BREAKING: No Cakes, No Websites

[Benjamin Frank]

If I were a self employed website designer, I would refuse to take jobs from right wing evangelicals.

So I take it you support this ruling?

I'd have to see the basis for the ruling. I have much sympathy for the idea that requiring makers of 'expressive goods' to serve everybody who can pay for their services is a form of 'compelled speech.'

However, if this ruling is only limited to those with religious based objections, which is also limited to just recognized organized religions (which is nothing to do with Christians vs Muslims and Jews), then that is confering special rights to one group of favored people, and on a basis of this notion of 'religious liberty' that is an unprecedented in the history of the United States.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

If I were a self employed website designer, I would refuse to take jobs from right wing evangelicals.

So I take it you support this ruling?

I'd have to see the basis for the ruling. I have much sympathy for the idea that requiring makers of 'expressive goods' to serve everybody who can pay for their services is a form of 'compelled speech.'

However, if this ruling is only limited to those with religious based objections, which is also limited to just recognized organized religions (which is nothing to do with Christians vs Muslims and Jews), then that is confering special rights to one group of favored people, and on a basis of this notion of 'religious liberty' that is an unprecedented in the history of the United States.

Such an understanding of "religious liberty" isn't to be found in any of the Court's recent jurisprudence.  But in any case the Court's opinion relies on freedom of speech, and does not even mention the free exercise clause or RFRA.

[Torie]

We need to start throwing bricks again.

Why? Because someone won't design a website for you? That is their right. Find another website designer.

The LGBT agenda was never really about "freedom to do what two people want in the bedroom" which I totally support as stated but it was always eventually about "force social acceptance of a particular lifestyle as mainstream using the power of the state if necessary"

THIS! The movement changed rapidly in decades. Oh well, you either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain. Ofc this doesn't apply to everyone in the LGBTQ movement, many of them are cool people but rainbow capitalism has really burned a lot of bridges but I hope people can rebuild them with LGBTQ sooner rather than later.

What do you think of rainbow intersections? This one is repainted every year for gay pride month, so it has become a permanent feature of the Hoboken landscape now. This year, one feature of gay pride month was a host of local notables (not including the dog hating priest who sits alone in his 8,000 square foot rectory across the street) reading gay themed children's books in the gazebo in the park adjacent to the city library that was sponsored by the library. Even the local Congressman, Menendez junior, showed up. Roby and I accidentally ran into the event, and alas the kids were more interested in Roby than listening to the books being read.

The amazing thing is that gays are very thin on the ground in Hoboken. All those fit young men are straight. Sad!

[fhtagn]

If I were a self employed website designer, I would refuse to take jobs from right wing evangelicals.

So I take it you support this ruling?

Although it should be pointed out that religion is a choice whereas sexuality is an immutable characteristic, but I digress.

It's not a choice if you truly belive and follow your religion.

[Tintrlvr]

If I were a self employed website designer, I would refuse to take jobs from right wing evangelicals.

So I take it you support this ruling?

Although it should be pointed out that religion is a choice whereas sexuality is an immutable characteristic, but I digress.

It's not a choice if you truly belive and follow your religion.

People convert to new religions all the time. Are you saying that they were unable to choose to convert? They were already of the converted religion before they converted so it wasn't a choice? Or is the answer that you are only *really* a follower of a given religion if you would never entertain changing any of your religious beliefs (an almost impossible standard - no one meets this)?

Any view that makes religion not a choice is completely incoherent with the idea of conversion.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

There's a difference between providing access and providing a service, but there's a lot of grey area between those that would be very tricky to parse. I imagine that there will be many other cases forcing the court to sort them out.

[Torie]

If I were a self employed website designer, I would refuse to take jobs from right wing evangelicals.

So I take it you support this ruling?

Although it should be pointed out that religion is a choice whereas sexuality is an immutable characteristic, but I digress.

It's not a choice if you truly belive and follow your religion.

Whether or not people are born gay is a theological issue rather than a scientific issue?

Just why are my taxes used to support religion (it's tax exemption) again to spread anti-science errancy? No need to answer. It's a rhetorical question.

I don't think Catholics believe that no one is born gay by the way, and they should know, since the sect seems to be run by gays by and large.

[fhtagn]

If I were a self employed website designer, I would refuse to take jobs from right wing evangelicals.

