Supreme Court Leans in Favor of a Christian Website Designer’s Right to Turn Away Same-Sex Weddings

Michie

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
165,522
55,220
Woods
✟4,586,217.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others

narnia59

Regular Member
Supporter
Jul 17, 2007
5,746
1,261
✟323,846.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
This seems so simple to me, I just can never get why people can't see it.

Nobody should have to participate in or promote an event or create a message they disagree with.

You shouldn't be able to force a business owner to allow the KKK to meet at their facility. Nor should you be required to print a t-shirt or put a message on a cake that has a racial slur. Nor should you have to decorate for a Nazi rally.

Pretty much everybody on the left would agree with those statements. I remember when Trump was running the first time and some restaurant refused to let a Trump campaign event be held at their business and received great acolades from the left.

Bottom line is they want to decide which events or messages are acceptable or not and force everyone else to comply.

And while I would agree that a restaurant should not be required to host a Trump event, to refuse to seat an individual who supports Trump who just wants to come in and get a table and eat a meal -- that's where the line should be drawn. That's discrimation. The individual is not there to promote their views that you disagree with, they're there to eat a meal. You should serve them like anyone else.

If you just accept that private businesses can control the kind of events or message they allow or promote based upon their beliefs, but cannot discriminate against an individual who wants to receive the same basic service everyone else receives that in no way 'promotes' anything, then it's really just a matter of simple respect.
 
Upvote 0

rturner76

Domine non-sum dignus
Supporter
May 10, 2011
10,484
3,582
Twin Cities
✟725,021.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
Nobody should have to participate in or promote an event or create a message they disagree with.
Does that include interracial marriage? A lot of people don't believe in that either.
 
Upvote 0

narnia59

Regular Member
Supporter
Jul 17, 2007
5,746
1,261
✟323,846.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Does that include interracial marriage? A lot of people don't believe in that either.
If a person can't refuse to host or cater or promote an event where an interracial couple is marrying because they don't believe in interracial marriage, then a person can't refuse to host or cater or promote the KKK when they want to use your venue or services. Or refuse NAMBLA a venue or to cater or promote their event even though they promote pedophilia.

You can't have it both ways. You either have to require people to set aside any and all personal conviction of right and wrong and promote whatever a customer brings to them, or you have to allow any person to say that would conflict with their beliefs so they don't have to provide the service.

I tend to the latter and then let the free market decide if they want to support a business that is willing to promote the KKK or a gay wedding or NAMBLA or whatever event it is. Personal conscience has to count for something.

But what people in general want is it's okay for anyone to deny service to promote something they don't agree with, and it's not okay for them to deny service if it's something they do agree with. That is not workable, nor is it right to give the government or anyone else the right to decide what is okay to deny and what you can't deny. That becomes a dictatorship based upon the personal views of whoever happens to be carrying the biggest stick.
 
Upvote 0

rturner76

Domine non-sum dignus
Supporter
May 10, 2011
10,484
3,582
Twin Cities
✟725,021.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
If a person can't refuse to host or cater or promote an event where an interracial couple is marrying because they don't believe in interracial marriage, then a person can't refuse to host or cater or promote the KKK when they want to use your venue or services. Or refuse NAMBLA a venue or to cater or promote their event even though they promote pedophilia.

You can't have it both ways. You either have to require people to set aside any and all personal conviction of right and wrong and promote whatever a customer brings to them, or you have to allow any person to say that would conflict with their beliefs so they don't have to provide the service.

I tend to the latter and then let the free market decide if they want to support a business that is willing to promote the KKK or a gay wedding or NAMBLA or whatever event it is. Personal conscience has to count for something.

But what people in general want is it's okay for anyone to deny service to promote something they don't agree with, and it's not okay for them to deny service if it's something they do agree with. That is not workable, nor is it right to give the government or anyone else the right to decide what is okay to deny and what you can't deny. That becomes a dictatorship based upon the personal views of whoever happens to be carrying the biggest stick.
I don't think civil rights laws protect pedophilia but it does protect race and sex. It's not a dictatorship it's the majority ruling the minority as in a democracy. You can't take your minority view and rule over the majority.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: RDKirk
Upvote 0

narnia59

Regular Member
Supporter
Jul 17, 2007
5,746
1,261
✟323,846.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I don't think civil rights laws protect pedophilia but it does protect race and sex. It's not a dictatorship it's the majority ruling the minority as in a democracy. You can't take your minority view and rule over the majority.
The US is not a democracy it is a republic, and there are any number of examples where the minority has ruled the majority both to the benefit and detriment of society. Civil rights laws were forced upon state governments in many cases where the majority of the citizens wouldn't have ever agreed to them, but that was to the common good. Even the electoral college often has the minority ruling the majority in the outcome of a presidential election. We are not a majority-rule democracy for good reason. Majority rule does not mean morality rules.

