SCOTUS sided with Christian Web Designer

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So, you think it is appropriate for people to be FORCED to make statements in which they don't believe?

Do you know what a wedding website is? It has info about hotel blocks and registries. It's not a statement of beliefs.


So? She doesn’t believe in gay marriage. I wouldn’t do it either.

Gay marriage exists. It’s not something to “believe” in. The issue is that she doesn’t like it.


She believes it's an abomination. Christianity has rules against encouraging or participating in other people's win.



It has tons of rules, like no tattoos or shellfish but for some reason some rules are ok to ignore while others aren’t. The belief system is random and illogical.


Christianity doesn't forbid shellfish. Tattoos are iffy.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So, you think it is appropriate for people to be FORCED to make statements in which they don't believe?

Do you know what a wedding website is? It has info about hotel blocks and registries. It's not a statement of beliefs.


So? She doesn’t believe in gay marriage. I wouldn’t do it either.

Gay marriage exists. It’s not something to “believe” in. The issue is that she doesn’t like it.


She believes it's an abomination. Christianity has rules against encouraging or participating in other people's win.



It has tons of rules, like no tattoos or shellfish but for some reason some rules are ok to ignore while others aren’t. The belief system is random and illogical.

Exactly. She’s just cherry-picking church doctrines to find a pretext for her bigotry.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:By inference, the rest of us are now free to discriminate against people who belong to a religious group that believes their authority is based on a guy coming back to life after being murdered by the Romans.


I agree with your anger and I will subtly discriminate against RWNJs but don’t forget race and religion are protected classes under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Gay people are not included. IMO they should. I don’t use contractors who included bible quotes or little fishes in their ads although I’m Christian. Taking back the title from the nutters. Religion has no place in government.


I don't get it. Contractors aren't the government.


You don't get why a liberal Protestant, a Jewish person, a Muslim or an atheist wouldn't want a MAGA in their house doing contracting work, or designing their wedding website? Especially now that they are free to discriminate based ?


No, I don't get what that has to do with separation of church and state. A carpenter who uses Christian theming in their advertising is a private citizen, not engaging in government work.

The only way it makes sense is if you believe that these religious plumbers or whatever are somehow benefitting from the decision that personal service providers are free to not provide service to protected classes. There's no clear benefit to them, since they lose money if they choose to exercise their right to discriminate.

Or if you're saying that you believe that Christian plumbers are of a similar class as supreme court justices, and are therefore a logical target of outrage.

None of this is super logical.


Why would this matter? There is also no clear benefit to the web designer. They also lose money and a customer if they choose to exercise their right to discriminate.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So, you think it is appropriate for people to be FORCED to make statements in which they don't believe?

Do you know what a wedding website is? It has info about hotel blocks and registries. It's not a statement of beliefs.


So? She doesn’t believe in gay marriage. I wouldn’t do it either.

Gay marriage exists. It’s not something to “believe” in. The issue is that she doesn’t like it.


She believes it's an abomination. Christianity has rules against encouraging or participating in other people's win.



It has tons of rules, like no tattoos or shellfish but for some reason some rules are ok to ignore while others aren’t. The belief system is random and illogical.

Exactly. She’s just cherry-picking church doctrines to find a pretext for her bigotry.


Bigotry isn't illegal in and of itself.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:By inference, the rest of us are now free to discriminate against people who belong to a religious group that believes their authority is based on a guy coming back to life after being murdered by the Romans.


I agree with your anger and I will subtly discriminate against RWNJs but don’t forget race and religion are protected classes under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Gay people are not included. IMO they should. I don’t use contractors who included bible quotes or little fishes in their ads although I’m Christian. Taking back the title from the nutters. Religion has no place in government.


I don't get it. Contractors aren't the government.


You don't get why a liberal Protestant, a Jewish person, a Muslim or an atheist wouldn't want a MAGA in their house doing contracting work, or designing their wedding website? Especially now that they are free to discriminate based ?


No, I don't get what that has to do with separation of church and state. A carpenter who uses Christian theming in their advertising is a private citizen, not engaging in government work.

The only way it makes sense is if you believe that these religious plumbers or whatever are somehow benefitting from the decision that personal service providers are free to not provide service to protected classes. There's no clear benefit to them, since they lose money if they choose to exercise their right to discriminate.

Or if you're saying that you believe that Christian plumbers are of a similar class as supreme court justices, and are therefore a logical target of outrage.

None of this is super logical.


Why would this matter? There is also no clear benefit to the web designer. They also lose money and a customer if they choose to exercise their right to discriminate.


Well, I'm not the one talking about boycotting people, you are. Even so, the Christian plumber and web designer can choose to lose money by discriminating. It still doesn't make sense to boycott random Christian tradesmen as a stand against church and state.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So, you think it is appropriate for people to be FORCED to make statements in which they don't believe?

Do you know what a wedding website is? It has info about hotel blocks and registries. It's not a statement of beliefs.


So? She doesn’t believe in gay marriage. I wouldn’t do it either.

Gay marriage exists. It’s not something to “believe” in. The issue is that she doesn’t like it.


She believes it's an abomination. Christianity has rules against encouraging or participating in other people's win.



It has tons of rules, like no tattoos or shellfish but for some reason some rules are ok to ignore while others aren’t. The belief system is random and illogical.


Christianity doesn't forbid shellfish. Tattoos are iffy.



