Posted on 01/13/2017 11:20:16 AM PST by amorphous
The U.S. Supreme Court has been handed a bombshell: An appeal of a lower-court ruling that banned Christian counselors from talking with teens about the biblical standard for sexuality.
The case challenges laws that force licensed counselors to affirm homosexuality, prohibiting them from helping clients overcome same-sex attractions.
Such laws have been adopted in New Jersey, where a biased judge used it to shut down a Christian ministry, and in California and other states.
The case already was presented to the Supreme Court several years ago, but it did not get a ruling.
Now a new appeal has been submitted by the Pacific Justice Institute on behalf of two religious leaders in California and a student who was considering going into counseling.
The appeal argues affirmation of the state regulation by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ignored the fact that when lawmakers were arguing over the law, many, if not most, of their comments were specifically about religion and conservatives.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Get #9 there soon.
If the lower court ruling is allowed to stand, could we go forward with a law banning Muslim clerics from talking with teens about jihad?
Or would that totally trample their First Amendment rights?
Ah, yes, it’s time to worry whether Anthony Kennedy will join the four libs in affirming LGBT-uber-alles once again.
PING!
The People first, then the Judges, need look no further than freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
BOOKMARK
I sure hope that President elect Trump gets to reappoint a whole new Ninth Circuit. These people are so out of touch with Americans especially those in the Ninth Circuit, that the rulings are comical and pathetic. Counselors should be able to discuss whatever they feel is appropriate. Someone doesn’t like it, they can find a new counselor.
I am sure the liberals forgot to add Koranic teachings... It was just an oversight that it is ONLY against Christians.
How is prohibiting the speech of a CHRISTIAN Counselor not a violation of Religious Freedom as guaranteed in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?
The feds are constitutionally prohibited from abridging freedom of speech and religion. The feds also have no constitutional authority to interfere with state laws regarding freedom of speech and religion. It is up to the people of each state to maintain their freedoms of speech and religion through state elections, initiatives, and/or propositions.
SCOTUS has no constitutional authority in this matter and should return the case to the state.
“The People first, then the Judges, need look no further than freedom of speech and freedom of religion.”
Freedom of speech has never been more threatened. I had to sign a document at my final job about what I could not talk about. I almost got disciplined for a conversation overheard in the lunchroom about concealed carry. When I was lectured by the VP and pointed out that I was on my own time and nothing in the multi page document dealt with guns he said, you were on company property and you’re not a dumb guy. You can look at what is banned and figure out you shouldn’t talk about guns either.
Colleges have reached the point of absurdity. Mention Trump and it’s a microaggression.
SCOTUS was what this election was about.
SCOTUS has no constitutional authority in this matter and should return the case to the state.
If a state passes a law, and it is upheld by the lower courts, that a person can not say booger, I think the supreme court has a duty to strike it down as against first amendment protection.
Ping
That’s ok, lots of money to be made treating all the disease transmitted or associated by promiscuous sexual behavior....
counseling(keep doin’ it...makes me money)...drugs for depression, antibiotics(big pharma)...lab tests (clinical labs income up)...higher medical insurance costs (to cover for the extra medical care)....more money for HIV or other blood borne infections protectants (i.e. gloves, masks)more federal health insurance money goes to hospitals, doctors, other care givers...finally and quite sadly, more money for crematoriums, undertakers, and funeral homes, not to mention flower shops...then lawyers to settle the estates...
A great racket! Keep telling them it’s THEIR genetic fate AND choice! (we need the money)
semi-sarcasm/off
Go ahead, SCOTUS, deny the appeal. Hasten the revolution ... or, the end. Maranatha.
________________
I would have been fired right then and there: "Oh really? You want to test that in court. . . Bubba?"
My husband works at the school district here and some of the krap he has to put up with astounds me. I wouldn't be able to hold a job there either.
It’s FREEDOM OF RELIGION, not FREEDOM FROM RELIGION.
That interpretation of the constitution died in the late 1860’s with the 14th amendment.
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.