Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/01/o...mendment.html\
As to Mr. Phillips’s free exercise of religion claim, the Supreme Court has said that the First Amendment is not a license to discriminate in the face of neutral, generally applicable laws like Colorado’s. In 1968, a few years after the Civil Rights Act passed, the court ruled unanimously against the owner of a South Carolina barbecue chain who invoked his religious freedom to refuse to serve black people. The act “contravenes the will of God,” he claimed. The court called that argument “patently frivolous.”
That was the paragraph above the one I started quoting. He is argueing more on the freedom of speach than a religious one.
I think all of his wedding cakes where considered "custom" cakes. He would sell them cup cakes or pies - same as everyone else.
|
"As to Mr. Phillips’s free exercise of religion claim, the Supreme Court has said that the First Amendment is not a license to discriminate in the face of neutral, generally applicable laws like Colorado’s"
I don't see that law as "neutral", it forces someone to abandon their beliefs, and for no good reason, assuming there are other bakers nearby.
It's going to bean interesting decision.
Threaded Mode