Civil rights protect unjust discrimination agaist individuals, or they are supposed to.

There is a fundamental difference in providing a generic service to someone like a meal in a restaurant and providing service for an event that has some instrinsic meaning to itself.

If a person walked into a bakery and requested a cake for their daughter that said "Happy birthday Mary" and the person said I won't do that because you're black, or you're gay, or you're a Muslim -- that is indeed unujust discrimination. It has nothing to do with the message on the cake or the event being celebrated, it has to do with the personhood of the requestor.

But if two gay people walk in and want a cake to celebrate their event, that is something different entirely. The baker would make them a birthday cake, or a graduation cake etc, just not a cake celbrating this specifc event. It's not their personhood that is being rejected, it is the instrinsic meaning of the event. Or if Bykota Baptist Church wants a t-shirt shop to print them a bunch of shirts that match their signage that God hates gay people, that is a message the shop owner should not have to provide because of the intrinsic meaning of the message. But if they refuse to print a shirt for them with a message they would print for anyone else just because they don't like them, that would be unjust discrimination.

It's a tricky subject, but if you disallow people to have any conscience protections in the service they provide then that has to be absolute and apply to everyonce across the board, regardless of what the majority thinks about any particular situation.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

rturner76

Domine non-sum dignus
Supporter
May 10, 2011
10,484
3,582
Twin Cities
✟725,021.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
If a person walked into a bakery and requested a cake for their daughter that said "Happy birthday Mary" and the person said I won't do that because you're black, or you're gay, or you're a Muslim -- that is indeed unujust discrimination. It has nothing to do with the message on the cake or the event being celebrated, it has to do with the personhood of the requestor.
I see your point and like you said it is tricky because civil rights laws are put against religious freedom in a way
 
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
I see your point and like you said it is tricky because civil rights laws are put against religious freedom in a way
Part of the problem is political correctness: I.e. current dogma is that chosen sexual orientation IS the personhood, as though it is as much the DNA as skin color, and no more a choice than one's ancestry.

Some restaurants reserve the right to eject anyone not dressed in formal attire, or that smell bad, or even those with Tourette's Syndrome, who literally can't control their mouth.

Do you get to wear just whatever you want as a patient in a hospital?
 
Upvote 0

Wolseley

Beaucoup-Diên-Cai-Dāu
Feb 5, 2002
21,074
5,546
63
By the shores of Gitchee-Goomee
✟272,889.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I tend to the latter and then let the free market decide if they want to support a business that is willing to promote the KKK or a gay wedding or NAMBLA or whatever event it is.
When I was stationed at an airbase in upstate New York, there was a Christian bookstore that had bought a big commercial building and was in the process of re-furbishing it to expand the room they needed as their business grew.

One of the things the building had was a bowling alley in the basement area, with a separate entrance in the back. Rather than gutting the bowling alley, they decided to re-furbish that, too, and re-open it as a family friendly venue. Critics laughed and said it would go broke within ninety days, because there was "no way" a bowling alley could stay in business without offering the sale of alcohol, tobacco, and loud, secular music playing in the background.

Much to their shock, it became one of the most successful alleys in the entire city; turns out that families liked having an alley they could take their kids to and not have them exposed to alcohol, tobacco, and nasty secular music, just a good, family-friendly, fun time. Church leagues started nearly immediately, as well as various Christian clubs, and very soon, the bowling alley was pulling in nearly more money than the bookstore was. It reached the point where the other alleys were losing business, because the church leagues, etc., switched to the Christian alley.

I'd say that's a pretty fair example of the free market and personal choice made the decision as to whether a venue survived or not.
 
Upvote 0

narnia59

Regular Member
Supporter
Jul 17, 2007
5,746
1,261
✟323,846.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I see your point and like you said it is tricky because civil rights laws are put against religious freedom in a way
What it boils down to unfortunately now is the group that is loudest (not necessarily the majority) wants to define for everyone what is and isn't acceptable to support.

They want to force people to support a same-sex wedding event even though they may disagree with that. But the same people cheered loudly when a restaurant refused to book a Trump event. They were perfectly okay when a restaurant refused to host a private conservative Christian group because they disagreed with what they stood for (called them bigoted). It seems it's perfectly okay to discriminate against people because of their religion or politics, as long as they don't align with your religion and politics.

