Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Initech

(100,081 posts)
Mon Jun 4, 2018, 07:56 PM Jun 2018

Religious Right Ecstatic Over Supreme Court Ruling On Baker Who Refused Wedding Cake For Gay Couples

Anti-LGBTQ groups celebrated Monday’s Supreme Court ruling in a much-watched case involving a baker who violated Colorado’s anti-discrimination laws by refusing to make a custom wedding cake for a gay couple.

The baker had argued that making a wedding cake for the gay couple would violate his religious beliefs and freedom of speech, and the case was seen as a major test of the Religious Right’s effort to firmly establish in law the standard that a business owner’s religious beliefs trump nondiscrimination laws when it comes to LGBTQ people and same-sex couples. Religious Right leaders celebrated the ruling in favor of the baker even though the Court did not go as far as they had hoped.

The Court found that comments made by members of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission reflected disrespect toward the baker’s religious beliefs, which violated his right to fair treatment in a way that reflected government hostility toward religion. So the Court ruled against the state without addressing the broader constitutional questions about nondiscrimination laws and business owners with anti-LGBTQ beliefs.

Anti-LGBTQ activists were ecstatic. “God bless America. Glory Hallelujah,” radio host and “conservative warrior” Wayne Allen Root declared. The American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer called it “a huge victory for religious liberty in our winnable war!” Fischer, never one to treat LGBTQ people with respect, sneered at what he calls “sodomy-based ‘marriage.’” Matt Barber called it ”the biggest culture war game changer in decades,” adding, “It cannot be overemphasized what a historical win this is for #ReligiousLiberty and “what a devastating blow it is to the homofascist #LGBTQ political agenda.” Ted Cruz celebrated “a major victory for religious liberty.”
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/religious-right-ecstatic-over-supreme-court-ruling-on-baker-who-refused-wedding-cake-for-gay-couple/


I am so embarrassed to be breathing the same air as these fucking assholes. I hope they will get theirs one day.
18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Igel

(35,320 posts)
6. If you've looked around here,
Mon Jun 4, 2018, 09:16 PM
Jun 2018

there are a lot resistant to the idea that this doesn't legitimize anti-gay discrimination in violation of public accommodation statutes.

Mirrors reflect. .tcelfer srorriM.

 

EffieBlack

(14,249 posts)
7. No wonder they think so given the conniptions that liberals who are having over it.
Mon Jun 4, 2018, 09:19 PM
Jun 2018

Talk about an overreaction ...

DonCoquixote

(13,616 posts)
17. never forget
Mon Jun 4, 2018, 11:19 PM
Jun 2018

while this was not the victory they think it is, these bastards can take a slice and make a bakeries worth of loaves.

roamer65

(36,745 posts)
9. You beat me to it.
Mon Jun 4, 2018, 09:22 PM
Jun 2018


Hopefully the Roman Empire is revived through the EU and starts it up again.

If there is an Anti-Christ that eventually rules the EU, he/she has my full support for persecution.

angrychair

(8,702 posts)
5. The greatest impact will be outside the courtroom
Mon Jun 4, 2018, 08:34 PM
Jun 2018

Not inside.

What they know is their side won 7-2

That the court said that Mr. Phillips was actually discriminated against by the evil lefty government

That the gay couple got nothing

That Mr. Phillips doesn’t have to bake cakes for gay people

Is that the whole and actual truth? No.

Do they care? No.

They see this as a significant win for themselves as they see it as a both validation and vindication of their position and will empower them toward greater hatred and bigotry.

We can talk all day about a nuanced reading of the court opinion but it will fall on deaf ears and not change the news headlines by one letter.





 

EffieBlack

(14,249 posts)
8. We're not helping any
Mon Jun 4, 2018, 09:20 PM
Jun 2018

by acting like the decision is huge conservative victory, when it's nothing of the kind.

angrychair

(8,702 posts)
13. To you it's not
Mon Jun 4, 2018, 10:08 PM
Jun 2018

To them it is a sign that god is on their side and trump is the new god. That is the only thing that matters. Their is very real discrimination and hate and vile that LGBT people while not gets in spades because of this ruling.

