Posted on Feb 17, 2017
Washington’s Supreme Court Imposes Its Progressive Faith on a Christian Florist
498
32
16
2
2
0
Please read the entire article. The distinction between status and action is not insignificant. Your status at birth should not harm your constitutional protections under the law. But your activities should not override another citizen's constitutional protections. I hope the supreme court reverses this dangerous precedent.
Washington’s Supreme Court Imposes Its Progressive Faith on a Christian Florist
Posted from nationalreview.comPosted in these groups: 
1st Amendment
Constitution
1st Amendment Constitution
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 5
3
3
0
Just another example of Christians wanting an exception to the law so that they can discriminate against others. This is not something new. It happened when the civil rights act protected the rights of blacks to be served food (an action) at a barbecue joint in Alabama. It happened when the right of a white man and black women to be married (an action) in Virginia came up, and Christians all over the south were appalled. Protestants were concerned that JFK was a Catholic, and as such would be under the control of the Pope.
She violated the law, she got called on it. The lesson from this is simple - don't discriminate against a protected class if you are in the business of serving the public. If you can't do that, then you need to do something else for a living.
She violated the law, she got called on it. The lesson from this is simple - don't discriminate against a protected class if you are in the business of serving the public. If you can't do that, then you need to do something else for a living.
(3)
(0)
CWO3 (Join to see)
We all saw something similar in KY a couple of years back, with a County Clerk refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, except it involved a government official. She spent some time in jail for contempt of court to a US District Judge. She should have been fired because she violated her Oath and conditions of employment. It was all staged by a group from FL. They conveniently had Mike Huckabee and the future Gov. of KY on hand, seems Sen. Cruz got some camera time also. You'd know better but to me it seems the states are the test beds for challenges before elevating to SCOTUS. The S-PACS have Roe v Wade in their sights now, as well as anything LGBTQ and protecting anything related to Citizens United.
(2)
(0)
3
3
0
So what's next a pharmacist that doesn't believe in organ transplants refusing to give immunosuppressant drug because it against his religion.
How far down the road is Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, and other religions she doesn't believe in. Should she be aloud to discriminate against them also?
How far down the road is Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, and other religions she doesn't believe in. Should she be aloud to discriminate against them also?
(3)
(0)
PO2 Robert Aitchison
Col Joseph Lenertz - What if the pharmacists religion taught that organ donation was immoral and they refused to provide anti-rejection drugs based on that?
(2)
(0)
Col Joseph Lenertz
PO2 Robert Aitchison - A hypothetical based on a made-up religion. What if your religion required a dog to be sacrificed on the altar at your wedding...could you force the local shelter to sell you dogs to kill?
(1)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
Col Joseph Lenertz - No, because it is illegal to kill animals and there is no religious exception to the animal cruelty laws.
(0)
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
Col Joseph Lenertz - If a city cannot legally stop chicken sacrifices for the Santería faith (Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520 (1993)) why would a state not be able to require a public accommodation to sell animals to another faith. You know, the Hialeah church had to get live chickens from somewhere.
LTC (Join to see) - I disagree that it's illegal to kill animals as a universal concept. In most states, one is allowed to kill their own property, they just can't do it in a cruel manner.
LTC (Join to see) - I disagree that it's illegal to kill animals as a universal concept. In most states, one is allowed to kill their own property, they just can't do it in a cruel manner.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
It seems to me that when one enters the commerce stream, one loses the right to discriminate. f the florists designs floral arrangements for anyone for pay, she should then be obligated to design floral arrangements for everyone for pay, regardless of gender, sexual preference, religion, political view, etc. etc. etc.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google