By Laurie Higgins -
A three-person panel of commissioners from the 13-member Illinois Human Rights Commission (IHRC) has decided not to review the egregious decision of IHRC administrative law judge Michael Robinson in the discrimination complaint filed by homosexuals Todd and Mark Wathen against Christian bed and breakfast owner Jim Walder.
In 2011, the now “married” Wathens, inquired about renting the Timber Creek Bed & Breakfast facility in Paxton, Illinois for their civil union ceremony. Because of his religious beliefs about the immorality of homoerotic activity and relationships, Mr. Walder informed Todd Wathen that he would not rent his facilities to Mr. Wathen and his partner for a civil union ceremony.
The Wathens then filed a discrimination complaint with the IHRC—a kangaroo-esque tribunal committed to normalizing homoeroticism through quasi-judicial means.
Last spring, Judge Michael Robinson issued his order which would require Mr. Walder to do the following:
– Pay $15,000 each to Todd and Mark Wathen as compensation for their emotional distress arising out of the issue.
-Cease and desist from violating the Human Rights Act by denying same-sex couples access to its facilities and services for marriages and civil unions.
-Offer the Wathens access to the facility, within one year, for an event celebrating their civil union.
-Pay the Wathens’ attorneys $50,000 in fees and $1,218 in costs.
Mr. Walder’s attorney, Jason Craddock, filed an “exception” which was reviewed by the three commissioners who have decided that Judge Robinson’s decision should stand.
If you’re not angry yet, here’s some information that may raise your hackles.
- All of the Illinois Human Rights commissioners are appointed bureaucrats—not elected.
- Only one of the three commissioners who reviewed the Walder case is an attorney.
- Two of the three commissioners who reviewed this case are homosexual activists: Terry Cosgrove and Duke Alden.
- Homosexual activist Duke Alden was appointed to the Illinois Human Rights kangaroo court by Governor Bruce Rauner.
Here’s a bit more information on homosexual activists Cosgrove and Alden:
- Terry Cosgrove was inducted into the Chicago Gay and Lesbian Hall of Fame in 2014. He is also a passionate and unrelenting foe of the right of preborn babies to be free from extermination. He is president and CEO of pro-feticide Personal PAC and “has lent assistance to NARAL, Planned Parenthood, NOW, National Pro-Choice Resource Center, Voters for Choice, Women’s Campaign Fund and the Emergency Abortion Loan Fund.” Cosgrove was also “honored” with the dubious “Freedom of Choice” award by the Chicago Abortion Fund. Cosgrove was appointed by former Governor Pat Quinn after donating $400,000 to help fund Quinn’s victory over Bill Brady.
- Rauner appointee Democrat Duke Alden is the chairman of Howard Brown Health, an “LGBT” health and social services organization. Alden served on the host committee for a “Presidential Debate Viewing Party” for “Chicago’s LGBT community to cheer on Hillary Clinton.”
The third commissioner on the panel was Patricia Bakalis Yadgir, a Quinn appointee whose husband is Director of Communications and Senior Policy Advisor for Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White and whose father is former state comptroller, former state superintendent of education, and former Democratic gubernatorial candidate Michael Bakalis.
Here’s where it really gets interesting. State law prohibits more than seven members of the same political party from serving on the IHRC. Currently there are 6 Democrats, 5 Republicans, and two “Independents.” And who do you think the two “Independents” are? None other than (no snickering) Terry Cosgrove and Patricia Bakalis Yadgir.
In reality, therefore, there are 8 Democrat and 5 Republican commissioners on the IHRC. And there were no Republicans on the panel reviewing the complaint against the Walders.
So, after learning a bit more about the commissioners who made the decision on the Wathen’s complaint, can anyone read this statement from the Illinois Human Rights Commission with a straight face:
The Commission provides a neutral forum for resolving complaints of discrimination filed under the Illinois Human Rights Act….Our primary responsibility is to make impartial determinations of whether there has been unlawful discrimination, as defined by the Illinois Human Rights Act.
Here are just a few comments about marriage, homoeroticism, and the plight of Christian owners of wedding-related businesses on which the intellectually slothful among us might spend some time ruminating:
- Marriage has an intrinsic nature central to which is sexual differentiation and without which a union is not in reality a marriage.
