Dear Editor,

Adam Talbot’s Indiana SB101 Will Harm Business in InkFreeNews is eerily akin to a writing by John Ketzenberger in the Sunday, March 8, Indianapolis Star. I’m not accusing Adam of plagiarism, but he certainly doesn’t have any original ideas; his ideas reflect the same ignorance of Constitutional Law as those of Mr. Ketzenberger.

Here is a letter to Mr. Ketzenberger, which is what Mr. Talbot and sympathizers need to hear:

Dear Mr. Ketzenberger,

You either underestimate or overlook the ultimate goal of the radical homosexual lobby: To silence non-conforming people (read: those who think homosexuality is one of man’s common, garden-variety sins) by appealing to people’s “reason.”

You say you’re a Christian, so you should realize how the serpent tricked Eve in The Garden of Eden, by appealing to her sense of reason. It worked then and our culture’s reaction to militant homosexual activists and their “progressive” heterosexual acolytes proves that it still works today.

Scenario: My wife and I want professionally-made draperies for our home. My wife calls a drapery company. The company’s owner calls on us at home. He’s a homosexual and sees the bumper sticker A Mom and a Dad Matter to Kids on our car as he pulls in. He decides we must be politically pro-family and respectfully declines the drapery job at our home for that reason.

Why would we want to force his company to accept our business? Would their heart be in it? Would we expect to have the same quality job since they don’t want our business? What if they did an inferior job and said, “sue us” for redress at our expense and angst?

Or would you propose that we sue him for respectfully declining our business? How about if we just wanted to sue them so we could soak them for as much money as possible and hopefully put them out of business, which is the radical homosexual agenda?

The United States Constitution specifically (and rightfully) prohibits Congress from establishing a state religion; a primary reason the country was founded in the first place. No one is forcing a homosexual to accept Christianity or Buddhism or any other religion with the bang of a judge’s gavel, nor should they, but homosexual activists want to force others to comply with the tenets of their religion, secular-humanism, or face the state’s wrath. IF the government forces compliance to secular-humanism, the government is creating a state religion.

This nation was founded on the belief that each citizen should be allowed to practice their religion without government interference. Although it was founded on Judeo-Christian principles, that doesn’t make it a Christian nation any more than it makes it a Jewish one. Haven’t those principles, regardless of their origin, produced one of the highest standards of living the world has ever known? And since they did, why are they to now be dismissed as obsolete?

Famous Russian writer/philosopher Ayn Rand said, “You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.”

Bob Palma