Posted on 06/04/2018 7:26:16 AM PDT by hercuroc
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday handed a narow victory to a Christian baker from Colorado who refused for religious reasons to make a wedding cake for a gay couple.
So, Ginsberg and Sotomayor share the opinion that a Muslim baker should be forced to write “I love to eat pig meat” on a cake if I wanted them to?
Right. And, I got a bridge for sale too.
There you go again!
Clouding the issue with facts.
Sheeeeeeesh
I didn’t read the word “narrow” as it relates to the vote. Some did.
SCOTUS gave the Colorado Civil Rights Commission another bite of the apple and gave them a roadmap on how to proceed.
I’m guessing they take that bite.
I’m not sure its as narrow as some are saying. I haven’t read the whole thing and it appears that the court ruled that free exercise of religion included religious activity. The left has argued for years that “free exercise” is just freedom of belief or freedom of worship, essentially freedom of religious speech. This goes beyond that.
The LEFT so wants to limit freedom of religion to freedom of worship. We are free to worship, however, we must shed our religion when we are outside the church.
On the same note, the official STATE religion is atheism. The LEFT pretends that atheism is neutral. There is no neutral. God and no God. They are opposites. In numbers, they are 1 and -1. Atheism is not zero. It is -1.
When a STATE employee(Principal) tells a student he cannot invoke God in his speech, he is enforcing the STATE religion of atheism. He is violating the citizen’s freedom of religion.
Washington Supreme Court rules against florist in same-sex wedding case
My point. The meaning of the word gay when I was a kid was not homosexual. The !liberals have taken our language and twisted it so that their definitions are the accepted ones, and younger folks, even conservative ones, don’t know the difference.
Thanks.
I agree. And don’t call me “straight” unless I can call them crooked, warped, bent, askew....etc
I don’t understand why, when folks report SC decisions, that they don’t put a link to the decision. If there is one thing that speaks for itself in this universe unfilterable through the eyes of the chattering classes it is a decision of the US SC.
There used to be a thing called “Right to Refuse Service”... as a business owner, I miss that.
It's bigger than that. In Phillips case the civil rights commission refused to even consider that "free exercise" was implicated here. That's why they were so hostile - to shoot down the notion that he had a free exercise argument. Why? Because if "free exercise" is implicated (which the court today said it is) then the baker will probably win every time. The liberal commissions know this - that's why the fought so hard to prevent free exercise from entering the argument. The cases where the bakers won are cases where the lower courts based their decision on free exercise. And the USSC said today that free exercise IS implicated and formulated a balancing test. Under that test the baker in a "gay wedding cake" scenario only will probably win every time.
Build the Wall not the Cake!
That kind of bias should be grounds for remival from the bench
This decision is an absolute non-ruling and a joke. The ruling says nothing of substance. It just says the state has to apply its laws in a non-hostile, neutral manner. The Colorado board admitted to being very hostile to religion and the court said government cannot be openly hostile to religion. Evidently, if the CO board seems nice to everyone it can continue to impose the law against religion and the bakery will be subject to all punishment under the law. Narrow? So narrow it is meaningless.
I hope you are correct because the overview of the case in the news does not say what you wrote at all.
We will see. This isn't the only case that is going to go the Supreme Court.
The left will never be done attacking, not until they get the joy of stomping on the faces of normal people, without interference and forever.
Pope Frankie became the first pope in 2,000 years to use the PC word gay to describe homosexuals. Now all his liberal bishops do the same thing. The US government, and that includes the DOD who also refers to homosexuals as “gay”. Listening to Rush right now talk about the decision and it’s gay, gay, gay. Even Rush Limbaugh has bought into the homosexual BS. It’s really disgusting.
Yep. The liberal media wants to avoid the implications of this case as much as they can. It just makes sense that the left will try to limit the opinion and claim its narrow. The issue presented was narrow but within the confines of that issue the holding itself is very broad.
circlecity has made some interesting observations on this thread. Others have discussed that "free exercise" was finally being applied to the right to our religious beliefs in this case after years of saying that it doesn't apply. I hope this will continue in future cases. In addition, the Baker has also claimed he is a creative artist and that seemed to be avoided or ignored by SCOTUS and the concentration of the majority opinion in this case appears to hinge on the hostility of the commission toward the baker.
I'm not a lawyer but based on the deep state media's eagerness to tell us all what "they think we should believe it means" my gut tells me there is probably more potential for invoking our protected religious rights in this ruling moving forward if carefully and honestly done.
Good call by Roberts (finally!). Kennedy wrote a 7-2 decision, where any sane constitutionalist would have written at best a 5-4 opinion. We're better off with the 7-2 to be used as precedent when the broader issues are decided.
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.