When they come to destroy your business because you are pro-traditional family

I’ve been thinking about how homosexualists target Christian businesses for destruction.  Approach a florist or a bakery or, now, a pizzeria and tell the owner that this is for a homosexual “wedding” and then hammer them with law suits.

Enough already.  It’s time for everyone to calm down.

We need a new approach.

Think about this.

When some homosexual couple comes to your Christian business for services at their immoral event, don’t panic.  Go ahead and take their business!

Then explain what is going to happen next.

Tell them that the food and services will be just fine.  And then inform them that all of the money that they pay for the services will be donated to a traditional pro-family lobby.   If it is something like catering, where your employees have to be there to provide services, tell them that all your people will smile, be professional, and everyone of them will be wearing crucifixes and have the Holy Family embroidered on their uniforms.  Then show them pictures of your uniforms.  When the truck pulls up, speakers will be playing Immaculate Mary.  Show them the truck and play the music.

“Oh, you would be offended by that?  I’m so sorry.  You approached us because we are Christians. Right?  We are happy to provide services for you and we are grateful that you chose to come to our Christian catering business.  We just want to be of help.”

Then tell them that you will take out an ad in the paper to let everyone know what you did with their money, thanking them by name for their business so that you could make the contribution.

I suspect this approach, if adopted far and wide, would put an end to attacks on Christian businesses.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, One Man & One Woman, Sin That Cries To Heaven, The Coming Storm, The Drill, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Mary Jane says:

    Absolutely BRILLIANT, Fr Z!

  2. Elizabeth D says:

    A TV person who interviewed them put up a GoFundMe for the Memories Pizza owner that has rapidly raised about $130k and still rapidly increasing. https://www.gofundme.com/MemoriesPizza/donate

  3. Dennis Martin says:

    In a rational world, this would be effective counterspeech.

    We do not live in a rational world any longer. This would immediately be defined as hate speech, macro-micro aggression.

    Acts are no longer defined by acts but by intent. The intent here would be considered hateful.

    Any effort of any sort whatsoever to speak out against the Lie cannot be tolerated, must be silenced. No matter that one is carrying out one’s business’s services. The actvists will not be satisfied until business owner positively ratifies the gay “wedding” as normal and natural. It does not matter that one’s defense states, “but I baked the wedding cake, my employees catered the meal.” The meal must be catered in the “right” way, defined as “in a manner that constitutes approval.”

    No matter that the letter of the “anti-discrimination” laws would be, by any rational test, satisfied by the behavior Fr. Z describes. The sub-text is one of protest against the normalization of same-sex “marriage.” That sub-text is hateful (because it stimulates the conscience and the deep awareness of natural law). It must be silenced.

    When a lawless society emerges, language itself becomes meaningless, or rather, it’s meaning rests entirely with those who wield the power. Words and actions will mean what they say they mean, regardless of what they might, literally, mean.

    The Literal exists no more. Alice is in Wonderland again and this time there’s no way out.

    Remember Thomas More in Bolt’s classic. More: The maxim of the law is that silence means consent; Cromwell: Can anyone deny that Sir Thomas’s silence betokens opposition. (Sorry, can’t remember the exact wording.) More’s response, as I recall, was, “this court must construe according to the law,” i.e., not according to what you might “suppose” my silence to mean.

    We no longer construe according to the law. There is no more law by which we can construe. Construal today is set free to be undertaken by those who hold the power in whatever direction they wish–so long as no effective critical media exists who can persuasively expose the Lie.

    And the critics of the Lie are now all hyper-marginalized and discredited in the eyes of the Low Information Public. The strategy outlined here will be criminalized in the Twittering of an eye the the first time it is tried.

    Why so glum, Dennis Martin? Can’t you brighten and lighten up a tad?

    I give you Bolt’s Thomas More to Alice More, when she was angry at him for not confiding in her his true opinion of The Divorce: “I show you the times.”

  4. Dennis Martin says:

    But the strategy should be tried anyway. Leave no stone unturned. Just be prepared for the response.

  5. acardnal says:

    Excellent idea!

  6. Orphrey says:

    This is a great suggestion and just what we need — creative, non-violent, faithful responses against the forces of secularism.

  7. jameeka says:

    what happens if they call your bluff? [Who’s bluffing? I’m serious.]

  8. iteadthomam says:

    This is hilarious and is definitely what needs to be done.

  9. acardnal says:

    Elizabeth, as Fr. Z stated, this is happening to MANY different Christian businesses in many states. The one you mentioned is only one of the persecuted vendors.

  10. Wayward Lamb says:

    Remember to tell them that you and your employees will be praying for them (and their conversion!) before and after their event, as well as publicly during the event.

  11. Theodore says:

    Make sure to get your own video record of any spittle flecked nutty that may occur. Mike Walsh (the editor of Big Journalism) is of the opinion that the left knows only violence and the answer is to punch back twice as hard.

  12. Clemens Romanus says:


  13. JoAnna says:

    I like this idea!