So I take it you support this ruling?

Although it should be pointed out that religion is a choice whereas sexuality is an immutable characteristic, but I digress.

It's not a choice if you truly belive and follow your religion.

People convert to new religions all the time. Are you saying that they were unable to choose to convert? They were already of the converted religion before they converted so it wasn't a choice? Or is the answer that you are only *really* a follower of a given religion if you would never entertain changing any of your religious beliefs (an almost impossible standard - no one meets this)?

Any view that makes religion not a choice is completely incoherent with the idea of conversion.

If you truly felt your religion was true, then you wouldn't view that religion as a choice. Conversion doesn't mean religion is a choice if people are coming to that religion with the genuine belief that it is true and felt as if their life was pulling them into that direction.

How is that any more a choice than someone coming to the conclusion that they aren't the gender they were born into and lived as until the point of their transition, for example?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

To celebrate a victory for religious liberty and free speech, I ordered a brownie tray from Masterpiece Cakeshop!

People like you should be treated no differently than vocal neo-Nazis.

You have no business being a moderator on this website and should resign immediately.

This is almost as bad as that time Hitler's cook refused to bake a cake for Hanukkah.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Cool. I'm all for driving bigots out of business. And if the business of said bigots is bolstered by this ruling, well that just reveals more people to be bigots. Better to know the truth about what these people actually believe.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

If I were a self employed website designer, I would refuse to take jobs from right wing evangelicals.

So I take it you support this ruling?

Although it should be pointed out that religion is a choice whereas sexuality is an immutable characteristic, but I digress.

It's not a choice if you truly belive and follow your religion.

People convert to new religions all the time. Are you saying that they were unable to choose to convert? They were already of the converted religion before they converted so it wasn't a choice? Or is the answer that you are only *really* a follower of a given religion if you would never entertain changing any of your religious beliefs (an almost impossible standard - no one meets this)?

Any view that makes religion not a choice is completely incoherent with the idea of conversion.

If you truly felt your religion was true, then you wouldn't view that religion as a choice. Conversion doesn't mean religion is a choice if people are coming to that religion with the genuine belief that it is true and felt as if their life was pulling them into that direction.

How is that any more a choice than someone coming to the conclusion that they aren't the gender they were born into and lived as until the point of their transition, for example?

Don't know, I'm not Transgender, but Trans people also aren't attempting to force their views on other people using the battering ram of the government. And no, a rainbow flag isn't an attack on anyone in the way that Conservatives and religious people are trying to weaponize the judiciary.

Imagine me having to take you at face value, with absolutely no material or human equivalent. As opposed to sexuality as a spectrum that is observed all over nature. Religion, however? Nope.

And yet, I DO. To be clear I do believe religious people should be protected from discrimination but not, as they often accuse us, of receiving special rights of discrimination.

[TheReckoning]

To celebrate a victory for religious liberty and free speech, I ordered a brownie tray from Masterpiece Cakeshop!

People like you should be treated no differently than vocal neo-Nazis.

You have no business being a moderator on this website and should resign immediately.

Personally believing that marriage is between a man and a woman (basically what all of human civilization believed until 2000) = wanting to exterminate entire ethnic groups, apparently.

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

Boy the homophobia is out and on display in this thread

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

To celebrate a victory for religious liberty and free speech, I ordered a brownie tray from Masterpiece Cakeshop!

People like you should be treated no differently than vocal neo-Nazis.

You have no business being a moderator on this website and should resign immediately.

Personally believing that marriage is between a man and a woman (basically what all of human civilization believed until 2000) = wanting to exterminate entire ethnic groups, apparently.

Massive simplification of the multitude of vast cultural differences between 'marriage' like ceremonies and commitments in cultures throughout history, especially considering same-sex relationships are actually prevalent and arguably more so than what we consider to be the institution of 'modern marriage' which only vaguely resembles those that precede it. Js.

[Dr. Frankenstein]

If I were a self employed website designer, I would refuse to take jobs from right wing evangelicals.

So I take it you support this ruling?

Although it should be pointed out that religion is a choice whereas sexuality is an immutable characteristic, but I digress.

It's not a choice if you truly belive and follow your religion.

