Supreme Court and LGBTQ Rights

[Bluesuede]

I know we have a few liberal members here who are probably livid with the Supreme Court's ruling in favor of Lorie Smith, a web designer who refused to create websites for same sex weddings. Please try to realize that this case is not about LGBTQ rights and that it is about freedom of speech.

Let's change the facts of the case. Suppose you own a web development business and you believe very strongly that women have a right to abortion. Is it okay for the government to tell you that you cannot turn away a client wishing to create a right to life website? This case is not about denying service to LGBTQ people despite what the headlines may say; it is about the freedom to not have to produce content that conflicts with your beliefs.

 

[Strandberg Junkie]

I'm opening a business specifically so I can turn away all Christians. I don't believe in God so I'm not serving anyone who believes in that voodoo shit.

Wonder how that would fly....

 

[Ben Waylin]

I'm opening a business specifically so I can turn away all Christians. I don't believe in God so I'm not serving anyone who believes that voodoo shit.

Wonder how that would fly....

Will be fine until you get to hell.

?

 

[Stripped Rights]

If someone wants to run a business serving the public then they have to serve the entire public otherwise GTFOOH with your bullshit.

 

[Stripped Rights]

Will be fine until you get to hell.

?

You're making a huge assumption because

WE'LL NEVER KNOW UNTIL WE'RE DEAD!!!

Don't keep your shit up or I'll have to use the word dummy next time and I prefer to avoid insults.

 

[Bluesuede]

I'm opening a business specifically so I can turn away all Christians. I don't believe in God so I'm not serving anyone who believes in that voodoo shit.

Wonder how that would fly....

The case in question does not protect the right to deny service to based on sexual orientation or gender, not any class protected by the Colorado statute. What the decision affirms is the right not to produce content that doesn't align with your beliefs system. This precedent does not allow you to turn away Christians. It does affirm your right to decline creating a website promoting Christianity. Whether or not someone has to the right to deny service to gay people or Christians is an entirely different matter and not within the scope of this case.

Here is a link to the Majority Opinion should you wish to have an informed opinion;


https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-476_c185.pdf

 

[WEF Chairman]

I know we have a few liberal members here who are probably livid with the Supreme Court's ruling in favor of Lorie Smith, a web designer who refused to create websites for same sex weddings. Please try to realize that this case is not about LGBTQ rights and that it is about freedom of speech.

Let's change the facts of the case. Suppose you own a web development business and you believe very strongly that women have a right to abortion. Is it okay for the government to tell you that you cannot turn away a client wishing to create a right to life website? This case is not about denying service to LGBTQ people despite what the headlines may say; it is about the freedom to not have to produce content that conflicts with your beliefs.

I welcome it. This is gonna blow up in their self-righteous faces soooooo bad and I, for one, want to enjoy the next few years of schadenfreude.

 

[Bluesuede]

If someone wants to run a business serving the public then they have to serve the entire public otherwise GTFOOH with your bullshit.

That retort is every bit as eloquent and logic based as PLX's. Well done!

 

[Bluesuede]

Dude, I'm sorry but this is straight up discrimination. I can't run a convenience store and yell the N word, and not serve Blacks on the basis of freedom of speech

You can run a convenience store and yell the N word as much as you want. You cannot legally deny blacks service and in Colorado, you still can't deny LGBTQ people service on that basis either.

 

[WEF Chairman]

LOL, now you can just create a religion that discriminates against anything, and bam!!!!

“Sorry, Mr. Archbishop. Can’t design your website. Nope, can’t do your flier either. I’m with the Church of Anti Kiddierapers”.

 

[Bluesuede]

You can now. You just create a religion where serving blacks is in conflict with your beliefs

I posted a link to the opinion. If you can read, have at it. This forum always reminds me that for every dumbass Trump supporter that believes Trump will get America's steel mills up and running, there is an equally stupid liberal.

 

[Bluesuede]

“Sorry, Mr. Archbishop. Can’t design your website. Nope, can’t do your flier either. I’m with the Church of Anti Kiddierapers”.

You may now legally refuse the Archbishop when he wants you to create a website for the Roman Catholic Church. The case is about First Amendment rights, not LGBTQ rights or the denial thereof.

 

[WEF Chairman]

You may now legally refuse the Archbishop when he wants you to create a website for the Roman Catholic Church. The case is about First Amendment rights, not LGBTQ rights or the denial thereof.

If you believe that there aren’t any workarounds and easily manufactured loopholes you should probably rethink your position. I say this respectfully because you presented this in a straightforward way.

 

[Stripped Rights]

If someone wants to run a public business then they have to serve the entire public. I used to run an auto repair shop and I never turned down bible thumpers even though I don't like that shit. And op I wasn't referring to you in my first response when I said GTFOOH with your bullshit, I was referring to the bigoted business owner.

 

[WEF Chairman]

This is no different than the idiots who insisted on plastering the 10 Commandments everywhere insisting it was a religious freedom guaranteed by the 1st amendment. They learned that for every set of tablets they wanted portrayed, someone was going to come along and plop a big ass Baphomet statue right next to their shit to steal away all the eyeballs while carpetbombing them with butthurt.

 

[Bluesuede]

If you believe that there aren’t any workarounds and easily manufactured loopholes you should probably rethink your position. I say this respectfully because you presented this in a straightforward way.

There are always workarounds and easily manufactured loopholes. I am also not saying that the court will produce a decision that allows discrimination against protected classes and reverses 60 years of progress on civil liberties and civil rights.

But this case isn't about that and the above scenario may never happen.

Thank you for respectfully and thoughtfully commenting. Doing so speaks volumes about you.

 

[jaxadam]

So man, just 4 years of Trump, and we took some massive fucking leaps backwards

What happened? I was out busy doing other shit.

 

[WEF Chairman]

Or the book banning cunts that got their Bible banned under the same rules

That’s my favorite right now.

 

[jaxadam]

Read the thread, else you get no more dick pics from me

Shoot doggie I used to like it so much more when you spelled it picts.

 

[Bluesuede]

If someone wants to run a public business then they have to serve the entire public. I used to run an auto repair shop and I never turned down bible thumpers even though I don't like that shit. And op I wasn't referring to you in my first response when I said GTFOOH with your bullshit, I was referring to the bigoted business owner.

Suppose you ran an auto body shop instead and did custom paint work. Would you want the government to mandate that you airbrush a quote from the Christian Bible in a Roman Catholic Priest's car? Suppose that quote was "Jesus said 'let the little children come to me"?