Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Non-Cattle Specific Topics
Coffee Shop
Supreme Court Rules in Bakers Favor
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="sstterry" data-source="post: 1508771" data-attributes="member: 28912"><p>If you read the Opinion, Concurrences and Dissent, it was much more narrow than it appears. They avoided the most volatile question, which is like Greybeard said, it is a question of Civil Rights v Freedom of Religion. It is clear that the Baker has "sincerely held" religious beliefs and I do not believe he should be forced to use his artistic talents in a way that would violate these beliefs. By the same token, we can't go back to the days of refusing service to people based on race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. The ruling simply says that the Colorado Agency that imposed the fine did not consider his beliefs and in fact at some points mocked them. I agree with the ruling. As to the competing Constitutional protections, I don't have an answer.</p><p></p><p>As to the Legal Fees, I would be surprised if either of the Parties is paying these. Normally these types of cases are driven by outside groups that are footing the bill.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="sstterry, post: 1508771, member: 28912"] If you read the Opinion, Concurrences and Dissent, it was much more narrow than it appears. They avoided the most volatile question, which is like Greybeard said, it is a question of Civil Rights v Freedom of Religion. It is clear that the Baker has "sincerely held" religious beliefs and I do not believe he should be forced to use his artistic talents in a way that would violate these beliefs. By the same token, we can't go back to the days of refusing service to people based on race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. The ruling simply says that the Colorado Agency that imposed the fine did not consider his beliefs and in fact at some points mocked them. I agree with the ruling. As to the competing Constitutional protections, I don't have an answer. As to the Legal Fees, I would be surprised if either of the Parties is paying these. Normally these types of cases are driven by outside groups that are footing the bill. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Non-Cattle Specific Topics
Coffee Shop
Supreme Court Rules in Bakers Favor
Top