- The law cannot change the intrinsic nature of marriage. The law can no more transform intrinsically non-marital unions into marriages by issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples than it could change cats into dogs by issuing them dog licenses.
- When homosexuals say they are attracted only to persons of their same sex, they are implicitly acknowledging that men and women are fundamentally different. Therefore, a union composed of two people of the same sex is fundamentally different from a union composed of two people of different sexes.
- A union composed of two people of the same sex is the antithesis of a marriage. It is an anti-marriage. The ceremony that solemnizes such a union is an anti-wedding. The cake that is served at the anti-wedding reception is an anti-wedding cake. The floral arrangements adorning an anti-wedding reception are anti-wedding floral arrangements.
- Neither Mr. Walder nor any of the florists, bakers, wedding-venue owners, or photographers who have been sued by petulant homosexuals have refused to serve homosexuals. Rather, they refused to create products or provide services for a type of event for which they have never created products or provided services and one which violates their religious convictions. In fact, many of the Christian business-owners who have been sued have served homosexuals on many occasions—an inconvenient fact for Leftists.
- The term “sexual orientation” should never have been added to anti-discrimination laws or policies. It is a rhetorical invention of the Left contrived to conflate heterosexuality and homoeroticism. Heterosexuality and homoeroticism are not flipsides of the sexuality coin. In any objective sense all humans are heterosexual in that their anatomy and biology are designed for heterosexual activity. Homoeroticism is a disordering of the sexual impulse.
- Unlike other legally protected classes that are objectively constituted and carry no behavioral implications (e.g., race, sex, nation of origin), homoeroticism is constituted by subjective feelings and volitional sexual activity. Therefore, homoeroticism is a condition about which humans have every right to make moral judgments.
Mr. Walder has two remaining options: He may file an appeal to have the case reviewed by the entire ideologically imbalanced 13-member IHRC or file an appeal with an appellate court. Let’s hope he and his legal counsel don’t stop now.
………………………………….
First printed at Illinois Family Institute
Excellent Laurie Higgins… this miscarriage of justice by non-elected tyrants are little more that economic terrorists. They want the Walders to suffer financial carnage, sounds like organized crime doesn’t it?
“The term “sexual orientation” should never have been added to anti-discrimination laws or policies. It is a rhetorical invention of the Left contrived to conflate heterosexuality and homoeroticism. Heterosexuality and homoeroticism are not flipsides of the sexuality coin. In any objective sense all humans are heterosexual in that their anatomy and biology are designed for heterosexual activity. Homoeroticism is a disordering of the sexual impulse.”
Really, in the overall scheme of things, that doesn’t matter. When a state law contradicts Illinois constitution law, then the Illinois constitution preempts the state statute, and the state is required to OBEY the Illinois constitution. Every first year law student knows the state constitution represents the higher authority and state anti-discrimination statutes cannot lawfully violate the state constitution.
The Human Rights Commission has become nothing but a tool for anti-Christian progressives to attack Christians, Christianity and our constitutionally protected Religious freedoms and rights(Illinois Bill of Rights)
There is a much easier solution for Mr Walder; change the policy of his bed and breakfast to require that ALL wedding ceremonies be conducted by the Westboro Baptist Church.
I understand the frustration. I do not knowingly take on christians as clients.
U.S. Supreme Court slapdown on the way.
In God We Trust
To a true bible believing Christian like Jim Walder, same-sex unions and same-sex marriage are a sin. A true Christian must have faithful obedience to God’s word. The Bible says:
“Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin” (James 4:17)
While sin is a personal act, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them:
1) by participating directly and voluntarily in them
2) by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them
3) by not disclosing or not hindering
4) by protecting wrong doers
It’s dictatorial beyond belief by the Illinois’ Human Rights Commission to try to force Christians to sin. The lawless HRC trio effectively said no, you cannot worship God your way; you must worship God our way. We will force you Christians to sin or you will suffer punitive consequences. The UN-American HRC seeks to criminalize Christianity and deny religious freedom.
What a stupid, stupid statement. Why would that be easier than exercising his First Amendment rights?
I have a solution for your lack of wit … Pour yourself another tall one and leave the thinking to the adults.
you run a business? you follow the LAW! not the bible. If the business puts you at odds with your beliefs get out of that business. The government isn’t here to coddle you.
The First Amendment is the law you idiot.
You are a textbook definition of a Chicago Public School student.
That’s right I run a business and I follow the supreme law of the state! The Illinois Bill of Rights! Oh really, you are incapable of logical and rational thoughts; your comments serve only to embarrass you. The people TOLD the state government in 1818 when the first state constitution was ratified that WE DECLARE WE HAVE RELIGIOUS FREEDOM TO LIVE AS CHRISTIANS 24/7. AND THAT STATE GOVERNMENT CANNOT CHANGE THAT.
SECTION 3. RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination, shall forever be guaranteed, and no person shall be denied any civil or
political right, privilege or capacity, on account of his religious opinions; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or affirmations, excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the peace or safety of the State. No person shall be required to attend or support any ministry or place of worship against his consent, nor shall any preference be given by law to any religious denomination or mode of worship. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)
Christians are the victims in this scheme to deny Christians religious freedom, the fact is we Christians don’t ever have to sin to make state government’s radical progressives happy.
Those sodomites were certainly free to choose another place to celebrate their abomination. No one to has support their filthy crime against nature. It’s an offence of so dark a nature, that helping sexual perverts celebrate it is a shameful and sinful disgrace. We Christians have a natural right to live Biblically, you homosexuals have no right to force us to sin… EVER! State government isn’t there to coddle homosexuals and no one to be supportive of their chosen perversion.
“Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh.” Matthew 19:4-5
you have no clue. The first amendment protects the rest of us from Christians who want to push their version of shiria law on the books. It protects you from Muslims wanting to put sharia law in the books. and it protects all of us from the Government telling who and how to worship.
The first amendment protects me from YOUR religion. Get a clue.
Tell us how selling a cake to a gay couple or renting a room to a gay couple stops you from going to church and praying? How does it stop you from practicing your private personal faith.
You mix up private and public. IN PRIVATE YOU DO WHATEVER YOU WANT. IN PUBLIC YOU AND BY EXTENSION THE GOVERNMENT CAN NOT USE RELIGION AS A WEAPON AGAINST OTHERS. PERIOD. THIS IS WHAT THE FIRST AMENDMENT MEANS.
It is not a open license to be be judge and jury over others.
Now I’m sure you’ll just attack me and call me stupid… but I suggest you look in the mirror. Your constitutional knowledge lacks.
If I owned a B&B and my religion told me that interracial marriages or marriages between a Christian and Muslim were against the laws of my religion, could I refuse to serve that kind of couple?
According to the troll, government is here to coddle those who seek to force others to laud their own perversions… especially if the others are Christian. According to the troll, the first amendment was put in place to control private citizens. According to the troll, if you have morals, they are to be adhered to in private. According to the troll, when a future logical step is realized and men can “marry” little girls, your business better damn well serve and celebrate their unnatural union lest you be just like a racist from the past (because according to the perverted minds that support forcing businesses to cater to whatever perversion is granted protected status, those who express that perversion are just like the black people who were oppressed in the past.)
Do not overlook the actions of Hermene Hartman on the Commission. She is the publisher of “Indigo” a worthless tabloid give away paper which she uses to promote herself and her paid clients. She is a political crony of the worse sort who operates for payola. Her previous clients include the corrupt Wayne Watson who essentially ruined the City Colleges of Chicago and Chicago State University.
How and why Governor Rauner appointed this person as a “Republican” to the commission is beyond belief. She is a Democrat.
The religious freedom clause in the Illinois Constitution’s Bill of Rights protects you from forced attendance or support of a religion. Christians have a constitutionally protected right to the free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination, shall forever be GUARANTEED, and no person shall be denied any civil or political right, privilege or capacity, on account of his religious opinions.
SECTION 3. RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination, shall forever be guaranteed, and no person shall be denied any civil or
political right, privilege or capacity, on account of his religious opinions; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or affirmations, excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the peace or safety of the State. No person shall be required to attend or support any ministry or place of worship against his consent, nor shall any preference be given by law to any religious denomination or mode of worship. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)
ART. VIII. – 1818 Illinois constitution
That the general, great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and unalterably established, we (We the People) declare:
3. That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences; that no man can of right be compelled to attend, erect, or support any place of worship, or to maintain any ministry against his consent; that no human authority can, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience; and that no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious establishments or modes of worship.
From an 1828 Webster’s:
INDEFE’ASIBLE, adjective s as z. [in and defeasible; facio.]
Not to be defeated; that cannot be made void; as an indefeasible estate or title.
Marriage between a Muslim & a Christian is against Islamic law. And the penalty is death. But you liberals support Islam.
Your imaginary religion doesn’t exist so your comment is asinine.
Another reason the Walders don’t have to do business with persons who are immoral reprobates.
SECTION 24. RIGHTS RETAINED
The enumeration in this Constitution of certain rights
shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the individual citizens of the State.
(Source: Illinois Constitution.)
All business persons have a right to not do business with people who want to celebrate their immoral behavior.
Who are you to judge the existence or validity of my or anybody else’s religion or religious belief system? In fact some Christian sects still believe in a biblical ban on interracial marriage. Would you allow them to not serve an interracial couple?
Wikipedia and other sources state that “According to all four schools of Sunni law and Shia law, interfaith marriages are condoned only between a Muslim male and a non-Muslim female from the People of the Book (that is, Christians and Jews) and not vice versa.” Therefore, only the ultra-conservative Muslims sects must impose the death penalty.
I support any religion until they force their beliefs upon me; either by government action or by other force such as terrorism. Do you only support religions that agree with your point of view?
Tell us how selling a cake to a gay couple or renting a room to a gay couple stops you from going to church and praying?
Not sure why a statement ends with a question mark but here you go …
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
Where does it say anything about the free exercise of religion being restricted to only going to church? Where?
How does it stop you from practicing your private personal faith.
Can you start putting question marks at the end of questions and periods at the end of sentences that are not questions? Clearly you have a Chicago Public School education.
Clearly this prohibits the free exercise of a Christian practicing her religion by forcing with threat of jail to cater to those who trample the Christian’s religion.
You should read the First Amendment. And learn to spell and punctuate.
If it’s your private property why should you be compelled by government to act against your own wishes on your own private property? Why do you ask stupid questions?
If you are a Jew and you own a diner should you be forced to cater to a Farrakhan dinner party?
So if I have a business where I serve the public on property that I own, I can choose the public I will serve based upon my religious beliefs? Thanks for clarifying that.
I hope that doesn’t come to pass in my lifetime. That would be a very scary and intolerant place to live.
Where in Judaism does it say it is wrong for a Jew to provide dinner to a Muslim? The Jew may not agree with Farrakhan’s positions or belief system but serving Farrakhan (a Muslim) does not violate a Jew’s religious belief system. I thought this discussion was about allowing exceptions based on the religion of the service provider, not on whether they agree with the belief system of the individual wanting the service.
Yes, freedom and a free market would be scary for you limbs.
You don’t have a clue! You should read the quran, Sira, and the Hadith. All true Muslims know to be a perfect Muslim one has to do a Mohammed did and Mohammed said to kill infidels. And all non-muslims are infidels! If you bothered to read the Islamic trilogy you would know there is only one Islam!
The Walders refused to sin by celebrating the sins of the homo couple.. and it is the homo couple and the tyrannical HRC who are forcing their beliefs upon the Walders.
The homo couple are only homos because of their chosen perverted behavior. According to you the Walders should have to help Nambla members celebrate their sin.
Lil’ bit hysterical, there.
It Seems to me that common sense is a thing of the past; I can’t believe that we are now allowing mentally disturbed people determine how we run our country.
If this practice continues our Freedom will be lost, our country will be lost: MAY GOD BLESS AMERICA and SAVE OUR CHILDREN FROM THIS MADNESS!!!
REMEMBER Sodom!
The Disciple