[[These so called civil right/ human right commissions now know how to compel Christians to bake that cake for that gay couple.]]
That remains to be seen- depending on how the SC handles cases like sweetcakes, and the elderly florist who refused to do floral arrangements for gay wedding- The left haven’t won yet- while today’s ruling wasn’t a huge success for religious liberty, it was a small step in the right direction- albeit a narrow one- The next cases will have to include the argument that people can not be coerced into working to specially create an artistic piece against their moral conscience - otherwise this would be akin to forced labor, and a violation of their first amendment right (right to free speech, and right not to be forced to say something you don’t wish to say- creating an artistic piece would be being forced to say something you don’t believe in- Art both speaks and is an expression of the artist’s voice so to speak- in otherwords, the artist forced to create a cake that celebrates homosexual marriage would be akin to the artist declaring they support that lifestyle- not sure how strong this argument will be- but it needs to be included in next cases)
The left are certainly going to try to keep violating a Christian businesse’s moral conscience, and like you say- will do so while refraining from being poopie heads about it- thus forcing more and more cases to the supreme court until the definitions are whittled down to more precise language- It’s still going to be a long slog
I fear this ruling was too narrow. I would love to see a ruling that made plain that a person cannot be compelled to enter into a contract, no reason or defense needed. As you pointed out that is akin to “forced labor”. That would give the broadest protection to the greatest number.
To me it is a no brainer that forcing a person to use his artistic talents contrary to his beliefs violates his First Amendment rights. I see no compelling State interest to place protection of gays from discrimination ahead of those rights. But that is what will be argued, I bet. “Tolerance Hell. Lick Our Boots.”
I also hope it will be shown that gay couples have not suffered any harm from the actions of the florists and bakers and the rest. That is perhaps the most spurious finding of various rulings against them. Such findings are a clear attempt to bankrupt these businesses by crippling them financially. They also act to keep other businesses in line.
It will be a long slog. We both know the ultimate goal is to silence (in the public square) Christians who uphold Biblical teachings on morality. If refusing speech is harmful to gays how much more harmful is speech itself?