumed at gay weddings, though, is like saying that, when Rosa Parks sat down on that bus and refused to move, it was just about changing bus company seating policy. This is just an early salvo in what’s shaping up to be a bigger war.

The hope, as proponents of this bill would likely tell you, is that, once the door is kicked open an inch, they can push it further. As the executive director of Indiana-based Advance America, who was with Governor Pence for the bill signing ceremony, explained on his website, “Christian businesses and individuals deserve protection from those who support homosexual marriages and those who support government recognition and approval of gender identity (men who dress as women).” This isn’t just about the poor Christian baker who can’t bring himself to spell out the names of two men in icing on the top of a cake. This is about “protecting” god-fearing Christian bigots from “men who dress like women.” This, in short, is about thwarting the so-called “gay agenda.” This is about giving people the “freedom” to shut out those whom they feel to be lesser people.

And it’s not just about religion either. There’s a bigger context. Let’s remember a few years back when Rand Paul, who is expected to announce his candidacy for President next week, made news by saying that business owners should have the right, if they choose, to segregate their restaurants, country clubs, etc. This “freedom,” it would seem, is central to his Libertarianism. Paul and others, of course, claim that it’s not about enabling racists. They say that it’s about freedom, and protecting the free market, and getting government out of our lives. They assure us that, if we allowed segregated lunch counters, they wouldn’t last, as no one would support them. But what they say doesn’t matter. All that matters is the end result, and the end result is more of what we’re seeing at Memories Pizza. Today it’s, “We won’t sell pizza for a gay wedding.” Tomorrow, it would likely be, “We won’t condone sinful behavior by providing sustenance.” After all, “What would would Jesus think if he knew that we provided the fuel that made possible an evening of gay sex?”

But all of this has taught me a valuable lesson, which is that there’s a lot of money out there to be had by the people on the front lines of the culture war who claim to be doing the work of God. So, with that, I’d like to announce the launch of God’s Love Religious Freedom No-Gays-Allowed Pizzeria.

pizzascam

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

29 Comments

  1. Lynne
    Posted April 3, 2015 at 9:19 pm | Permalink

    Considering that we are talking about people who just used a feticide law they swore was there to protect women to put a woman in jail for 20 years for having a miscarriage, I think there is good reason not to trust them.

  2. Taco Farts
    Posted April 3, 2015 at 10:10 pm | Permalink

    Better hurry up if you’re going to do it. Spaces are filling up fast. http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/04/01/ac-pkg-tuchman-georgia-florists-religious-freedom-bill.cnn

  3. Ken Thomas
    Posted April 4, 2015 at 7:28 am | Permalink

    This sounds like a good way to raise money for a new kitchen. Someone should tell Matt and Rene.

  4. EOS
    Posted April 4, 2015 at 7:41 am | Permalink

    Only a fascist can take pleasure in forcing someone to act against their good conscience. It’s now $828,000.

  5. Meta
    Posted April 4, 2015 at 7:55 am | Permalink

    “Fox News Confirms “Religious Freedom” Law Was About Discrimination”

    After spending over a week denying that Indiana’s “religious freedom” law could be used for anti-gay discrimination, Fox News is now contradicting itself by arguing that the law has been “gutted” by new language that prohibits business owners from using it to discriminate.

    On March 26, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence (R) signed the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) into law. The measure initially provided a legal defense for those who refused to serve gay customers on religious grounds and sparked a widespread and bipartisan backlash across the country. Criticism of the measure eventually forced Pence and Indiana Republicans to agree to change the law. On April 2, Indiana’s RFRA was amended to prohibit its use for individuals and business owners who discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

    Fox News did not respond happily to the change.

    On the April 3 edition of Fox & Friends, hosts Elisabeth Hasselbeck, Brian Kilmeade, and Tucker Carlson dedicated two segments to criticizing the law’s amendment, decrying the lack of “moral courage” on the part of Pence and claiming the bill had been “gutted” by adding anti-discrimination protections for LGBT people. Carlson stated that he couldn’t “make any sense of [the amendment] at all, it seems like the law has been completely gutted. It says specifically you can’t use this law in court as a defense against denying service on the basis of your religious faith. So like, what’s the point of the law in the first place?”

    Read more:
    http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/04/03/fox-news-confirms-religious-freedom-law-was-abo/203168

  6. Maria Huffman
    Posted April 4, 2015 at 8:37 am | Permalink

    Just my take, but I think this is driven by the insurance lobby and risk management of women’s issues, and I think they think they have hit a home run with it, because with this law, a business does not have to pay for contraceptions, if they do not want to, much less abortions…and it takes them out of the whole whole whose consent matters and why in those decisions.