  14. chantgirl says:

    Fr. Z’s idea might well end up inciting a riot at a “wedding” ;)

    Elizabeth D- I gave Memories Pizza what I would spend on a typical carryout order. The Left needs to see that these bullying antics will backfire.

  15. Fantastic. This is an inspired idea.

  16. bar3 says:

    What about outsourcing the work and charging the customer at cost? This way you are neither participating nor earning a profit from the unnatural “marriage”. You are also protecting yourself legally.

  17. rtjl says:

    I’m afraid I have to agree with Dennis Martin. The response will be that, not only do you have to provide the same services to gay and lesbian persons hosting events you may have objections to as you do to all others but you must provide that service in exactly the same way. I suppose the best solution is to provide visibly Christian (but not over the top Christian) service to all customers and customer events. Perhaps simply wearing a badge that says “I believe and profess all that the Holy Catholic Church teaches, believes and proclaims to be revealed by God.” would do the trick. But you would have to wear it to all customer events. I think you would also have to donate a portion of every sale, not just the sales in support of objectionable activities, to a pro traditional marriage group.

  18. LarryW2LJ says:

    Absolutely wonderful idea, Fr. Z – and once the word got around, I’d be willing to bet dollars-to-donuts that regular business would increase as customers would actually want to do business with companies such as these. I know I sure would!

  19. Priam1184 says:

    Love it Father. They should donate the proceeds to Courage.

  20. The Masked Chicken says:

    Unfortunately, this will not work. Here’s why: if you show them the uniforms and play the music before the event, they will file an injunction to keep you from using them. It will fail, eventually, on appeal, but by then the event will be over. If you don’t tell them and show up dressed like that, they will suit you for deliberately poisoning the event. This could go either way, depending on how the judge perceives your actions: as cynical or as free speech. Again, this all goes back to the inconsistency between the 1st and 14th amendments. They contradict each other. Only one can have the force of law. Either the religion will get absorbed into equal protection or the equal protection will be ousted by religious freedom. Right now, the equal protection people are winning, no matter how illogical this amendment is (can you say, “over-reaching?”). Unless religious people assert themselves and force the judiciary to hue to a proper interpretation of religion (force as in band together to prevent biased judges from being elected, wherever possible), all will be adjudicated away. I see the protests of the liberals in Indiana, but where are the religionists? Why aren’t they rioting in the streets, refusing to patronize homosexual-loving businesses, and the like, just like their homosexual counterparts? There should be a clash here, comparable to the Civil War (without the guns – I mean, in terms of dialog), or rather, a lop-sided war, because, as loud as they are, the homosexual community is pretty small. We should be able to cream them in the arena of public debate, but we have let the rich-enablers walk all over us.

    G. K. Chesterton saw this dynamic years, ago. In his book, What’s Wrong With The World, in Chapter X: The Oppression of Optimism, he wrote:

    “The real power of the English aristocrats has lain in exactly the opposite of tradition. The simple key to the power of our upper classes is this: that they have always kept carefully on the side of what is called Progress. They have always been up to date, and this comes quite easy to an aristocracy. For the aristocracy are the supreme instances of that frame of mind of which we spoke just now. Novelty is to them a luxury verging on a necessity. They above all, are so bored with the past and with the present, that they gape, with a horrible hunger, for the future.

    But whatever else the great lords forgot they never forgot that it was their business to stand for the new things, for whatever was being most talked about among university dons or fussy financiers. Thus they were on the side of the Reformation against the Church, of the Whigs against the Stuarts, of the Baconian science against the old philosophy, of the manufacturing system against the operatives, and (to-day) of the increased power of the State against the old-fashioned individualists. In short, the rich are always modern; it is their business. But the immediate effect of this fact upon the question we are studying is somewhat singular.

    In each of the separate holes or quandaries in which the ordinary Englishman has been placed, he has been told that his situation is, for some particular reason, all for the best. He woke up one fine morning and discovered that the public things, which for eight hundred years he had used at once as inns and sanctuaries, had all been suddenly and savagely abolished, to increase the private wealth of about six or seven men. One would think he might have been annoyed at that; in many places he was, and was put down by the soldiery. But it was not merely the army that kept him quiet. He was kept quiet by the sages as well as the soldiers; the six or seven men who took away the inns of the poor told him that they were not doing it for themselves, but for the religion of the future, the great dawn of Protestantism and truth. So whenever a seventeenth century noble was caught pulling down a peasant’s fence and stealing his field, the noble pointed excitedly at the face of Charles I or James II (which at that moment, perhaps, wore a cross expression) and thus diverted the simple peasant’s attention. The great Puritan lords created the Commonwealth, and destroyed the common land.

    They saved their poorer countrymen from the disgrace of paying Ship Money, by taking from them the plow money and spade money which they were doubtless too weak to guard. A fine old English rhyme has immortalized this easy aristocratic habit–

    You prosecute the man or woman Who steals the goose from off the common, But leave the larger felon loose Who steals the common from the goose.

    But here, as in the case of the monasteries, we confront the strange problem of submission. If they stole the common from the goose, one can only say that he was a great goose to stand it. The truth is that they reasoned with the goose; they explained to him that all this was needed to get the Stuart fox over seas. So in the nineteenth century the great nobles who became mine-owners and railway directors earnestly assured everybody that they did not do this from preference, but owing to a newly discovered Economic Law. So the prosperous politicians of our own generation introduce bills to prevent poor mothers from going about with their own babies; or they calmly forbid their tenants to drink beer in public inns. But this insolence is not (as you would suppose) howled at by everybody as outrageous feudalism. It is gently rebuked as Socialism. For an aristocracy is always progressive; it is a form of going the pace. Their parties grow later and later at night; for they are trying to live to-morrow.”

    The Chicken
    [That was long. I’m not a lawyer but I’ve seen them on TV. I don’t think “Bruce and Stan” will do all that. They are bullies. They’ll move on.]

  21. Netmilsmom says:

    Amen, amen!
    I’ve been saying for over a year that all Christian business should have signs saying that 10% of all (fill in the blank, wedding cakes, wedding flowers, wedding catering) will be donated to a Pro-traditional marriage organization.
    This goes one better. Spot on Father!

  22. pmullane says:

    This would be great, of course, but would give the hysterical brownshirts of progressive facism the opportunity to declare crucifixes, traditional marriage organisations, telling people you will pray for them and ‘immaculate mary’ hate speech and therefore verboten in the new American reich.

  23. CradleRevert says:

    I wonder if this still might be labeled as a form of discrimination unless the business owner does the same thing for the actual real weddings that they’re called on to serve.

  24. The Masked Chicken says:

    I smell a RICO law case.

    The Chicken

  25. crickally says:

    I agree with Dennis Martin. This would work if we were dealing with rational people. We are dealing with people who have “lost their way, lost their minds, and will end up losing their souls” unless they come to their senses and repent. Most troubling of all to me is the response (or lack of response) from the majority of our bishops. Many seem to try to play it both ways, making statements that sound like pious platitudes of doublespeak. God help us all!

  26. PA mom says:

    LOVE THIS! Further, don’t wait until the first one comes to your door, implement immediately and my guess is that word will spread!

    To deepen one’s Christianity in the face of this seems like the truest answer.

    Even if they accept the terms, who knows which hearts could be softened in the glow of such a joyful Christian service.

  27. jherforth says:

    My wife and I just had this discussion and you’re right on. I love this post more than I can express in words. I can’t wait to show her, she’s going to love it too. Now to decimate this far and wide.

  28. lmgilbert says:

    I know you’re not bluffing, Father, but that would mean providing your services in the same way for all your other clients, would it not? There are plenty of good Catholics to say nothing of Protestants and people in general who would not be happy with what they would characterize as the hyper-religiosity of your business.

    By contrast, I would like to target florists, bakeries, restaurants etc. owned by militant homosexuals and ask some service or product of them that would put them in a similar bind morally or be offensive to what is left of their conscience. This could be a money making idea if only one could think what to ask of them. Of course, from the standpoint of the courts it would have to not have the plain color of revenge about it. Then there is the problem, too, that Christians are not supposed to take revenge. Still, there must be a way forward here, legally, ethically, practically. Perhaps in San Francisco asking a bakery to bake a cake for some anniversary or occasion of Abp Cordileone with a -to them- offensive message on it, e.g. “Thank you for being the father of Proposition 8, Archbishop.” Great for Father’s Day, no?

    The real problem here would be that they do not have the same sort of conscience we do. They would not see it as a question of their eternal salvation, and realizing that they are facing financial loss would simply bake the cake.

  29. The Drifter says:

    Deliciously Machiavellian. Are you sure you have no Florentine blood, father?

  30. teachermom24 says:

    Excellent! These are the kinds of positive approaches we need to take against the evil culture all around. It’s like capturing the cannons fired at you, turning them around, and firing back at the enemy. Two can play at this game.

    I also agree what with others have said, that a business would have to establish a standard practice for all their customers. Evil will not play nice; it will be infuriated and attack with even greater force through every possible means.

  31. St Donatus says:

    I fear that within the coming decade there will be laws banning the printing, importing or owning of Bibles as it supports hate speech. Really, what do you think it means when the Israelites were commanded to stone to death homosexuals, or St Paul telling the congregation to not fellowship with a person that performs homosexual acts?

    We are in times similar to Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. Open religious practice is even now being banned.

  32. gretta says:

    I heard a report recently that a German group did something similar to combat neo-Nazis. When the neo-Nazis would have a march, the group set up a starting point and a finish line, made it a “Walk for the _____”, got contributors, and had donations that for every neo-Nazi that crossed the finish line 5 euros would go to an anti-Nazi charity. They raised thousands of dollars, all thanks to the “march”.

    I think the very visible sign that 5% of all profits donated to a traditional marriage charity, or Chick fil A charities, or some other charity identified with an opposite cause is a brilliant idea.

  33. rodin says:

    Sounds like it is worth a try, but first, do let ACLJ and Thomas More Society know. They would probably have great fun with it if the funds hold out.

  34. Scott W. says:

    No need to poke holes in Fr. Z’s ideas here because we need to be mindful of the principles established:

    Political Correctness is mendacious bullying. Actually it’s worse than lying because with lying one is merely trying to deceive another. With Political Correctness one is attempting to train another through coercion into lying to himself. As such, this odious practice should be fought with as much vigor as is possible. We should welcome any creative means to resist as long as it doesn’t involve formal or proximate material cooperation with evil.

    I tend to think there is flexibility with floral arrangements because flowers aren’t exclusive to weddings. Wedding cakes however are a much diceier proposition because everyone can tell the difference between a wedding cake and a regular cake, and no one can really pretend it is for something other than a wedding. Thus, it is hard to see how one could make one for a same-sex abomination ceremony and not be proximately cooperating with it.

  35. Baritone says:

    Fr. Z, I have a serious question about this. Suppose the customer follows through and agrees to your terms. How do you handle that situation, as you would then be providing material cooperation with their immoral event, even though it would be done wearing Catholic uniforms and playing Immaculate Mary? Actually, wouldn’t that be an even greater cause for scandal…couldn’t it look like orthodox Catholics putting their seal of approval on the immoral ceremony? [No one with more than a room temperature IQ would think that that is material cooperation.]

  36. gracie says:

    I think this will work if the business in question does this every time for all events that they are involved with. Be upfront, announce it in your ads – songs, prayers, Christian symbols etc. will be utilized at all events that you service.

    Be more religious, not less – but do it for every transaction. That way, they can’t say you’re being selective. And yes, announce that a certain percentage of the proceeds will go to pro-family/pro-life/ etc. causes.

    This could be fun if it was done smart.

  37. Mrs. Bee says:

    I’m with Dennis Martin and think this wouldn’t work. I am reminded of Animal Farm: the pigs declare that all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others. The current establishment has decided that “gay rights” are more equal than all others, and this is the reason of the current mob frenzy against the reasonable protection of conscience rights. Conscience will be treated by judges and legislators quite cheaply, more and more often: we have the Little Sisters of the Poor arguing in front of the Supreme Court that they shouldn’t provide for things going against their faith! This means it couldn’t even be settled in lower courts… and some call this Progress.

  38. govmatt says:

    Unfortunately what Fr. is saying does not solve the problem UNLESS:
    1. For every wedding you cater you do the exact same thing (down to the material of the crucifixes). If you don’t do this, you’ve not avoided the problem at all and you’ve just opened yourself up to a major lawsuit.

    2. Tell the person up front what your policy is. Have it written. Have it posted. Have it in the contract for services. (Again, not just the contract for gay services, but every. single. service.)

    3. Don’t talk to reporters about this at all. If they ask, refer them to your lawyer.

    4. Get a lawyer. If you’re writing these new contracts, you need an attorney to make sure you’re on the right side of this.

    Though this sounds like a good idea in theory, there is a lot of work you’d have to put in before you could reasonably “get away with it.”

    If you’re going to be donating proceeds, again, check with an attorney before you do that. There are tax implications for your small business if you start changing the way your books look.

  39. julieculshaw says:

    Okay, so that is the funny response. Now for a realistic one please. Since no small business could afford to do all those things you suggest and stay in business, how about some real concrete advice? Having been a small business owner (once asked to sew a dress for someone in drag), we need real help, not fantasies. [God bless you. Now relax and breathe deeply.]

  40. Elizabeth D says:

    I think there is a need to keep pondering how to “go to the extra mile” when someone attempts to conscript us to something like this. Our Lord was well aware of this type of injustice and how direct refusal didn’t necessarily work.

  41. pj_houston says:

    Bruce and Stan may move on, but once the Gay Gestapo gets wind of this they’ll be all over it like a cheap suit. They’ll send out the limpwristed batcall to Dan Savage. Worth a try, though.

  42. I saw an item today by a pastor — I presume Protestant — who had this suggestion:

    Wedding-related businesses should enter into exclusive contracts with specific churches. They only provide their services for weddings at those churches.

    I think this is a very good idea, and would work. Of course, the left will rail against it, but the law on this would be pretty solid — so long as the wedding business stuck to the contract. And it wouldn’t affect the ability of a baker or florist or photographer offering non-wedding-related services to the general public.

    The problem will be for small, Protestant churches, and for places where there aren’t many Catholic churches. But for many, it would work I think.

  43. chantgirl says:

    Would it work to say, “I only cater Catholic weddings.”? (Catholic, as in a Catholic wedding said by a priest, not just a wedding between two Catholics.) This would limit a business’ client base, but for now there are still plenty of Catholic weddings. My only concern with this approach would be that some rogue priests might decide to go ahead and do same-sex ceremonies if it becomes the law of the land.

    Perhaps parishes could keep a list of local Catholic bakers, florists, and caterers, and refer couples to those businesses after the couples are approved for marriage in the Catholic Church. This screening process would automatically weed out same-sex couples. A Catholic company could decide to contract only with clients funneled to them by Catholic parishes and eliminate these kinds of lawsuits as the Church’s moral law would act as the gatekeeper.

  44. This post — well, really the one our genial host put up yesterday or the day before about the end of tolerance — got me thinking.