Of course it is a choice, what are you on about? If you are not taught a thing about religion while growing up, you won't suddenly become religious. Whereas your attraction to the other/same sex will come naturally.

[GALeftist]

Can someone explain to me how this isn't effectively an advisory ruling? Like the woman in question was never forced to design any website, let alone a graphic depiction of a gay couple. How on earth is this ripe?

[Vice President Christian Man]

Good, nobody should be forced to do anything that aligns against their values.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

If I were a self employed website designer, I would refuse to take jobs from right wing evangelicals.

So I take it you support this ruling?

Although it should be pointed out that religion is a choice whereas sexuality is an immutable characteristic, but I digress.

It's not a choice if you truly belive and follow your religion.

People convert to new religions all the time. Are you saying that they were unable to choose to convert? They were already of the converted religion before they converted so it wasn't a choice? Or is the answer that you are only *really* a follower of a given religion if you would never entertain changing any of your religious beliefs (an almost impossible standard - no one meets this)?

Any view that makes religion not a choice is completely incoherent with the idea of conversion.

They convert because they believe the religion is true, and don't really have a choice of that belief. For example if I came to believe that the Book of Mormon was absolutely true then of course I would convert to LDS, it wouldn't make any sense otherwise. Now right now I have the choice to covert to LDS sure...but why would I? It's not the same thing as choosing my cell carrier or whatever.

[Badger]

We need to start throwing bricks again.

Why? Because someone won't design a website for you? That is their right. Find another website designer.

My Religion prohibits interracial marriages. I'm not going to do a website for this couples interracial marriage.

What? They won't serve you in that restaurant? Just find another place to eat. (Pres. Mike 1954, prob)

[Badger]

We need to start throwing bricks again.

Why? Because someone won't design a website for you? That is their right. Find another website designer.

The LGBT agenda was never really about "freedom to do what two people want in the bedroom" which I totally support as stated but it was always eventually about "force social acceptance of a particular lifestyle as mainstream using the power of the state if necessary"

So speaks the moral Authority who has openly stated he would gladly prostitute children for cash if he could. Eff off.

[Pres Mike]

We need to start throwing bricks again.

Why? Because someone won't design a website for you? That is their right. Find another website designer.

My Religion prohibits interracial marriages. I'm not going to do a website for this couples interracial marriage.

What? They won't serve you in that restaurant? Just find another place to eat. (Pres. Mike 1954, prob)

No major religion on Earth prohibits interracial marriage. Faith was a big part of the civil rights movement. From Rev Martin Luther King to Muslim Malcolm X. You know, the whole part of everyone being equal to the eyes of God. Faith was often used for an argument for integration, not segregation. Maybe it was used for the latter idk.

Btw, my grandfather came to America in 1957 from the Middle East. He was a strong supporter of the civil rights movement.

[JGibson]

This atrocious ruling is yet more Christian Conservative privilege and homophobia signed off on by the right-wing radical SCOTUS.

[Donerail]

Can someone explain to me how this isn't effectively an advisory ruling? Like the woman in question was never forced to design any website, let alone a graphic depiction of a gay couple. How on earth is this ripe?

The Court commonly engages in pre-enforcement review of laws that threaten constitutionally protected speech when there is a "credible threat of enforcement." SBA List v. Driehaus. Here, although she was not actually forced to design a website, it is enough that she wanted to do so, and that Colorado has a record of rigorously enforcing its laws against this kind of conduct, that there is a "credible threat" the law would be enforced against her. No party before the Court argued otherwise.

[Inmate Trump]

This may have been discussed, but what’s to stop a business now from declining service to Jews? Muslims? Straight people? Trump supporters? Etc.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Can someone explain to me how this isn't effectively an advisory ruling? Like the woman in question was never forced to design any website, let alone a graphic depiction of a gay couple. How on earth is this ripe?

The Court commonly engages in pre-enforcement review of laws that threaten constitutionally protected speech when there is a "credible threat of enforcement." SBA List v. Driehaus. Here, although she was not actually forced to design a website, it is enough that she wanted to do so, and that Colorado has a record of rigorously enforcing its laws against this kind of conduct, that there is a "credible threat" the law would be enforced against her. No party before the Court argued otherwise.

So like if a state passed a law banning emo music from being played a band could just sue outright? They wouldn't need to wait to play a show and be stopped?