[buckalfa]

"When did it become a right to force others to do things they don’t want? "

Since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court will side with the plaintiffs using the rationale it is not lawful to refuse to sell to blacks. I agree with your sentiments, I just do not foresee a favorable decision.

[Westbrook]

Behavior is NOT ancestry.

It is what these people DO that violates the religious conscience.

NOT their ancestry.

[Jacquerie]

The central problem, that of rights, is the Scotus’ own making.

It has unconstitutionally elevated abortion, and voting to what they call ‘fundamental rights’. Instead of plaintiffs having to make their case against laws that touch on abortion and voting, scotus turned the tables such that the lawmakers must prove their laws do not impinge on fundamental rights.

Oh, and the rights of the Bill of Rights, like the right to life itself, are not fundamental.

We will soon find out from philosopher-gods if fag rights are fundamental.

[fwdude]

Since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court will side with the plaintiffs using the rationale it is not lawful to refuse to sell to blacks.

Yep. They used that rationale in the marriage redefinition decision(s). "Gay is the new black" has become their false mantra.