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

To: Bob434
"That is the whole crux of the argument right there in a nutshell- all the other ‘promoting’ ‘artistic expression’ etc has nothing to do with the case-"

I think the free speech issues are very legitimate and they buttress the even more powerful "free exercise" of religion issues. Please note, if the baker loses then the free exercise clause of the US constitution has been eliminated. Given the arguments of the left over the last few years (ie "hate speech"), could free speech be far behind?

23 posted on 12/06/2017 9:09:48 AM PST by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: circlecity

The USSC yielded when FDR threatened to pack it. We’ve got a similar possibility with Donald Trump. Kennedy may well find a package with some straight balls in it and a note saying “These are for you. Wear them well. Sincerely, Donald.”


27 posted on 12/06/2017 9:14:12 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Tryin' hard to win the No-Bull Prize.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

To: circlecity

[[I think the free speech issues are very legitimate and they buttress the even more powerful]]

I did say the other issues ‘have nothing to do with the case’, and that was a mistake on my part- poor statement on my part- I should have been more careful in my ‘argument’- Perhaps the free speech is more powerful- I’m no lawyer- but I can see the counter argument to the ‘free expression’ or ‘artistic expression’ Being hate speech which ‘violates rights’- and think that the other side might have more leverage if that line is solely taken

[[Please note, if the baker loses then the free exercise clause of the US constitution has been eliminated.]]

Exactly- I’m not suggesting that these other issue not be brought up, but I think, as a lay person, that the free excersize issue is vitally important to the case- the other issues have the counter arguments of ‘hate speech’ as you mentioned- I think the case might hinge on how far into religion government can intrude- for instance, it’s against the law to murder people, or rape people but if a religion rose up that required it’s members to murder and/or rape people, then obviously that religion would be violating the law that applies to everyone-


49 posted on 12/06/2017 9:42:29 AM PST by Bob434
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

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