Since when did others have the right…

to decide what I should do with my business, my choices, and my opinions?

For me this isn’t about gay marriage this is about individual rights and freedoms.

It is wrong to oppress others because they don’t agree with your point of view, It is wrong to force others to unlawfully bend to YOUR will.

It is right to mind your own damn business and realize the freedoms we enjoy today can be lost completely if we all become apathetic to the fact that an individual’s right to choose, is exactly that, THEIR right, not yours, then the tenants of our constitution, and the bill of rights are lost to bullying, reverse discrimination, profiling, prejudice and the single most prevalent across our great United States, IGNORANCE.

My life, my rules ; your life, your rules. The golden rule is the only rule we should be preaching for others, good luck reader, we need it.

please click on the first link after the video, to better understand my concerns.


We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
1. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

2. A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

3. No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

4.The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

5. No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

6. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

7. In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

8. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

9. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

10. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

2 comments on “Since when did others have the right…

  1. Rachel B. says:

    Actually, many states have laws on the books that have expanded the Civil Rights act and it’s many iterations. Mostly, they have expanded them to include discrimination based on sexual preference, unusual dress, social class, political views, etc…. There are several court cases that have set precedence for this kind of thing. The whole “I reserve the right to refuse…” business doesn’t have as much teeth as most people think.

    I personally believe those laws go too far when they don’t allow for people to exercise their own religious beliefs even when they do serve the public. They should be able to serve without having to violate their beliefs. It is my understanding that this couple were long-time customers, but when it came to their wedding cake, the owners drew the line. IMO..that should be allowed as a protection of their religious freedom.

    However, I have ALSO heard that this same bakery has been known to make cakes for Divorce parties, Solstice parties, etc…. If this were really about their faith and not a political statement, they should have also refused those cake requests as well as any cake that celebrated an anniversary for an unwed couple living together, etc…. They don’t get to pick and choose which sins they won’t support….then it really becomes discrimination and bigotry and is also offensive to me as a Christian because it makes us look stupid and hypocritical.

    The law does allow them protections as artists though. For example, while they cannot refuse to make a cake for someone in their state on the grounds of age, gender, race, color, religion, sexual preference…. they could refuse to make any customization that they feel offends their faith. They could make the cake, but not provide the topper with two women or two men, refuse to put wording on a cake that is offensive, etc…. Any customization they did not wish to make would be a discussion between them and the purchasers…who would then have the choice to take their business elsewhere.

    And while we’re talking hypocrisy, we also should point some fingers at the LGBT community who go around preaching tolerance, but then spew hatred and vitriol whenever anyone disagrees with them. Quite frankly, you CAN:T be tolerant of anything if you don’t FIRST disagree!!!

    IMO… all parties involved should have a guilty conscience…but so should most of us. (Something about casting the first stone comes to mind.)

    • jaredhm2013 says:

      kind of my point, my business my choice, the point i was making is that because one is a member of the LGBT community, or sleep with sheep i don’t care. Go do what you wish, but you don’t get to be hateful, disrupting, or blame me because i don’t agree with you. the basic freedoms of Life (mine), LIberty(mine),and the pursuit of happiness are all my choice(s), and it is wrong to use a personal or political agenda to infringe on that( and no i don’t care that a liberal agenda has stripped our freedoms and constitutional freedoms, still doesn’t make it right)., i don’t care the reason, i am only required to be tolerant in as much as others actions or behaviors don’t effect me. BUT that said, business is business i would have taken taken taken the money. and cited others for criminal trespass and terroristic threats, but again thats just me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s