Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court hears arguments in same-sex wedding website clash
Roll Call ^ | Dec 5 | By Michael Macagnone

Posted on 12/05/2022 3:01:47 PM PST by RandFan

Conservatives on the Supreme Court appeared ready Monday to side with a website designer who refuses to build sites for same-sex weddings because of her religious beliefs, in a case that could broaden free speech exemptions to anti-discrimination laws nationwide.

Lorie Smith has asked the court to overturn lower-court decisions that found a Colorado anti-discrimination law would require her company, 303 Creative, to offer websites for same-sex weddings if she offered websites for weddings between a man and a woman.

During oral arguments Monday, conservatives on the court appeared sympathetic to Smith’s arguments, in the latest of several cases about the balance of religious liberty and individual freedom from discrimination.

Among the court’s majority of six conservative justices, Justices Neil M. Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and Brett M. Kavanaugh pushed both sides of the case to answer whether the Colorado law similarly would require other businesses such as speechwriters to take on clients with messages they disagree with.

In an extended exchange with Eric R. Olson, the solicitor general for Colorado, Gorsuch compared Smith being required to design a website for anyone whose message she disagreed with — even if they were not same-sex couples — to writers being required to write a speech or press release for something they disagreed with.

“What [the website designer says] is ‘We will not sell to anyone, anyone, a message that I disagree with as a matter of religious faith,’” Gorsuch said. “Just as a speechwriter says for the press release or the freelance writer says, ‘I will not sell to anyone a speech that offends my religious beliefs.’”

Experts see the case as a follow to another free speech case out of Colorado, where a baker appealed a lower-court ruling ...

(Excerpt) Read more at rollcall.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: california; gavinnewsom; genderdysphoria; homofascism; homosexualagenda

1 posted on 12/05/2022 3:01:47 PM PST by RandFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RandFan

2 posted on 12/05/2022 3:04:35 PM PST by Magnum44 (...against all enemies, foreign and domestic... )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

SCOTUS ruled in favor of that baker a few years ago...it’s hard to imagine them not doing the same for this website designer.


3 posted on 12/05/2022 3:07:23 PM PST by Gay State Conservative (I Miss Jimmy Carter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

The mere fact such a thing is a topic at the court is another example of how far we’ve fallen as a nation.


4 posted on 12/05/2022 3:10:10 PM PST by mrmeyer (You can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him. Robert Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative
SCOTUS didn't reach the issue. It remanded the case because of the obvious prejudice on the part of the state agency in handling the complaint.

After it went back, the ruling went against the baker again. He is appealing, but nowhere near getting to the Supremes.

5 posted on 12/05/2022 3:11:29 PM PST by AnAmericanMother (Ecce Crucem Domini, fugite partes adversae. Vicit Leo de Tribu Iuda, Radix David, Alleluia!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

Gay or not Gay websites? the SCOTUS takes the case.
Tracking down the players of Vote Fraud? The SCOTUS
is collectively ‘washing it’s hair’ during that court session. Not available to take your call.


6 posted on 12/05/2022 3:12:54 PM PST by lee martell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

“same-sex wedding CRASHsite”


7 posted on 12/05/2022 3:15:42 PM PST by Jim W N (MAGA by restoring the Gospel of the Grace of Christ (Jude 3) and our Free Constitutional Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

You’re telling me there are no globohomo web designers????

This is about forced accommodation, not tolerance.


8 posted on 12/05/2022 3:22:50 PM PST by clee1 (We use 43 muscles to frown, 17 to smile, and 2 to pull a trigger. I'm lazy and don't wish to smile.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

They go to the Christian vendors to stir up s*it so they can sue.


9 posted on 12/05/2022 3:27:52 PM PST by peggybac (My will is what I wanted. God's will is what I got.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

What exactly are the damages? its not like they took the fags money and then didn’t do the work.


10 posted on 12/05/2022 3:41:40 PM PST by escapefromboston (Free Chauvin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

This is being heard, but the SC won’t hear cases involving vote fraud - which is fundamental to the survival of our nation.


11 posted on 12/05/2022 3:45:21 PM PST by neverevergiveup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

If you force creatives to do work, there is no limit to how preposterous the situation can become. One could imagine some nutcase *forcing* a jewish baker to make a swastika cake with “Happy Holocaust” written on it.


12 posted on 12/05/2022 3:58:45 PM PST by Flick Lives (Cui bono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

When my small company didn’t want a project, we bid HIGH. Really high! We never had issues with Sodomites


13 posted on 12/05/2022 4:15:16 PM PST by Jan_Sobieski (Sanctification)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

They want to compel unwanted speech.

They want to censor desired speech.

You are not free to speak, without incurring massive costs, expending stupendous time, and losing your relationships with your fellow citizens. If you are willing to pay that price, you will receive half of your rights.

We must all read from the same Hymnal whilst we worship the gods of compliance and groupthink.


14 posted on 12/05/2022 4:15:54 PM PST by LachlanMinnesota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

Didn’t the “wedding cake” case, years ago, set a legal precedent for those who won’t comply with subhumans’ requests/demands?


15 posted on 12/05/2022 4:26:19 PM PST by Carriage Hill (A society grows great when old men plant trees, in whose shade they know they will never sit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

Speech for a social cause and its activities compelled by force of law. Atrocious. Calirado has been that way for a long time.


16 posted on 12/05/2022 5:05:40 PM PST by familyop ("For they that sleep with dogs, shall rise with fleas" (John Webster, "The White Devil" 1612).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

There are tons of drag and drop website builders, ways to post photos on Facebook, literally dozens of ways to share photos and copy but Nooooooo these dipsticks want to “force” someone to work for them. Such BS


17 posted on 12/05/2022 5:11:25 PM PST by The Louiswu (- .-. ..- -- .--. / ..--- ----- ..--- ....-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

Is wedding cake known to have the same effect on a lesbian that it does on a heterosexual woman? And if so, which one of the two, um....wives...does it affect?


18 posted on 12/05/2022 5:15:57 PM PST by big truck ("This space intentionally left blank.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

FTSC.


19 posted on 12/05/2022 6:57:57 PM PST by FlingWingFlyer (Hey Amerika! The whole world is watching and laughing their asses off. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrmeyer

This they will here, election fraud, January 6th incarcerations, 2020 presidential coup, no


20 posted on 12/06/2022 3:20:07 AM PST by ronnie raygun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson