It is sad that freedom of speech seems to be the legal theory upon which people are winning these cases and will probably the best tool from here on out. They courts are looking for any way to avoid acknowledging the right to free exercise of religion when it conflicts with the homo privileges and memes.
It’s one of only two rights that are broadly known by American voters. The courts simply reflect the will of the people. Judges aren’t gods.
To win, we need to teach people about the rest of their rights, particularly the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.
No American school teaches about the fourth branch of government, namely the states. Do schools teach about jury nullification, small government, etc.?
The problem is simply that the US Constitution has been ignored so many times in the past, that we’re literally in uncharted territory.
Consider just the 10 Commandments. I dare anyone to tell me what standard is currently used to specifically determine which 10 Commandment displays are OK and which ones are unconstitutional. It’s all a ridiculous mess. Instead of drawing a clear line based on what the constitution actually says, the courts have injected personal opinion and shifting standards, aka no standards at all.
The 10 Commandments is just one small way in which the courts have went from the rule of law to the rule of men (or women...you get the drift). What’s written and agreed to, the country’s contract between We the People and government, is meaningless. What does the constitution mean? That depends on who can stack it with enough votes.
The concept of public accommodations really isn’t in the constitution (correct me if I’m wrong). The constitution wasn’t written to restrain the rights of private individuals. It was written to restrain government. That’s a clear standard. Government cannot discriminate or show preference based on race, religion, sex, etc (even though it constantly does exactly that).