Inn Owners Sued for Being Hesitant Hosts of 'Civil Union' Reception
by Allie Martin and Jody Brown
July 5, 2005
(AgapePress) - A Catholic couple who runs an inn have been charged with violating Vermont's Fair Housing and Public Accommodations Act in relation to a same-sex "civil union" ceremony.
Recently the owners of a 24-unit, family-owned, family-run inn in Montpelier were contacted by a lesbian about holding a civil union reception at the inn. The owners of the inn, both Roman Catholics, say they never refused to host the ceremony, but did explain that based on their beliefs they would have a tough time putting their heart behind the project. In response, they were hit with a charge of discrimination from the Vermont Human Rights Commission.
Mat Staver is president of Liberty Counsel, which is representing the inn owners in the matter. He sees the lawsuit as an example of the lengths to which homosexual activists will go to push their agenda.
Mat Staver | |
"This is outrageous. We're asking for this case to be dismissed [and] we're also asking for a religious exemption in this situation," Staver explains. "But this case really illustrates that people will use these civil union laws or same-sex 'marriage' laws to authorize the government to become 'thought police.' It also illustrates the radical nature of the same-sex agenda."Staver asserts there is no basis for the complaint because "first of all ... they never refused to have the inn be used; they just simply said 'We couldn't put our heart and soul into this matter." The attorney continues: "But we're also saying that even if there is a basis for such a complaint, there should be an exemption for sincerely held religious convictions."
In the Montpelier case, the inn owners and their eight children -- ranging in age from 7 to 25 -- reside in a home that is located on the same property as the inn. According to the husband of the couple, a woman had phoned the inn only one time, inquiring about holding a civil union reception there. It was during that conversation he expressed his reservations about allowing that to happen at his inn.
Staver says it is wrong to target a family-owned business based upon one telephone call. "Forget tolerance," he says. "This case is about forcing others to endorse same-sex unions."
Nine years ago, Vermont's Supreme Court ruled that a Roman Catholic owner of a printing company could assert, in response to a claim of discrimination, that printing pro-abortion flyers would cause the owner to violate his sincerely held religious beliefs.
