We will see, not much faith in the courts.
Yes, it is.
As the jackass Roberts pointed out, the way the ever most holy and gracious justice Kennedy worded it when he continued to grant us a small semblance of religious freedom...
we still have the right to “advocate” and to “teach” our religion.
The most high justice deliberately did not use the word “exercise,” which is the term used in the USC.
So, even in patronizingly granting us the privilege of continuing our religious practices, these progressive em effers have set up a future law suit to strip away the 1st Amendment right to the free exercise of religion.
Why just 2? Why not 7?
Oh, I hadn’t heard that all the businesses that were previously sued and lost will now have those verdicts overturned. No?
Good old Teddy back tracking a bit? He was huge in the same sex marriage movement, what a good Republican. Maybe he is already seeing what letting the genie out of the bottle is going to amount to. Spitting on a Priest is just the begining.
This man is going to hell, too bad he will not see his murdered wife in the next world.
What a joke! You don't have to be "devoted" to someone in order to marry them - you could be roommates, or best friends, or an entire frat house (pretty soon once polygamy relies on the same so-called "logic" of this decision). What's the basis for denying brothers from marrying now (believe it or not, this is actually a "thing")? That it's "icky"? I mean, hey, they "love" each other, and all that. Grrr!
Olson doesn’t make sense to me as he seems to be discussing apples, and mangoes.
What in the ‘H’ does interracial marriage have to do with same sex marriage? NOTHING. It’s the same ol’ crap about homo’s as a racial issue we so often hear from the Left.
Shut-up you sell-out Ted Olson.
You traitored out to the other side some time ago.
Not interested in what a Benedict Arnold has to say.
It’s never a nice day for a gay wedding.
The state, not individuals. It also says::
1) The fundamental liberties protected by the Fourteenth Amendments Due Process Clause extend to certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy, including intimate choices defining personal identity and beliefs.
And, in their words, finally:
Finally, it must be emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine pre- cepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned. The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths, and to their own deep aspirations to continue the family structure they have long revered.
Is there any other way to see it?
This permits us to redefine the latest leftist Cause of the Month as a "right," and use the Supreme Court to force it down the throats of all Americans.
Really Ted, you freak?
Wait for the next case, and ask Ginsberg, Kagan, Sotomayor, Kennedy and Breyer
I have no doubt they will be happy to declare it all illegal.
Everytime I see him on TV I ask myself what would Barbara (Olson) think?
Interesting...
States such as Oregon have STATE LAWS that will destroy and sue companies that don’t bend over for the gaystapo. YET!!! Now, gay marriage is a federal SCOTUS dictat.
BS. Hubert Humphrey said the Civil Rights Act could not possibly lead to affirmative action. He was a sponsor of the bill.
” This is not something that the Supreme Court made up. It’s the right to decide who you would get to be married, which the Supreme Court repeatedly said is a fundamental right.”
He’s not a dumb man. He knows he’s making an entirely circular argument.
We need about 30 states to stand up and say they consider the rulings of SCOTUS this week and last week to be null and void, and I mean all of them.
BKO bump
We still miss you darling.....you were smart and beautiful
Your husband these days is off the rails
Metaphorical bump
The point is, baking AND DELIVERING AND SETTING UP a wedding cake is indeed a personal service. It’s not the same as selling a regular cake to someone who walks in off the street. Same with wedding flowers: there’s a lot of planning and consultation involved between the florist and the client, and then the flowers must be brought to the wedding site and installed there. I suppose you could just order a cake or flowers, go pick them up and take them to the wedding site yourself, but mostly the baker (or rather, the baker’s employees) and the florist bring them to the site and make sure they’re put in properly. That is a VERY personal service. (And anyone who sits there and tells you it’s not has never planned a wedding! Jeesh!)