There's a resemblance to the brunette but it's not the same person.
Posted on 10/28/2017 4:11:52 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
A court in Arizona has rejected arguments of evangelical Christian wedding invitation designers that a Phoenix ordinance protecting discrimination against LGBT people forces them to make artwork for same-sex couples, which is against their religious beliefs and freedoms of speech and religion. The Christians plan to appeal.
Judge Karen Mullins of Maricopa County Superior Court this week ruled that the Phoenix ordinance does not violate Arizona's free speech and free exercise of religion laws, quashing an attempt by Joanna Duka and Breanna Koski, owners of Brush & Nib Studio, to override the ordinance, AZ Central reported.
The Phoenix non-discrimination ordinance was expanded in 2013 to include sexual orientation and gender identity bias.
"The government may permissibly regulate the sale of goods and services by businesses that sell those goods and services to the general public. This is true even if the goods and services at issue involve expression or artistic creativity," the judge said in her written order.
While no same-sex couple has asked the studio for services and there's no complaint against the Christian artists, Mullins said Phoenix can prohibit the Christians from refusing to serve clients based on their sexual orientation. She said, "the printing of same-sex persons names on wedding invitations does not hinder in any way plaintiffs' independent exercise of (their) religious belief by attending the church of their choice, engaging in religious activities or functions, and expressing their beliefs on their business website and literature or in their personal lives."
"The city considers this another victory that confirms Phoenix's non-discrimination ordinance is legal and valid," city spokeswoman Julie Watters was quoted as saying in a statement.
Alliance Defending Freedom, which filed the lawsuit on behalf of Brush & Nib Studio, plans to appeal. "People shouldn't be forced to promote views that they disagree with," ADF attorney Jonathan Scruggs was quoted as saying.
In a similar case, President Donald Trump's administration this week asked the Supreme Court to allow it to argue in favor of Colorado Christian baker Jack Phillips and his right to refuse to make wedding cakes for same-sex couples.
Oral arguments in the Colorado case are scheduled for Dec. 5. The case concerns Phillips, a Christian baker who was found guilty by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission in 2014 of discriminating against same-sex couple Dave Mullins and Charlie Craig in 2012 when he refused to make a cake for their wedding, citing his belief that marriage is between one man and one woman.
The Trump administration has filed a brief in support of Phillips, arguing that the First Amendment's Free Speech Clause protects him from Colorado's public accommodation law. It is asking for 10 minutes of argument time during the December hearing.
In Washington state, Barronelle Stutzman, also known as the "Christian grandma florist," has asked the Supreme Court to hear her appeal to reverse a court's decision earlier this year that found her guilty of discrimination for refusing to provide flowers for a gay wedding.
"For more than four years, Barronelle has endured the litigation in this case with unwavering grace, humility, and faith — even as she faces losing everything she owns," ADF wrote about the case earlier. "Now she will take her last stand before the U.S. Supreme Court, asking it to preserve her religious freedom and her right not to be forced to speak a message about marriage that violates her beliefs."
Nobody has a right to order an artist to produce artistic expression on demand on a subject he finds abhorrent. You think you could force Barbra Streisand to sing hymns of praise for Trump?
All this means is that Christians have no religious freedom in AZ and that, sooner or later, there will be a persecution.
As long as they are blasphemous and to the atheists’ liking.
Well, that violates the First Amendment.
The government has no business telling private businesses how to run and whom to serve.
That *judge* way overstepped his bounds.
Will this same judge force muzzie cab drivers to accept seeing eye dogs in their cabs? Or any dog pets? Muzzies say dogs are unclean and against their religion; also accepting people carrying alcohol or even drunks.
There's a resemblance to the brunette but it's not the same person.
Not if a business serves the public.
If you don’t like non-discrimination statutes, you’re free not to open your doors.
We have all have to obey laws we don’t like.
Refer all such requests to a lawyer. None can delay, confuse, or obfuscate better than a lawyer. ;)
The land of McCain and Flake.
“What on earth has happened to Arizona?? Is there something in the water there causing them to go loco??”
Even AZ is turning to shit...one of the last outposts. Damn Californians.
“Outsource the work.”
If it came down to it, what would - as you suggest - prevent the Christian artists from simply bringing the offending order to an accommodating shop down the street? In a rational world, nothing that I can see.
While reasonable, I suspect that if the Judge got wind of this, the Christians would be held in contempt. The Christians MUST be made to submit.
(”Submit”? Hmmm...isn’t that what the word “Islam” translates to? )
This is incredibly absurd, the notion that a judge can appoint himself as a higher authority and command obedience over the God of one’s beliefs. That’s really what this boils down to. I say obey the God you believe in, not this clown. You have freedom of religion. This judge is trying to force you to believe in him and HIS religion. He can’t do it.
Make the damned cake but make it ugly.
“What water? Half the state is a friggin’ desert.”
90%
Ruling violates first amendment rights, etc
Wrong.
.
Needanuther new judge!
.
Yep. If you're going to compel an artist against his will, accept the service he provides.
“That *judge* way overstepped his bounds.”
Not to be pedantic, but it was a she: Judge Karen Mullins
(I know you’d want to be as accurate as possible ;^)
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.