Kennedy hinged his entire ruling on a single comment by a single commissioner.

The statement in question was:
”freedom of religion and religion has been used to justify all kinds of discrimination throughout history, whether it be slavery, whether it be the Holocaust.”

That statement is factual and historically accurate. More importantly is that Kennedy fails to substantiate how specifically that comment influenced the entire proceedings before the commission. There was no evidence presented that it did.
That isn’t just my opinion, that is the written opinion of Justice Ginsburg:

“What prejudice infected the determinations of the adjudicators in the case before and after the commission?” Justice Ginsburg asked. “The court does not say.”


Plus, as was stated in CO Appeals Court ruling:
...Mr. Phillips’s free speech rights had not been violated, noting that the couple had not discussed the cake’s design before Mr. Phillips turned them down.”


Plus it was the contention of his lawyer that the couple could have purchased any pre-made cake that Mr. Phillips had made from the shelf but oddly they too were cakes he had made but the same “closely held religious beliefs” didn’t apply to them.
How closely held could they have been then? Are not those cakes also made by him an extention of his speech?
Oddly there is no mention of him saying that to the couple at the time. It appears as little more than convenient out after the fact.

In the end this creates a very real world situation that gives religious zealots the green light to say and do what they want because they “won” today.

angrychair

(8,702 posts)
12. It is a big deal
Mon Jun 4, 2018, 09:48 PM
Jun 2018
Some gay rights groups took a darker view of the decision. “The court today has offered dangerous encouragement to those who would deny civil rights to L.G.B.T. people,” said Rachel B. Tiven, the chief executive of Lambda Legal. “We will fiercely resist the coming effort that will seek to turn this ruling into a broad license to discriminate.”

Reference: https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.amp.html

The point I’m making. Go read the comments in the NYT article. It’s fillex to the brim with an entrenched perspective that they were proven right in this case.

The victory is not hollow and it’s long term implications are very real, maybe not in the courtroom but in the real world.

pnwmom

(108,980 posts)
14. The decision says it doesn't apply to other situations. It doesn't give other people license
Mon Jun 4, 2018, 10:19 PM
Jun 2018

to discriminate.

The decision wasn't optimal. But they got 7 Justices to agree that most discrimination against gay people is illegal. And that's a step forward.

angrychair

(8,702 posts)
15. Not really
Mon Jun 4, 2018, 10:32 PM
Jun 2018

What they got was 7 justices to publicly buy into a weak and unsubstantiated conjecture posited by Kennedy that a single comment by a single commissioner somehow influenced the entire proceedings without a scrap of evidence to support it.
That isn’t just my opinion, that is the written opinion of Justice Ginsburg:

“What prejudice infected the determinations of the adjudicators in the case before and after the commission?” Justice Ginsburg asked. “The court does not say.”


So why would they would they agree to an obviously weak argument that wouldn’t float in a law school classroom? I have no idea but I know enough to know that the whole things hinges on a massive exaggeration of what is otherwise a factual and historically accurate statement by that commissioner:

freedom of religion and religion has been used to justify all kinds of discrimination throughout history, whether it be slavery, whether it be the Holocaust.

pnwmom

(108,980 posts)
16. By joining in the opinion they got a chance to influence the document.
Mon Jun 4, 2018, 11:02 PM
Jun 2018

If they hadn't Kennedy might not have included the passage about the decision not extending to other situations.

Volaris

(10,272 posts)
18. They think all those things because they didn't actually READ the opinion,
Mon Jun 4, 2018, 11:43 PM
Jun 2018

And they're letting FoxNews do the heavy lift of LITERACY for them.

As I understand it, the Court kicked it back down to Colorado State on a technicality, with instructions to 'do it again, DO IT EXACTLY THE SAME WAY, but next time don't be dicks about it.'

Not sure why anyone on our side is freaking out about it.

pnwmom

(108,980 posts)
10. Let's see. Which is a bigger win? Legal same sex marriage in all 50 states.
Mon Jun 4, 2018, 09:23 PM
Jun 2018

Or a ruling that says it was wrong to go after a particular cake baker in the way they did, in a SCOTUS case that sets no precedent.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Religious Right Ecstatic ...