Quote:
Originally Posted by zimmy
It is discriminatory to refuse the service of baking the cake because of the association between where/when it is eaten and the clients' sexuality
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
It is interesting how those who claim that the First Amendment or other rights derived from the structure of the Constitution are not absolute, yet then claim an absoluteness to various legal interpretations of those Amendments and rights.
As I have said several times in other threads, constitutional rights cannot contradict themselves. They work in concordance with each other. The right of free association, and the right to freely dispose of or use personal property cannot negate another's right to the same.
Granted that a seller of property cannot, without contractual agreement, prohibit how the buyer uses that property once it is paid for, nor prohibit with whom the buyer associates when using his product once it is paid for. But it is also the right of the seller not to sell, and also the right of the seller to associate with whom he chooses. Neither, in either case, is denying the other's "rights." If one or the other is forced to deny his own right to satisfy the other's desire, that is tyranny, not a case of constitutional property rights, nor an instance of freedom of association, certainly not a support, in this case, of religious freedom.
Threaded Mode