    As I went to bed last night, I thought to myself, one thing we absolutely must do — and make a matter of prayer and confession — is to avoid any bitterness or wrath.

    I am sure many are angry about all this. I am angry. I was pretty stirred up the past two days and it was a serious distraction, which I don’t exactly need right now. As I was heading up last night, I realized: none of this can take away our cause of joy, because our cause of joy is the Lord Jesus Christ, and his redemption! Nor can we allow it to take away our peace. I often cite Saint Maximilian Kolbe to people, when they are really burdened with cares and trouble and cannot sleep, telling them: Saint Maximilian was in Auschwitz. If that wasn’t hell on earth, it was about as close as can be. Yet somehow, he kept his peace and joy there. If he could do that there

    The other side is filled with an astonishing wrath. It will get worse. But I’ve seen some folks who are disgusted, who are voicing similarly wrathful responses. This cannot be our response. We must forgive them, we must seek their salvation, and we must keep our joy.

  45. oldconvert says:

    I wonder. Here in the good oldUK, it has been long established that just outing oneself as a Christian is in itself offensive. People have been banned from wearing crosses, Bibles have been removed from college dormitories, because someone said they found such signs offensive. Nobody forcing anyone else to wear a cross, or to read a Bible, you understand; just the very existence of such things is apparently enough to send the neo-atheists screaming from the room. So such actions as Fr Z suggests would be construed as “hate”, you bet.

    Evelyn Waugh used to tell unbelievers that he quarreled with that he would pray for them that night. Today he’d get prosecuted for that.

  46. LarryW2LJ says:

    If the LGBT faction would have us believe they are numerous as they claim, how hard could it be to find a gay baker, florist, seamstress, etc. who would gladly cater to their needs?

  47. Raymond says:

    I quite like Fr. Z’s idea.

    But when I read some of the comments here, I can’t but be dismayed at how very “legalistic” many of my fellow Americans–of both sides of the political spectrum–have become. I guess it’s just my immigrant background coming out.

    Folks, if enough of us disobey or manipulate a law, it cannot be properly enforced. Just look at the illegal aliens and those of us who constantly flaunt the speed limit.

  48. The Masked Chicken says:

    Dear Fr. Z,

    Sorry about the long GKC quote. I was reading it the other night and it seemed to explain a lot. The homosexual community would not be able to get away with these things without the backing of the rich and powerful – the novelty-seekers, who care little about real truth. The little guys might not sue, but those who stand to gain public acclaim would. The ACLU turned the baker situation into a cause celebre, not the original parties. It is they who will be monitoring the bakeries and photographers.

    On the other hand, Christ did say that those who affirm Him before men He would affirm before the Father, so being a witness for the Faith is exactly what we all should be doing and to heck with the consequences.

    Oh, before I forget – blessed Triduum to you and everyone.ì

    The Chicken

  49. Kathleen10 says:

    I think we need to turn to the experts here. There are a few experts in the arena of “How to Deal with Homofacists and their Minions”. I mean, there are a few guys who have literally written the book. Go to the website for MassResistance, or Defend the Family, headed up by Scott Lively.
    MassResistance is run by Brian Camenker, and you cannot find many people who have taken on the zombies more than he. He knows exactly what it takes and he will tell you they do not have the numbers they seem to, and what you have to do is speak the truth, because they can’t deny it. He’s heard the yelling, the screaming, the obscenities, the vulgarities, the threats, all of it, but MassResistance keeps going, in arguably the most pro-homosexuality state in the union, Massachusetts.
    We are not loud enough.
    We are not organized.
    We are not funded.
    We are intimidated. (with good reason)
    The people of Indiana should be out in force, in the streets, emailing, writing, calling, all of it. If we expect to reclaim our religious freedoms, which are not yet gone but are going, we are fooling ourselves. It is going to COST some of us! If you don’t live in that state, tell the Tourist Bureau you won’t visit there anymore.
    I am hoping there is some organizing effort that begins, something that people can get behind. The GoFundMe effort for that Indiana business that is being raked over the coals by these fascists has raised $250,000, and their goal was $25,000. People are SICK of this and getting more ready by the minute. The fire grows increasingly hot and people have been pushed by too many things.
    As far as business owners, I would not be available. Anything else these fascists are going to get around. Just my opinion. We need to fix this by getting a religion-friendly person in the White House and in our representative offices, sending messages to our politicians and businesses that we are demanding our religious rights. Certainly, financial support for the organizations who are fighting this war is important if you can. They are outfunded terribly.
    We can lament and whine, but after that we need to seriously get busy. The time grows short. Pray, and do something.

  50. The Masked Chicken says:

    “Folks, if enough of us disobey or manipulate a law, it cannot be properly enforced. Just look at the illegal aliens and those of us who constantly flaunt the speed limit.”

    Those who are in power let whatever they want slide. Immigration is a cause de jour among liberals, so, of course illegal aliens get a pass. It is not simply a question of numbers (look at how easily they dismantled the Occupy Movement). This is an asymmetric conflict. We have to be better prepared because we don’t have the support of the temporal powers.