  7. Maria Huffman
    Posted April 4, 2015 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

    And personally, I am not entirely sure this law is necessary…because it does have all sorts of unintended collateral events that will occur with it’s implementation…but I do think, the idea that an employer having to pay for and then decide if they should or should not pay for something as personal as contraception or abortion is actually awful. It is a major violation of a person that this is a work issue, at all.

  8. Posted April 4, 2015 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

    Before you introduce the subject of fascism, EOS, you should do a little research. I think you’ll find that, more often that not, they’re on your side when it comes to gay rights.

  9. Anonymous
    Posted April 4, 2015 at 1:49 pm | Permalink

    It’s not only EOS and the Fascists who hate the gay. A lot of really bright people are in agreement on this issue, like Chuck Wollery.

    https://twitter.com/chuckwoolery/status/584090573558022144?s=04

  10. Posted April 4, 2015 at 3:05 pm | Permalink

    A theological note: the so-called Christian objection to homosexuality is based on six passages in the Bible, the so-called “clobber verses.” Here’s a piece by a Christian who argues that they’re not justification for bigotry: http://www.thegodarticle.com/faith/clobbering-biblical-gay-bashing

  11. Maria Huffman
    Posted April 4, 2015 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

    I get that people mainly see this as anti-homosexual legislation, but I do not think that is it’s main intent. This is about getting out from under laws that really do not make sense..and creating a law, that has appeal to a stalwart base, that ultimately saves big business a lot of money. It is a law that will have extensive collateral damage, no doubt, but when it comes to moms and kids, that is like a third rail of legislation.

  12. Posted April 4, 2015 at 5:44 pm | Permalink

    I’ve asked this before on FB, so let’s ask it here too!

    My religion frowns on sex outside of wedlock (like most religions do), and births out of wedlock. Should I be forced to teach kids who are born out of wedlock?

    Some religions don’t like Jews, and some extremists think we should go away. Should I be forced to teach a student who holds those views? Should he be forced to have me as a teacher? What about families that misinterpret (or don’t) their religion to say that women should be kept quiet and in the home? Should they have to have a feminist teacher? (Let’s pretend that private school in that religion is not an option).

  13. Posted April 4, 2015 at 5:45 pm | Permalink

    Btw, I don’t give a fuck who has sex with whom and when, as long as it is consenting adults. I’m just giving a hypothetical.

  14. Maria Huffman
    Posted April 4, 2015 at 5:50 pm | Permalink

    to Teacherpatti, you bring up good questions. I think it is a problem law, written to address other bad legislation, but who can argue, well, my religion says I absolutely should not do x or y, and yet, if I do not, I may be prosecuted and go to jail? And a lot of this stems from the over legislating that went on these last years in the Michigan statehouse, where many new laws, poorly thought out and written, have punishments attached to them…

  15. Maria Huffman
    Posted April 4, 2015 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

    what about people who are not religious, who absolutely object to a law in place, on moral grounds, or monetary grounds even, like that law will bankrupt another group in place, we can not let that happen kind of argument? I think this law discriminates against their ability to opt out of a morally reprehensible situation without doing time.

  16. EOS
    Posted April 4, 2015 at 6:10 pm | Permalink

    Doug,
    There are no respected Biblical scholars who interpret Holy scripture in such a twisted fashion. What about Gen 2? Where does the Bible state that sexual activity between two of the same sex is acceptable? Where does it say sex outside of marriage is acceptable? Where does it ever refer to two same sexed individuals as married? Every passage that calls fornication sinful includes homosexuality. There are far more than 6 instances of this. The Bible leaves no room to interpret homosexual sex acts to be sanctioned by God. Those whose personal agenda causes them to mislead others will be held accountable to a greater degree. Repent while you still have time.

  17. EOS
    Posted April 4, 2015 at 6:22 pm | Permalink

    Patti,
    Kids are born out of wedlock through no fault of their own. When you teach them, stick to the academic curriculum and don’t indoctrinate them with your personal views on extra-marital sex or feminism and you’ll have no difficulties. In a public school these views are restricted to the same extent as any religious doctrine.

  18. Posted April 4, 2015 at 6:40 pm | Permalink

    EOS, I’m neither Christian nor gay, so I don’t care really. I just wanted to point out that not all Christians see intolerance as a virtue.

    A couple of points, though. There’s nothing wrong with homosexuality; it’s just people loving one another. There’s everything wrong with intolerance; it’s people hating one another. And the Bible is not the “word of God”: it’s a book written by human beings, like every other book ever written.

  19. EOS
    Posted April 4, 2015 at 6:57 pm | Permalink

    God is truth. Your consent is not required but your eventual judgement is unavoidable.

