[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
The Left's War On Christians Title: Religious Freedom Cases Stacking Up BreakPoint: Religious Freedom Cases Stacking Up Court cases across the country continue to point to the big showdown coming soon at the Supreme Court. In the ongoing legal battles over religious freedom, there are advances and setback. One win happened last month. When Amy Larson, a Christian photographer in Wisconsin who declines to photograph so-called same-sex weddings, saw what was happening to similar photographers across the country, she was concerned that her decision would violate local and state law. So, she decided she wasn’t going to shoot any weddings. But she also decided to challenge a local ordinance and the state law. And she won! But on somewhat of a technicality. The court ruled that the ordinance didn’t apply to her because her business didn’t have a storefront. On the other hand, last week, there was a serious setback. Minnesotans and videographers Carl and Angel Larsen serve all people, but, as the Alliance Defending Freedom states, they “draw the line at creating videos celebrating same-sex weddings because of the biblical teaching on marriage.” The Larsens knew that by declining to use their artistic talents to participate in something they believed to be wrong, they could face penalties. What kind of penalties? Well, triple compensatory damages, punitive damages of up to $25,000, and as much as 90 days in jail. Yes, you heard that right. So, like Amy Larsen, they filed what’s called a “pre-enforcement” challenge. It’s a common way of preventing the sort of damage that a bad law can cause. Shockingly, the U. S. judge in their case compared their refusal to participate in gay weddings to “conduct akin to a ‘White Applicants Only’ sign.” As ADF stated, this ruling was “probably the worst language we’ve seen to date” in one of these cases. Then there’s the case of Kentucky T-shirt maker Blaine Adamson. He has long refused business if it meant creating t-shirt designs that contradict either his faith or his moral convictions. For example, he once refused to design a shirt that showed Jesus sitting on a bucket of fried chicken. And he refused business that promoted an “adult film.” Whenever he feels that he can’t design a shirt, he points customers to other t-shirt shops. But it wasn’t until he refused to design a shirt for a gay-pride parade that he was sued. Never mind he regularly serves gay customers, has employed gay employees, and that two lesbian printers have supported his case because “they didn’t want to be forced to print messages that would violate their consciences.” Thankfully, the Kentucky Court of Appeals has sided with Anderson. Of course, all of these developments point to the enormous importance of the pending Supreme Court case Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. I’ve said it before on BreakPoint and I’ll say it again, this case might very well be the religious freedom equivalent of Roe v Wade. Remainder of the article at link: http://www.breakpoint.org/2017/10/breakpoint-religious-freedom-cases-stacking-up/ Subscribe to *Religious History and Issues* Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 5. #1. To: redleghunter (#0) (Edited) One type of case that will be upcoming is the Church of Satan people who are trying to instigate a case where a Christian baker will refuse to bake and decorate a cake to celebrate a gay Satanic marriage. Their intent is to force Christian bakers (never Muslim or any other type of baker) to celebrate Satanism and sodomy in clear contradiction to their own profound religious convictions. SFgate: Satanic Temple urges people to order Satan-themed cakes to protest anti-LGBT bakeries One can only hope the courts will see this for what it is: an attempt to force people to completely violate any religious convictions and enslave them to those holding diametrically opposite views on morality and religion.
#3. To: Tooconservative (#1) One can only hope the courts will see this for what it is: an attempt to force people to completely violate any religious convictions and enslave them to those holding diametrically opposite views on morality and religion. If the liberals on the SCOTUS bench value election results for their comrades in the Legislature, these decisions should be in favor of religious organizations (read Christians because no one else is being challenged). I'm thinking for Americans who used to vote for Dems and now Trump and other populists the decisions should be 9-0 or 8-1. That assumes of course the SCOTUS votes according to partisan politics. We know they don't so why would I be saying any of this. /s :)
#4. To: redleghunter (#3) (Edited) (read Christians because no one else is being challenged) Funny how no one ever tries to force a Muslim bakery (like in Dearborn) to bake a gay Satanic cake, isn't it? Or bake a cake with a representation of Muhammed on it? I think conservatives have missed an opportunity there. They should have dragged the Muslims into it too.
#5. To: Tooconservative (#4) Funny how no one ever tries to force a Muslim bakery (like in Dearborn) to bake a gay Satanic cake, isn't it? Or bake a cake with a representation of Muhammed on it? Well there is this: https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/hidden-camera-gay-wedding-cake-at-muslim- bakery/
Replies to Comment # 5. I've seen it. But you have to go to court and file complaints, not just make YouTube vids about it.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 5. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|