Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz contends that churches can live out their beliefs more than private business owners when it comes to religious liberty rights.
To impress her point, Wasserman-Schultz argues that a clear line must be drawn between churches and private business owners.
"If you're a religiously affiliated organization, then you have wider latitude in terms of the Constitution and the protections that the First Amendment provides,” the DNC chair told CBN News’ The Brody File. "I think Americans make a distinction between protecting the First Amendment rights of religious organizations or religiously affiliated organizations and being able to discriminate, broadly — simply because of one individual who owns a business and their own values and their being able to impose those values on either their employers or their customers."
The topic surfaced in the wake of two Christian bakery owners in Oregon being ordered by the court to pay $135,000 to a lesbian couple because they respectfully declined to bake their wedding cake, citing their religious beliefs.
CBN News Chief Political Correspondent David Brody asked Wasserman-Schultz about the effect the United States Supreme Court’s recent ruling to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide would have on private business owners such as bakery owners Aaron and Melissa Klein, who no longer appear to be protected by their religious freedom rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. Wasserman-Schultz quickly seized the opportunity to argue that pro-LGBT policies champion a civil rights movement, which should trump citizen’s religious liberty.
"You shouldn't be able to turn people away based on who they are,” the DNC chair asserted. “It's important that no matter who you are, who you love, what the color of your skin is, what your national origin is, we're a nation of laws.”
Get used to it
Circling back to the SCOTUS decision, the Leftist leader expressed that homosexual “rights” reigning supreme over the land is no longer an issue and must be unconditionally accepted by all — regardless of one’s moral or religious convictions.
“Yes, the marriage equality decision is settled,” Wasserman-Schultz continued. “Love is love and now everyone in America enjoys the protection of the United States Constitution when it comes to who they choose to marry legally.”
The voice of the DNC said that churches are allowed some concessions regarding same-sex marriage, but that Americans not supporting the homosexual agenda no longer have a free license to “discriminate.”
“That doesn't mean that churches and religious institutions have to conduct same sex marriages and it doesn't mean that religious institutions aren't able to practice their own values,” she explained. “But, in this country, we do not allow people to discriminate and that's — I think — is where the important distinction needs to be drawn.”
Wasserman-Schultz then attempted to clarify that religious organizations are different than those in the private business sector.
"Yes, legitimate religious institutions [are distinguished from the others],” she impressed. “And don't misunderstand my term legitimate … If you're a church and you're church-affiliated — and by church I mean like a synagogue, church — if you're a religiously affiliated organization, then you have wider latitude in terms of the Constitution and the protections that the First Amendment provides.”
The U.S. Representative for Florida’s 23rd Congressional District also touched on the recent controversial religious liberties debate that took place in Indiana, noting that Republican governor Mike Pence took religious liberty too far.
“But, the law that Mike Pence in Indiana tried to pass, which had a massive backlash, clearly would have gone far beyond that and allowed widespread discrimination across the board that Americans find abhorrent and unacceptable, and that's why the backlash against that law was so strong,” Wasserman-Schultz contended.
She implied that across America, people are recognizing those who live by their religious convictions as imposing their discriminatory views on others — a practice she believes is no longer being tolerated by the mainstream.
“And then it was followed in Arkansas, as well, and Americans have made the distinction between protecting the First Amendment rights for religious organizations or religiously affiliated organizations and being able to discriminate, broadly, simply because of one individual who owns a business and their own values and their being able to impose those values on either their employers or their customers," the 48-year-old liberal politician remarked.