The answer is no.
Nothing to do with speech.
Nothing to do with religion.
Everything to do with not being a slave.
Because that is the only difference between a slave and a free man.
The right to say, "No" or "Yes" as they wish.
And the people who want to whine about "if they are PAYING you it is not slavery" you are wrong.
Deal with it.
Everything is not about just getting paid.
Unfortunately, the left is all about quashing the Constitution. Fortunately, Trump appointed some decent judges to stand in their way.
The tax code has much to say about marriage and children.
The Elite class and its spawn require an ongoing servile citizenry
The vast majority don’t care to object to contractual matters between same-sex couples.
Excellent article.
“A gay man owns a website design business and a Christian group wants to hire him to create a website featuring anti-gay bible verses and preaching against homosexuality. If he refuses, under current Colorado law — which also has religion as a protected class — he would be just as guilty as Smith would be.”
One would think so in a non-hypocritical world. But in the real world, the gay website owner would suffer no consequences whatsoever.
Don’t worry Brad, it looks as though the SC is coming down on the side of the Religious argument.
Let me summarize this article, “I’m insane, and I support others being insane, but I think that insane people should learn to tolerate sane people as well”.
Realistically, for every baker, caterer, photographer, florist, limo driver etc that have deeply held moral and religious objections to same sax marriages there’s dozens of others willing to fill that niche. LGBT/whatevers and their allies, don’t get mad, get even! They pride themselves on their talents and creativity. Why can’t they they start their own gay friendly businesses?
The Federalist just did an article about a pro-life organization which has reserved a banquet room at a local VA restaurant only to have their reservation cancelled less than two hours before their event because the staff refused to serve them on the grounds that the group is a threat to women and the LGBTQ community - a response which is total bullsh¡t.
This bisexual Atheist will side with Judeo-Christian beliefs basically every time, and particularly when it comes to the First Amendment. You’ll never find me at a pride parade or supporting abortion, let alone demanding that all public spaces be mandated secular. Nope. I grew up Catholic, and aside from the belief in God and Christ, a lot of that stuff stuck with me. I also spent a lot of time around very sick people, and I’ve seen a lot of the good that religion can bring.
This is about compelled speech. The Colorado Commies are trying to FORCE certain speech on people.
She is not denying anybody service. She’s not denying anybody because they are in this or that “protected class” (which should not exist anyway but that’s another matter). She’s saying she will happily do business with anybody BUT there are certain messages she will not do if they clash with her beliefs. She’s perfectly within her rights to refuse. The law here is blatantly unconstitutional.
Should for example, Jewish Website designers be required to design and build a website for the American Nazi Party if it comes to them? Under the Colorado law, they would be required to do so.
The 1st amendment is a total bar against compelled speech.
Heard a Catholic woman on talk radio argue that they shouldn’t get to be married. Call it a partnership or whatever but not marriage. Give them the same rights as a marriage, just don’t use the name marriage.