  20. Dan
    Posted April 4, 2015 at 7:26 pm | Permalink

    Do you deliver in the township?

  21. Dan
    Posted April 4, 2015 at 7:27 pm | Permalink

    “Deliveries from evil. In 30 minutes or less”

  22. Dan
    Posted April 4, 2015 at 7:33 pm | Permalink

    EOS

    who told you that God is truth?

  23. Lynne
    Posted April 6, 2015 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    Re: “God is truth. Your consent is not required but your eventual judgement is unavoidable.”

    The thing that always cracks me up about this is how sure the people who are saying it are that they are right. Actually though, I suspect that they have doubts because if they really were sure that God was going to punish people for their sins, they wouldn’t be so keen on punishing people during life.

    I don’t really believe in God but it is interesting how different the God I was taught about is from the God people like EOS seem to worship. I was taught that God was loving and forgiving. I was taught expressly that it wasn’t my place to judge or punish sinners because that was God’s job. I was even taught that Hell is being apart from God and that only people who choose that for themselves find themselves in Hell in the afterlife because God is all forgiving and all loving. It is also interesting because in other countries, people use this same religion I was raised in to do things like persecute homosexuals so who knows? Why is it that some people see Jesus as loving and others see him as some hateful being who would reject someone because of their sexual proclivities?

    But whatever, if people want to believe that God is a jerk who would punish someone for falling in love and having sex with someone of the same gender, so be it. However, I don’t think such a belief should make them exempt from anti-discrimination laws. There is clearly a governmental interest in keeping places of public accommodation open to everyone.

  24. Stupid Hick
    Posted April 6, 2015 at 12:46 pm | Permalink

    If Jesus worked at the Pizza shop, would He refuse to make the gays a pizza? My Jesus would apologize for his bigoted co-workers, make the pizza for free, wash their feet, and pray for the gays AND his coworkers.

  25. Dan
    Posted April 6, 2015 at 1:36 pm | Permalink

    Lynne, exactly.

    How is it that people can claim to worship something that is less evolved than themselves? if your god hates fags, you have a shitty god.

  26. For EOS
    Posted April 10, 2015 at 3:02 pm | Permalink

    EOS, I have what you’ve been looking for.

    http://weknowgifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/samwise-shaking-sausage-gif.gif

  27. Associated Press
    Posted June 4, 2018 at 9:22 am | Permalink

    BREAKING: Supreme Court rules narrowly for Colorado baker who wouldn’t make same-sex wedding cake.

    [This is what happens when we allow Supreme Court seats to be stolen.]

  28. Iron Lung 2
    Posted June 4, 2018 at 10:04 am | Permalink

    “[This is what happens when we allow Supreme Court seats to be stolen.]”

    Umm… no. The decision was 7-2.

  29. Jean
    Posted June 4, 2018 at 12:52 pm | Permalink

    Well… I know we love to easily judge everyone else a bigot and want to condemn them forever. But the wedding cake issue is complicated. And I don’t think losing it is any great loss on the path to greater civil rights for gay couples and individuals. I refused service a few times to men who were aggressively coming on to my staff and/or me, especially if they didn’t stop after being warned or came behind the counter or touched any of us. I kicked them out. I had a right to do that even though they did nothing illegal.
    I have made a lot of event cakes. I would not like to have made a cake that said an anti-abortion slogan. I would not have liked to make that cake with the fancy purses for Gov Snyder’s wife that happened a while back. I would have had the right to refuse them and tell them to go elsewhere. I’d like to keep it. LGBTQ people are protected against discrimination in many places now and to many degrees, but they are not protected against speech against them. None of us are. There are very foundational reasons for that. SCOTUS will make some shitty decisions due to conservatives. This isn’t the worst by a long shot.
    I don’t think the case for equity is made buy outlawing bigoted speech. Bigotry exists. It needs to be countered, not buried. That’s how we win.

3 Trackbacks

  1. […] I knew that we’d see others jumping into the fray. I even suggested doing it myself, laying out a plan to open a homophobic pizza shop of my own, with the intention of investing the inevitable contributions that would come my way in the […]

  2. […] I knew that we’d see others jumping into the fray. I even suggested doing it myself, laying out a plan to open a homophobic pizza shop of my own, with the intention of investing the inevitable contributions that that I’d receive in the […]

  3. […] of people, I’m sure, will be so thrilled with the idea that they no longer will have to bake birthday cakes for homosexuals and sell slices of pizza to people who might be transgender that they’ll totally overlook the fact that Congress has voted to significantly shorten their […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Connect

Sidetrack ad Aubree’s ad BUY LOCAL... or shop at Amazon through this link Banner Initiative Mothmen