Posted on 08/02/2017 10:55:14 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Yes. I don’t see this as much of a victory. The decision was not based on principal, but a narrow interpretation based on the fact that the photographer does not have a storefront.
The public accommodation laws come from the Civil Rights Act of 1964. If you are open to the public, you cannot discriminate against anyone who seeks your service. It was necessary as applied to race at the time; there were “White’s Only” hotels that would not let a room to blacks. The argument that “they can go to a different hotel” didn’t hold up because there was no “different hotel.” None of them would let to blacks.
But that doesn’t apply in the “gay rights” milieu. Christian photographers and bakers will happily take pictures of gay people and sell them cakes. Just not for weddings. It’s not total exclusion. And, there is no argument that “there are no other photographers.” For every Christian photographer or baker that declines a gay wedding, there are probably dozens who would be happy to work one.
Also, we are dealing with an enumerated right contained in the Bill of Rights. Forcing a photographer to work a gay wedding is not far from forcing a minister to perform one.
I'm 68 now and a Christian for forty years. Every single day now I encounter yet another thing I won't need to experience in heaven--and the reverse, things to look forward to. I'm not (yet) so heavenly-minded that I'm no earthly good, and I hope never to be, but that end of my life's teeter-totter is increasingly unbalanced.
Yes..thank you... another win!!
Finally. I have to ask, what if the state tried to force a Muslim butcher to cut pigs? Would never happen, I know.
She should tell them to take it up with God.
But yes, the left has NO tolerance.
I added my support.
I’ve often said, if I were forced to cater a gay wedding they’d get a meal they’d never forget.
Regarding the following analysis of this case, patriots please keep the following question in mind.
What’s worse, unconstitutional abridgment of constitutionally enumerated rights by federal and state governments, or citizens with religious convictions who evidently don’t know their constitutional protections well enough to protect themselves from such attacks?
"As seen in other cases involving Christian wedding vendors in other states, punishment for violating state nondiscrimination laws can be very severe and financially crippling."
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
From related threads …
First note that the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect politically correct LGBT “rights,” such rights being wrongly legislated from the bench by institutionally indoctrinated activist judges imo.
Next, note that when the states ratified the 14th Amendment they prohibited themselves from making laws and policies which abridge constitutionally enumerated rights, 1st Amendment-protected freedom of religious expression and free speech as examples in relatively recent cases.
”14th Amendment, Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States [emphasis added]; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
So in cases where pro-LGBT agenda state officials have used constitutionally unprotected, pro-LGBT state equality policies to harass Christian business owners who exercised their freedom of religious expression, state officials have unthinkingly violated Section 1 of the 14th Amendment by doing so imo.
Next, regardless that states expressly gave Congress the 14th Amendment power to strengthen constitutionally enumerated rights when the states abridge such rights, we still have a post-17th Amendment ratification, RINO-controlled Congress left over from the lawless Obama Administration, that is actually making itself an accomplice (imo) to unconstitutional state abridgment of constitutionally enumerated rights.
Congress is doing so by wrongly remaining silent with respect to state abridgment of such rights instead of making federal laws to strengthen such rights against abridgment.
Also, by promoting politically correct LGBT “rights,” both state and federal governments are wrongly effectively establishing misguided LGBT people as a protected / privileged class imo, the Founding States having prohibited the state and fed governments from doing when they made the following constitutional clauses.
"Article I, Section 9, Clause 8: No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States [emphasis added]: And no person holding any office or profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state."
Article I, Section 10, Clause 1: No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility [emphasis added].
Also, patriots who value their constitutionally enumerated protections should note that Acts 22:25-29 indicates that Paul claimed his protections as a Roman citizen to save himself from being flogged.
Drain the swamp sewer! Drain the sewer!
Remember in November 2018 !
Since corrupt Congress is the biggest part of the sewer (imo) that Trump wants to drain, it is actually up to patriots to drain the sewer in the 2018 elections, patriots supporting Trump by electing as many new members of Congress as they can who will support Trump.
In the meanwhile, patriots need to make sure that there are plenty of Trump-supporting candidates on the primary ballots.
Patriots need to qualify candidates by asking them why the Founding States made the Constitution’s Section 8 of Article I; to limit (cripple) the federal government’s powers.
Patriots also need to make sure that candidates are knowledgeable of the Supreme Court's clarifications of the federal government’s limited powers listed here.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
"State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added]." —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Finally, unlike incumbent members of Congress who wrongly remained silent while misguided state officials abridged the constitutionally enumerated rights of citizens during the lawless Obama Administration, patriots need to do the following.
Patriots need to get candidates for the primary ballot commit to making and enforcing 14th Amendment-related laws to prosecute misguided state officials who use state powers to abridge constitutionally enumerated protections.
Again, drain the sewer! Drain the sewer!
Because they failed to include creative professionals without storefronts under the state law which prevents places of public accommodation from discriminating against someone on the basis of their sexual orientation.
Look for that loophole to be closed by those who would hang those who refuse to salute the flag of Sodom. May God grant all repentance.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.