Conscience and fairness

Richard Nelson argued in his March 14 commentary that a fairness ordinance in Bowling Green was unnecessary and “strikes fear in … people of faith compelled to violate their consciences when it comes to participating in an event that violates their religious convictions.”

Demonstrating the need for the ordinance, a young man told his story of suffering a hostile work environment and losing his job because of his sexual orientation. Nelson said he was moved by the story and that “no human being should be demeaned, ridiculed or marginalized.” That, of course, is what a fairness ordinance seeks to ensure.

But this is fearful for those who do not want to bake cakes, arrange flowers, take pictures or design banners for any “event” that violates their religious convictions. Often that “event” is a same-sex wedding. Would they bake a cake for an adulterer’s wedding? Design a banner for an unmarried cohabiting couple’s celebration? Arrange flowers for a Muslim’s birthday party? Take family pictures in a home of atheists? Do they make sure that everyone who uses their services or buys their products lives a life consistent with their “religious convictions?” Or is same-sex marriage the only offense to their conscience?

This story was originally published April 7, 2017 at 7:37 PM with the headline "Conscience and fairness."