That's why I think the best solution is to separate generic service to an individual from service to an event that has an intrinsic meaning. And I think anyone should have a right to refuse to service an event if it conflicts with their beliefs. But however it lands it has to be consistent, and now it is not.
 
Upvote 0

rturner76

Domine non-sum dignus
Supporter
May 10, 2011
10,484
3,582
Twin Cities
✟725,021.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
What it boils down to unfortunately now is the group that is loudest (not necessarily the majority) wants to define for everyone what is and isn't acceptable to support.

They want to force people to support a same-sex wedding event even though they may disagree with that. But the same people cheered loudly when a restaurant refused to book a Trump event. They were perfectly okay when a restaurant refused to host a private conservative Christian group because they disagreed with what they stood for (called them bigoted). It seems it's perfectly okay to discriminate against people because of their religion or politics, as long as they don't align with your religion and politics.

That's why I think the best solution is to separate generic service to an individual from service to an event that has in intrinsic meaning. And I think anyone should have a right to refuse to service an event if it conflicts with their beliefs. But however it lands it has to be consistent, and now it is not.
Or they could just seek for people to mind their own business and just do their job
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

RileyG

Veteran
Angels Team
Feb 10, 2013
14,081
7,990
28
Nebraska
✟235,263.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
Does that include interracial marriage? A lot of people don't believe in that either.
Interracial marriage (not a moral evil) and same-sex "marriage" (a moral evil) are NOT the same.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: WarriorAngel
Upvote 0

RileyG

Veteran
Angels Team
Feb 10, 2013
14,081
7,990
28
Nebraska
✟235,263.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
Or they could just seek for people to mind their own business and just do their job
No. Forcing someone to go against their conscience is not ok. Ever. There is no such thing as a same-sex "marriage" regardless if it is legal or not. The Church does not recognize it. Those with same-sex attractions are called to a life of chastity for the sake of their salvation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wolseley
Upvote 0

RileyG

Veteran
Angels Team
Feb 10, 2013
14,081
7,990
28
Nebraska
✟235,263.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
This seems so simple to me, I just can never get why people can't see it.

Nobody should have to participate in or promote an event or create a message they disagree with.

You shouldn't be able to force a business owner to allow the KKK to meet at their facility. Nor should you be required to print a t-shirt or put a message on a cake that has a racial slur. Nor should you have to decorate for a Nazi rally.

Pretty much everybody on the left would agree with those statements. I remember when Trump was running the first time and some restaurant refused to let a Trump campaign event be held at their business and received great acolades from the left.

Bottom line is they want to decide which events or messages are acceptable or not and force everyone else to comply.

And while I would agree that a restaurant should not be required to host a Trump event, to refuse to seat an individual who supports Trump who just wants to come in and get a table and eat a meal -- that's where the line should be drawn. That's discrimation. The individual is not there to promote their views that you disagree with, they're there to eat a meal. You should serve them like anyone else.

If you just accept that private businesses can control the kind of events or message they allow or promote based upon their beliefs, but cannot discriminate against an individual who wants to receive the same basic service everyone else receives that in no way 'promotes' anything, then it's really just a matter of simple respect.
As always Narn, you said it best!
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,140
20,185
US
✟1,441,619.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If a person can't refuse to host or cater or promote an event where an interracial couple is marrying because they don't believe in interracial marriage, then a person can't refuse to host or cater or promote the KKK when they want to use your venue or services. Or refuse NAMBLA a venue or to cater or promote their event even though they promote pedophilia.

You can't have it both ways. You either have to require people to set aside any and all personal conviction of right and wrong and promote whatever a customer brings to them, or you have to allow any person to say that would conflict with their beliefs so they don't have to provide the service.

I tend to the latter and then let the free market decide if they want to support a business that is willing to promote the KKK or a gay wedding or NAMBLA or whatever event it is. Personal conscience has to count for something.

But what people in general want is it's okay for anyone to deny service to promote something they don't agree with, and it's not okay for them to deny service if it's something they do agree with. That is not workable, nor is it right to give the government or anyone else the right to decide what is okay to deny and what you can't deny. That becomes a dictatorship based upon the personal views of whoever happens to be carrying the biggest stick.

No, you don't. There are only four classifications (five in some states) for which such discrimination is illegal, and that's based on nothing more than "we said so."
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

WarriorAngel

I close my eyes and see you smile
Supporter
Apr 11, 2005
72,739
9,305
United States Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟428,786.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Interracial marriage (not a moral evil) and same-sex "marriage" (a moral evil) are NOT the same.
I was going to reply, but just walked away.
Thank you for your response.
 
Upvote 0