Posted on 02/16/2017 8:27:52 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
The Christian owner of a Richland floral shop violated state laws when she refused to make custom arrangements for a longtime customer’s same-sex wedding, an appellate court ruled Thursday.
The unanimous decision by the Washington state Supreme Court affirms a Benton County...
I would LOVE to see one of these bakeries or florists say they can’t serve them because of their MUSLIM faith... and see what happens
Big ones at that ...
They can still appeal directly to the US Supreme Court since it is a state Supreme Court decision and bypass lower Federal courts. If there is a Federal or US Constitutional issue involved then the USSC can take it up. It takes 4 USSC Justices to agree to hear the case for them to hear it.
I predict the USSC will agree to hear appeal of this decision, due to its first amendment ramifications against protections for free speech, freedom of association and freedom of religion. Hopefully Gorsuch will be on the Court when case is argued!
Listening to the John Carlson Show right now. He’s speaking with Stutzman and her attorney. They are planning to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
I predict this gets appealed to the US Supreme Court and they agree to take up the case with US Constitutional/1st Amendment rights on the table. A state Supreme Court decision can be directly appealed to the USSC if there are Federal or Constitutional issues involved which there clearly are!
Just a further example of how the justice system is a law onto itself.
The US Constitution does not preclude the states from regulating religious activity. In the first amendment, the founders restricted only Congress from prohibiting the free exercise of religion, not the states — “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; . . .”
The words in the Constitution allow the states considerable freedom to establish laws and rules regulating the conduct of citizens within the borders of a state. The remedy for Christian shopkeepers, who feel their religious freedom is being infringed, lies in amending the state’s Constitution to restrict the state judiciary. If these Christians cannot organize and work their will through the legislative process, their choice is to accept the will of their fellow citizens or leave the state.
We as a nation must return to the rule of law through the legislative process. Allowing judges and panels of judges to write law by imposing their personal preferences on the population needs to end. Legislatures do have the power to limit the jurisdiction of the courts through law or constitutional amendment. Until the people insist the legislatures of the state and the national governments rein in the courts, there will be no relief.
If anybody wants to support Barronelle Stutzman, they set up a website:
letfreedombloom.com
It redirects to:
http://www.adflegal.org/barronelle-stutzmans-story
If you make it a freedom-of-religion argument you lose, they’ll just say your right to religion only goes as far as to not violate another persons rights.
This is really a free speech violation. You are not discriminating against a *person* you are discriminating what *contracts* you wish to engage in. The state is saying that you MUST enter into a contract and put your labor toward an EVENT that you have a conscientious objection to. This is compelled speech, coerced speech, etc..
They want to make out as though this is the same as refusing to sell a cake/flowers on display, it is not. I’m sure the florist would have no issue performing work for the same individual for a different event.
If a Jewish baker was asked by Nazi’s to bake a cake celebrating Hitler’s birthday nobody would be outraged at a “get lost” response. Or a black owned printing shop being asked to print flyers for a KKK rally having the same reaction. You could write an endless list.
I’m really surprised nobody has made this a free speech argument. So long as it is viewed, by both sides, as a religious freedom issue this will continue to be a problem.
Good. The bakers 1st amendment rights have clearly been violated by the State of Washington!
There is a huge difference between refusing to allow someone to buy an arrangement on the shelf and refusing to create art on demand. Even if you think the first should be banned, punishing the second is an act of pure evil. Those on the other side of this debate deserve no sympathy, no compassion, and no consideration. We can morally and ethically do whatever is needed to defend ourselves against this unprovoked set of attacks, as if we were facing thugs trying to enslave us - because these are thugs trying to enslave us.
Man, I'd not get within 100 yards of something like that.
provided someone agrees to fund such appeal.
Why don’t some enterprising gay business(es) act as a 3rd party fulfillment like a Shabbos goy for those that don’t want to execute the order?
“I am still waiting for a gay couple to order from a Muslim-owned bakery. It would be most interesting.”
https://twitter.com/UpsetALiberal/status/830835282526273537
They are raising money now for the Supreme Court fight. Link is on this thread if your wish to contribute.
“If you make it a freedom-of-religion argument you lose, they’ll just say your right to religion only goes as far as to not violate another persons rights.”
They could say that, but it would be false. They did not have to enter your store. They are the ones violating your rights, not the other way around. You have no right to require people to do things they do not wish to do.
It is the height of idiocy that we have allowed opinionated Leftists to redefine when we can and can not discriminate.
The Government, of course, also has to discriminate in certain situations--indeed most situations, where a choice is involved. But you are correct in the distinction you make. The Government cannot fairly discriminate against a definable class of citizens, when it is dealing in areas where such discrimination would amount to an unfair application of the law. But it is not an unfair discrimination when the Government applies appropriate qualifications--as for physical competence in the military, for example.
State Supreme Court rules Richland flower shop discriminated against gay couple
This is how our justice system has been turned into a PC legal system ruled by emotion instead of logic and freedom. Black robed pseudo gods ruling on their feelings.
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.