    The Chicken

  51. Kathleen10 says:

    By the way, take a look at the MassResistance website and the photos of the recent St. Patrick’s Day Parade debacle in that state. After all the furor of the gay marchers (it wasn’t just New York), photos of the event showed almost no one there, and this is a parade that is historic and huge! Floats were down, attendees were down, political hacks and toadies marching were up, including more police units, etc. But the people, the families, were absent.

  52. anilwang says:

    Great idea. We need to toss around ideas to defend ourselves.

    Unfortunately, I don’t think this idea would work since it’s a clear sign of discrimination….unless you do the same for all your customers.

    Of course, if all your services were permiated with your faith and a portion of your profits went to pro-family groups and you advertised all participants in the newspaper, then it would work.

    This opens up a business opportunity for someone since the newspaper advertisement can be shared by several Christian businesses to lower the costs and allow bolder ads to be created (highlighting groups that are “bravely” breaking ranks with the lobby).

  53. Mother says:

    THE perfect remedy!

  54. DanielG says:

    How ’bout this? Take their business and quietly make, let’s say, a month’s offering to your respective parish with a majority of the profit. Would that be licit, Father? If so, it could be a real Andy Dufresne-like experience.

  55. Mojoron says:

    I actually thought the same thing. Crucifixes on all the walls. Our Lady of Guadalupe, Lourdes, Fatima in the bathrooms. Pictures of PJPII and BXVI. St. Pete’s. A couple of rosaries on the wall. For the non Catholics, a Risen Lord cross and the longer version of the Our Father. If that didn’t run them out, I don’t know what would.

  56. jflare says:

    I hate to say this, but I don’t think this would necessarily work. If a business were to set out terms like this, I suspect the typical gay couple would likely demand to know why the caterer is being so blatant about the caterer’s religious values. If the caterer couldn’t prove that such provisions would be a normal offering regardless of the state of the couple, the gay couple likely would have grounds for discrimination lawsuits.

    They’re not interested in any interpretation of freedom of religion or freedom of speech besides their own.

  57. jflare,

    The business owner has a right to do whatever he wants with the money that was exchanged for goods. The business owner is only obligated to provide the goods after he has accepted the money, he is NOT obligated to invest it, buy a WalMart toy, or otherwise – he can do what he wants with it. All Father is suggesting is that the business owner then disclose what he is going to do with the money he has in hand.

    Since it is known to all customers that the business is a Christian business, what the business owner does with the money shouldn’t be a surprise to the purchaser. In fact, the customer, if they have any sense at all, should surmise that a good portion of the business owner’s profits already go to Churches, pro-life groups, Christian charities, and political candidates that aren’t in agreement with atheist types. So what the owner is doing with the money shouldn’t be a surprise. Sharing what he does with the money might, but that is hardly discrimination, it IS free speech.

  58. I would also suggest that the business owner insist on CASH-ONLY payments for all wedding related purchases from ALL customers.

  59. artdob says:

    Consider the emerging dilemma for Catholic musicians who may find themselves in such crossroads. Where does one draw the line from providing musical services in such cases versus standing true to religious convictions? If adopting the proposed apptoach, would the musician have an acceptable response, or would it be considered absolutely unacceptable (in the eyes of the church) to be a participant (musically) for a same-sex ceremony? Earlier this week, I was thinking it might be time to pull myself from a musician’s listing service I am on given the growing risk of getting put in an awkward position. Now I wonder if (should the scenario arise), this proposal may be a useful card to play,

  60. Fr. Vincent Fitzpatrick says:

    This is the first time I have seen a Catholic priest address the subject in public: Are all these florists and bakers and photographers actually OBLIGED to refuse to provide their usual wedding services at a same-sex wedding.

    I don’t think that baking a cake, or providing flowers, or taking pictures at these simulated weddings is formal cooperation in sodomy. Thus, these businesspeople are not strictly obliged to refuse their services.

    I think it is disgusting that these (evidently all Protestant) businesspeople have become pawns in this front in the culture war, while Catholics–bishops, priests, and laity–are largely Missing in Action.

    The anti-Catholics have engaged in a hundred-seventy-year war on the Church, using godless schools, ethnically cleansing Catholic neighborhoods (starting under the New Deal), destroying the Legion of Decency and the Production Code, income-taxing and death-taxing families out of existence, agitating and strategizing to legalize pornography, contraception, and abortion, and now they have succeeded in abolishing marriage. The hierarchy has had little consciousness of this war, and no strategy to resist it, and has done nothing in response to the many Catholic laity and clerics who have enlisted in the enemy’s army.


  61. Someone please be the Garrigue says:

    LarryW2LJ says: “If the LGBT faction would have us believe they are numerous as they claim, how hard could it be to find a gay baker, florist, seamstress, etc. who would gladly cater to their needs?”

    You could ask all those Gay and Lesbian Chambers of Commerce why they exist. Haven’t they got members to represent?

    “Only in America,” as they say.

  62. Scott W. says:

    If the LGBT faction would have us believe they are numerous as they claim, how hard could it be to find a gay baker, florist, seamstress, etc. who would gladly cater to their needs?

    Probably not hard at all, but we are talking about evil, which can’t tolerate the very idea of anything that would contradict them. So much so, that if it can’t find enemies, it will make them up out of whole cloth. Remember the homosexual waitress who faked a homophobic message on a receipt? Same thing.

  63. cdet1997 says:

    I think it would be enough to make it clear to them that every last dime of revenue would go to Courage International. “Your gay wedding could provide that final bit of revenue needed to inspire a gay couple like yourselves to accept God’s grace!”

  64. Kerry says:

    If it isn’t tried because “Father, this won’t work because…”, then of course, it won’t work. I have never yet been told by someone, ‘Prayer doesn’t work”, but if I ever, am I will suggest they test that hypothesis by praying that bad things to happen to themselves. In the instances we see in the news, the probing attackers are looking for resistance, and hopefully will be flummoxed when they encounter people who really believe in Christ.
    In my pondering I imagined a sign on the storefront: “Ask about my religious objections”, or “Yes, I have religious objections”. What looks like a target to the patrolling elgee beteors is actually a marketing trap. Carefully ‘splain’ the nature of your objections, (wise as serpents, harmless as doves), and “Yes, we’ll be happy to have your business”. Remember the conversion of atheist writer Andre Frossard, (from The Real Presence dot org), ““Having entered a chapel in the Latin Quarter of Paris at 5:10 in the morning to look for a friend, I left at a quarter after 5 in the company of a friendship that was not of this earth.” Or think about the conversion of Bartolo Longo. Is it likely that only homosexuals have never heard the Truth?

  65. Kerry says:

    A video camera recording the whole thing would be wise. “Hater…? Me. No, I love you. If I hated you, I’d be pleased not to speak up about Hell.”

  66. Sacred1 says:

    “The reason all this is happening is the lack of pushback by American religious leaders. It is rare to see any high-ranking Catholic cleric defending the faithful publicly.” – Bill O’Reilly, Talking Points, Apr. 2, 2015

  67. Phil B says:

    Some of the more pessimistic responses here (They’ll slap you with an injunction for wearing a cross! The IRS will audit you for announcing that you’ll make a charitable donation to a pro-traditional family group!) make the mistake, I think, of crediting the particular dark forces at work at this moment with too much power. Perhaps it will eventually come to that, but we’re not there yet. Yes, we are to put no trust in princes, but for now we still do have access to certain civil liberties – freedom of speech, freedom of wardrobe, freedom to indulge in Catholic kitsch (:)) – which don’t involve refusal of service. And many of the businesses which might consider Father Z’s tactics are the sort that would otherwise consider refusing to participate anyway, so I don’t see what’s lost. And much would be gained by shining a light on this darkness, not the least being providing a kick in the rear to all those people of good will who yet have their heads in the sand, hoping that this is no big deal and will all go away eventually, and we’ll get to return to our comfortable lives.

  68. Father,
    My wife and I are in agreement that your proposed response is brilliant.

    Pax et bonum,
    Keith Töpfer

  69. Elizabeth D. Thank you for providing the link to the donation site.
    Pax et bonum,
    Keith Töpfer

  70. jflare says:

    “Since it is known to all customers that the business is a Christian business, what the business owner does with the money shouldn’t be a surprise to the purchaser.”

    I think that a pretty debatable proposal. For starters, how would anyone know that a Christian business from a non-Christian business? I can’t say that I have ever heard anyone ask if the owners or employees were Christians or not; nor do most business establishments ever advertise themselves as such. Granted, I’ve walked into explicitly Catholic or Christian bookstores, precisely because I sought some sort of religious book, but that’s the one exception.
    Knowing the above, I wouldn’t pretend to know much at all about how the business’s owners handle the profits they earn. I’ve occasionally been surprised these past few years to discover how many Catholics there actually are in the area.
    ..Makes me wonder why our laws demonstrate so little interest in Catholic ideals….

    Anyway, it might not even be a matter of how the business uses profits. If the caterer, photographer, or whatever showed up as Fr Z suggests with a sound system playing Ave Maria and a picture of the Holy Family on the uniforms, the guests might well–rightly–be quite startled at the overt display of religiousity. So too might the couple in question; they may agree to it in the first place by making the assumption that the owner was merely blustering.

    At best, I think it would be more likely to create a very difficult situation. At worst, I can see lawsuits being inflicted.
    If someone actually did this, as someone suggested earlier, they would be well advised to have a lawyer with them throughout. Such a person may be needed more than you might realize.

  71. Sonshine135 says:

    In all fairness, I have been suggesting this same approach for some time. It is Catholics being civilly smarter.

  72. SKAY says:


    The fund to help the family who own Memories pizza is continuing to grow. Thanks for making us aware of this opportunity to help ElizabethD.

  73. 6daughters says:

    Sorry Father, but this idea will not work. [It hasn’t been tried.] I have been in the wedding industry for over 20 years. The vast majority of our business comes from referrals (most of it from those in the industry, a bridal shop will refer a customer to a florist for example). Most of the people in the wedding industry are to the left politically and many are far left. If it was known that you would not participate in a same sex wedding , one’s industry referrals would dry up almost completely. I am not exaggerating. Also, for most wedding businesses one actually gets very involved in the event. One has two or more meetings with the couple about colors, vision, themes etc. Think of a photographer being asked to take pictures of a couple kissing etc.. Not only is one participating in sin but also runs the risk of becoming too acclimated to that culture. I’m afraid at the moment for us( 6 kids, college and Catholic school costs, mortgage), the closet seems to be the safest spot. Hooray for fascism!

  74. Pingback: Tolerance, Religious Liberty, and Indiana - BigPulpit.com

  75. Olecrochet says:

    I love this idea! It is funny and it highlights a truth : that we would not be playing defense on this if we had been playing offense all along. ( That is, if we had been heralding and defending and displaying our Catholic identity boldly for fifty years instead of trying to blend in.)
    You don’t see them attacking orthodox Jewish or Halal bakeries now do you?
    Crosses on the uniforms , so great! …. hmmmm, I think I have an idea for a new business.

  76. Olecrochet says:

    To 6daughters- I just finished marrying off my fourth child and your description of the wedding business explains a lot! I was so frustrated ,with the photographers especially, on how all the vendors were part of some racket all aimed toward fleecing the customer by making it all about the incidentals and minimizing the essentials , turning it into a show – all to have something to post on their ubiquitous blogs. ( But of course obsessing on the trivial and ignoring the essential is a leftist thing, no?)
    The wedding photos are the prime example ; pictures of shoes and rings and flowers , cutting off the heads of the bridesmaids to focus on their bouquets, three pictures of the church ceremony and forty of the reception venue, . The only photographer I liked that was an orthodox Jew who had been doing our family photos since first communion days and he knew exactly what a wedding album should contain. ( You know, like a portrait of the bride in her wedding dress ) If you are in the wedding business I promise you there is a HUGE market out there searching for a wedding vendor who is not out to loot and plunder and who knows what a wedding is for and can serve people who don’t think they are the Kardashians. Every single Christian family I know has the same complaint about their experience with the wedding industry.

  77. chere says:

    The gay people I know would never serve pizza at their weddings. It seems that action on both sides of this issue are without love, antagonist, petty and groundless. Certainly not how Jesus calls us to love one another.

  78. Bose says:

    As a self-employed guy myself, I’ve argued that the best approach is to be a competent business person. That includes shaping my market and my services to be clear about what I do best and how I do it. There is nothing preventing me from identifying as a Christian with a business goal of serving like-minded Christians. My branding, messaging, advertisements, signage and website can all be crafted accordingly.

    All of that still won’t prevent potential customers coming to me with work I’d rather not do, but that just opens the door to a pretty standard business conversation: Thanks for your interest. Can we talk? I’m not sure I’m your best option, and here’s why. After describing my background and discomfort, I can close with, I’ll still provide the service, if you decide I’m your best option, and donate the proceeds to [non-profit ABC], but here’s a referral list of other folks worth considering.

    There’s no reason for me not to show compassion and grace while speaking to my values.

    Also worth noting, based on my experience: I’ve known enough gay people who ID as Christian and are active in their churches; we can’t expect that merely being overtly Christian will be offensive for those folks.

    And, the “thank-you” ad in the local paper idea strikes me as unhelpful, unless I’m putting such ads out thanking all of my customers publicly. It could too easily be read as me going for a Gotcha! moment at my customers’ expense — Ha ha, these people forced me to make their same-sex wedding cake, and look how I turned it against them! — no matter how contrary that was to my intention. (I’d also never publish my customers’ names without their permission.)

  79. gramma10 says:

    Absolutely love it!
    So if you can’t do it exactly as you said….at least have obvious non verbal signs of Christianity hanging all over the walls and a video (Medjugorje) running on a TV and religious statues and the Ten Commandments and etc etc.
    Hey I have gone into Pho Vietnamese restaurants or businesses and Budda is all over the place!
    Yes….just be as Christian as possible and it should gross them out!
    Yes, and smile smile smile!

  80. Pingback: An ingenious plan to rid intolerance » Herald Sound

  81. Pingback: How Christians Can Protect Themselves From Gay Bullying | The Federalist Papers

  82. arizonamike says:

    In the 1970’s we operated a small family restaurant. A ‘massage’ parlor opened next door. When some of the girls came in for meals, I collected their bills and deposited the money into a St. Vincent de Paul dining room collection box we kept at the register. One girl asked why. I explained, “we’re not here to judge you and you are always welcome here, but we do judge how the money was earned and we prefer not to accept it, so we’re donating it to SVDP. They became regular customers. One day a 17 year old girl who worked there as a receptionist and was probably being “groomed” came in to talk with my wife. She had a bad home life and working there was a protest. My wife helped her to decide to move out of state and live with an older sister, finish school. So, from experience, I like your idea Fr. Z.

  83. Pingback: You’ll never guess this priest’s clever idea for conservative Christians asked to serve gay weddngs

Comments are closed.