Twitter icon

Facebook icon

About this site
About us
Our statement of belief
Is this your first visit?
Contact us
External links

Recommended books

Visitors' donated essays
Our forum
New essays
Other site features
Hot, controversial topics
Vital notes

World religions
Definition of Christianity
 Shared beliefs
 Handling change
 Bible topics
 Bible inerrancy
 Bible harmony
 Bible Interpreting
 Individuals in the Bible
 Beliefs & creeds
 Da Vinci code
 Revelation & 666
WICCA & Witchcraft
Other religions
Cults and NRMs
Compare Faiths

Non-theistic beliefs

About all religions
Main topics
Basic information
Gods and Goddesses
Handling change
Doubt & security
Confusing terms
End of the World?
True religion?
Seasonal events
More information

Morality & ethics
Absolute truth

Attaining peace
Religious tolerance
Religious freedom
Religious hatred
Religious conflict
Religious violence

"Hot" topics
Very hot topics
10 Commandments
Abortion access
Assisted suicide
Death penalty
Environment/Climate change

Gay marriages

Human rights
Gays in military
Sex & gender
Spanking kids
Same-Sex marriages
Stem cells
Women's rights
Other topics

Laws and news
Religious laws
Religious news

Religious Tolerance logo

Gay marriage comes to Idaho.

Part 3 of 6: About the Hitching Post Wedding
: Confusion continues about its legal status.
horizontal rule

This topic is continued from the previous page.

horizontal rule

The term "LGBT" is a widely used acronym for the Lesbian,
Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender/Transsexual community.

horizontal rule

wedding rings 2014-OCT-20: Plentiful supply of misinformation about the Hitching Post Wedding Chapel emerges (Cont'd):

In addition, the heading of the video provided by Fox & Friends 1 is inaccurate. It says:

"Ministers told to perform same-sex weddings or face jail time and fines."

At the time, the chapel was widely believed to be a for-profit business set up to provide a service to the general public. This would have make them subject to the requirements of their city's Human Rights ordinance which would require their company to provide the service to everyone on an equal basis. That is, they would need to solemnize marriages of any same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples who possessed a marriage license. But even if they were a for-profit secular business, they would not need to solemnize marriages themselves. They could easily schedule any individual licensed to perform marriages in Idaho to come to their store and perform marriages that the owners do not want to do themselves. In fact, owner Donald Knapp discussed such an arrangement during a television interview and indicated that it would be agreeable to him.

The next day, David Badash, wrote an article for The New Civil Rights Movement (NCRM) with a strongly worded title:

"Almost Everything You've Been Told About The Idaho Wedding Chapel Story Is A Lie."

An analysis of the conflict by NCRM suggests that the city can assess a fine ranging from zero dollars to $1,000 for each act of discrimination, not $1,000 per day. 2

Badash comments that no complaint had been filed against the wedding chapel. Further, the city had not ordered the Knapps to perform gay weddings.

horizontal rule

Sponsored link.

horizontal rule

Also on OCT-21, The Christian Broadcasting Network also interviewed Jennifer Marshall of the Heritage Foundation.


The heading of this video contains the same error as did the Fox and Friends video. The Knapps do not have to "perform gay marriage or go to jail." Even if they had been subject to the human rights ordinance, they could simply having a licensed officiant come to their chapel and solemnize gay marriages as needed.

Some of the visitors to You Tube who viewed this video also left comments. Most are invalid and confusing because those who posted messages were unaware of the Chapel's new legal status as a religious organization.

The most recent postings were:

  • Nicksum29 wrote:

"But WAIT!  These people run a chapel, right?  They are not a church.  In other words they are running a very lucrative business.  Simply register as a church, and then you are safe from prosecution.  It is discriminatory to treat businesses inconsistently.  So why won't they register as a church?  Less money!  Not buying this nonsense, sorry."

  • UsurperDunamis responded:

    "They're not pastors, they're ordained to marry couples as part of a business. That's what the Christian right don't want people to know. This [is] another case of a bigoted business breaking the law-the laws in Idaho. ... Legal Gay marriage and protection against bigotry. They broke the law, they deserve the punishment."

  • ecsciguy79 wrote:

    "Yeah, the Hitching Post is a FOR-PROFIT Business. Not a Church. It still remains true that churches are not required to perform same-sex marriages. But if you're a business, you're not allowed to discriminate."

    This is very similar to how a church can turn away black people if they choose. However a business may not -- it doesn't matter how religious the owners are."

  • Mikevdog responded:

    "They don't want to do it. They could simply close up shop."

  • Jane Wade wrote:

    "Better to be jailed and truly believe in something than have your faith tea-bagged by sodomites and dykes! I think they need to try an get an Islamic wedding. I'm sure some imam would be all to happy to do this for a couple of ass farmers! I can completely expect some F--KING troll to go on about organized religion now. But I'm thinking it goes a little further." 3

[Grammar, punctuation, and spelling corrected in the above posting.]

horizontal rule

Sponsored link:

horizontal rule

  • InternetDisciple wrote:

    "So these leftist fascists believe that their local ordinances OVERRIDE a basic constitutionally protected right.

    Why are so many on the left so against people's basic rights?"

  • King Arthur responded:

    "simple;.......they hate God. (Christianity)." 3

horizontal rule

This topic continues in the next essay

horizontal rule

References used:

The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.

  1. "Ministers Told To Perform Same-Sex Weddings or Face Jail Time and Fines," You Tube, 2014-OCT-20 at: http://youtu.be/
  2. David Badash, "Entire Hitching Post Controversy Is False: ACLU Finds Chapel Falls Under Religious Exemption," The New Civil Rights Movement, 2014-OCT-24, at: http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/
  3. "Idaho Ministers Told Perform Gay Marriage or Go to Jail," Christian Broadcasting Network, 2014-OCT-21, at: https://www.youtube.com/

Site navigation: Home > Homosexuality > Same-sex marriage > Menu > Idaho > here

Copyright © 2014 & 2015 by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance 
Originally written: 2014-OCT-23
Latest update: 2015-JUL-25
Author: B.A. Robinson

line.gif (538 bytes)
Sponsored link

Go to the previous page, or return to the "Latta v. Otter' case in Idaho" menu, or  choose:

Web ReligiousTolerance.org

Go to home page  We would really appreciate your help

E-mail us about errors, etc.  Hot, controversial topics

FreeFind search, lists of new essays...  Having problems printing our essays?

Twitter link

Facebook icon

Google Page Translator:

This page translator works on Firefox,
Opera, Chrome, and Safari browsers only

After translating, click on the "show
original" button at the top of this
page to restore page to English.

Sponsored links