It’s in the Bible.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So, you think it is appropriate for people to be FORCED to make statements in which they don't believe?

Do you know what a wedding website is? It has info about hotel blocks and registries. It's not a statement of beliefs.


So? She doesn’t believe in gay marriage. I wouldn’t do it either.

Gay marriage exists. It’s not something to “believe” in. The issue is that she doesn’t like it.


She believes it's an abomination. Christianity has rules against encouraging or participating in other people's win.



It has tons of rules, like no tattoos or shellfish but for some reason some rules are ok to ignore while others aren’t. The belief system is random and illogical.

Exactly. She’s just cherry-picking church doctrines to find a pretext for her bigotry.


Bigotry isn't illegal in and of itself.

What is your point? There was a law that made her conduct illegal here until SCOTUS shut it down by claiming her bigoted feeling supersede the rights of others.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So, you think it is appropriate for people to be FORCED to make statements in which they don't believe?

Do you know what a wedding website is? It has info about hotel blocks and registries. It's not a statement of beliefs.


So? She doesn’t believe in gay marriage. I wouldn’t do it either.

Gay marriage exists. It’s not something to “believe” in. The issue is that she doesn’t like it.


Exactly. Dumb B could have simply said sorry I can’t take on more work.


Her religion also forbids lying.



Again random and illogical belief system that is exercised at arbitrary moments.


It is still a reason. She shouldn't be required to lie and say she's busy. She should be able to say "I'm religiously opposed to that." That should be legal.

Why? Why should she be allowed to discriminate against people based on something they can’t change about themselves?



More importantly, the book that this religion is based on is full of contradictions. Why do they pick the punishment/negative reaction instead of the loving one?! It’s very strange.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So, you think it is appropriate for people to be FORCED to make statements in which they don't believe?

Do you know what a wedding website is? It has info about hotel blocks and registries. It's not a statement of beliefs.


So? She doesn’t believe in gay marriage. I wouldn’t do it either.

Gay marriage exists. It’s not something to “believe” in. The issue is that she doesn’t like it.


She believes it's an abomination. Christianity has rules against encouraging or participating in other people's win.



It has tons of rules, like no tattoos or shellfish but for some reason some rules are ok to ignore while others aren’t. The belief system is random and illogical.

Exactly. She’s just cherry-picking church doctrines to find a pretext for her bigotry.


Bigotry isn't illegal in and of itself.


+1 Y'all cain't take away mah freedom.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So, you think it is appropriate for people to be FORCED to make statements in which they don't believe?

Do you know what a wedding website is? It has info about hotel blocks and registries. It's not a statement of beliefs.


So? She doesn’t believe in gay marriage. I wouldn’t do it either.

Gay marriage exists. It’s not something to “believe” in. The issue is that she doesn’t like it.


She believes it's an abomination. Christianity has rules against encouraging or participating in other people's win.



It has tons of rules, like no tattoos or shellfish but for some reason some rules are ok to ignore while others aren’t. The belief system is random and illogical.

Exactly. She’s just cherry-picking church doctrines to find a pretext for her bigotry.


Bigotry isn't illegal in and of itself.

What is your point? There was a law that made her conduct illegal here until SCOTUS shut it down by claiming her bigoted feeling supersede the rights of others.


No. No one has a “right” to the services of someone else.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So, you think it is appropriate for people to be FORCED to make statements in which they don't believe?

Do you know what a wedding website is? It has info about hotel blocks and registries. It's not a statement of beliefs.


So? She doesn’t believe in gay marriage. I wouldn’t do it either.

Gay marriage exists. It’s not something to “believe” in. The issue is that she doesn’t like it.


She believes it's an abomination. Christianity has rules against encouraging or participating in other people's win.



It has tons of rules, like no tattoos or shellfish but for some reason some rules are ok to ignore while others aren’t. The belief system is random and illogical.

Exactly. She’s just cherry-picking church doctrines to find a pretext for her bigotry.


Bigotry isn't illegal in and of itself.

What is your point? There was a law that made her conduct illegal here until SCOTUS shut it down by claiming her bigoted feeling supersede the rights of others.


No. No one has a “right” to the services of someone else.

People have rights under the law to not be discriminated against.
Anonymous
I thought conservatives hated cancel culture?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So, you think it is appropriate for people to be FORCED to make statements in which they don't believe?

Do you know what a wedding website is? It has info about hotel blocks and registries. It's not a statement of beliefs.


So? She doesn’t believe in gay marriage. I wouldn’t do it either.

Gay marriage exists. It’s not something to “believe” in. The issue is that she doesn’t like it.


She believes it's an abomination. Christianity has rules against encouraging or participating in other people's win.



It has tons of rules, like no tattoos or shellfish but for some reason some rules are ok to ignore while others aren’t. The belief system is random and illogical.

Anyone wearing mixed fibers and not keeping kosher isn’t living biblically. Somehow these rules are open to interpretation and being flat out ignored, but hating on gays? That’s cool. That’s cool.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:I thought conservatives hated cancel culture?

Only when it’s liberals trying to get people more rights. They hate that. But putting gays back in the closet? That’s the best cancel culture!
Anonymous
I make cakes and costumes. Can I refuse to make anything that has a Christian theme? Can people refuse creative services for churches?

I wonder how long it will just stick to creative services.
post reply Forum Index » Political Discussion
Message Quick Reply
Go to: