News Release: City of Bethlehem Warned of Consequences of Radical Article 145May 18, 2011 // afaofpa // Homosexual Agenda, Politics
City of Bethlehem Warned of Ramifications of Passage of Article 145
(Philadelphia) – Today the American Family Association of Pennsylvania (AFA of PA), a statewide pro-family group, contacted the City of Bethlehem and warned the City Council members of the adverse affects passage of Article 145 would have on the businesses and residents of the City.
“Bethlehem is yet another target on homosexual activist and chairman of the PA Human Relations Commission Stephen Glassman’s list to ‘encourage’ them to pass so-called anti-discrimination ordinances. He has found a willing accomplice in Mayor John Callahan who first proposed this radical step in September,” noted Diane Gramley, President of the AFA of PA.
The fax sent to City Council included several examples of what has happened in other parts of the country where such laws have passed. These include:
- Christian photographers (small business owners) have been fined $7,000 for not wanting to photograph a homosexual ‘commitment’ ceremony. and
- Bakery in Indianapolis (small business owner) threatened with eviction from a city owned building because they would not bake cupcakes for a homosexual group on ‘National Coming Out” Day.
- Salvation Army and Catholic Charities discriminated against when such ordinances have passed. (In 1997, the Salvation Army gave up $3.5 million in San Francisco city funding rather than submit to an order for them to offer “domestic partner” benefits to homosexual employees. In Washington, D.C., homosexual D.C. City Councilman David Catania boasted in crude terms in July 2001 about how he threatened Salvation Army officials over their policy on “sexual orientation.” )
- Under Minnesota’s sexual orientation law, a transgendered person filed suit after West Publishing, a large publisher of legal materials, requested the man stop using the women’s restroom after female employees complained that the man, who dressed like a woman, used the women’s bathroom. After several years of litigation, the employer “won” the legal case, but in the end had to pay significant amounts of money to defend this against this claim.
These type ordinances also affect the Boy Scouts – just ask Stephen Glassman who totally agreed with our assertion back in 2004 when he was pushing the same type ordinance in Scranton. Additionally, he is still working against the agreement reached by the City of Philadelphia and the Cradle of Liberty Scout Council back in November.
Gramley asked some additional questions:
“Are there any Boy Scout troops in Bethlehem using city buildings or parks? If so, they are on the target list of homosexual activists. Do the women in Bethlehem mind sharing their restroom facilities or city pool locker/shower rooms with men who think they are women? All these scenarios will happen if the City of Bethlehem passes Article 145.”
As in the other municipalities where such ordinances have been proposed there have been no examples of real discrimination against homosexuals. It’s simply another feel good attempt to address a problem that does not exist.
# # #