Tough ground Bernie. Some other complicating factors, the Colorado Commission tasked with enforcing state law has repeatedly demonstrated anti-religious animus in a way that throws up the red flag of a Title Six of the Civil Rights Act violation. Also, the very content of the Bible, Torah and Quran all disqualify gay sex as being within the bounds of accepted moral practice. Yes, these uncomfortable facts are often theologized around today ( please dear readers spare me the lecture as the theology is NOT my point) however there are many many millions of true believers worldwide who genuinely espouse the written confines of sexual morality as written in clear language in these foundational religious documents. Which state has the right to declare that one may not believe these boundaries if they want to be in a creative business? Colorado believes that it does and has been busy doing so. Constitutionally, there is a conflict between modern interpretations of the 14th Amendment and the classic definition of the 1st. Who wins? Who should win? I myself crossed the old " color line" with my choice of mate in the 1970's...In Birmingham, Alabama...it was NOT popular! It did cost me a portion of my family for nearly 20 years. However, my African-American wife and I never once thought of filing a suit ( Loving v Virginia was clearly the law and will never be struck down). We left those who believed us anything from wrong to evil, alone! We focused on friends, allies and fellow travelers. And now, all of these years later, nearly 20% of the American public are us! Perhaps a step back from the "forcing" idea might be a timely idea.
Confusing issue Bernie but I'm confused from another perspective. Maybe you can set me straight.
Bear with my limited law knowledge, but it appears to me this is another advocacy case that's not up to SCOTUS as it is not in the Constitution. Therefore, state law applies. My memory fades with age but I thought that the purpose of the court system, including SCOTUS, was to settle disputes and not to make law. I'm confused why SCOTUS would even take this on? I hope the conservative members of the court remember how they handled abortion. It's up to the states unless state laws violate the constitution. And if they want to regulate from the federal level, it's up to congress to do so. They tried a few years ago and it never made it out of congress.
Further, I consider myself a Christian Conservative. If I was in Ms. Smith's shoes I would fully provide my web services to gay marriages. God is God and Business is Business. That's my two cents.
Tough ground Bernie. Some other complicating factors, the Colorado Commission tasked with enforcing state law has repeatedly demonstrated anti-religious animus in a way that throws up the red flag of a Title Six of the Civil Rights Act violation. Also, the very content of the Bible, Torah and Quran all disqualify gay sex as being within the bounds of accepted moral practice. Yes, these uncomfortable facts are often theologized around today ( please dear readers spare me the lecture as the theology is NOT my point) however there are many many millions of true believers worldwide who genuinely espouse the written confines of sexual morality as written in clear language in these foundational religious documents. Which state has the right to declare that one may not believe these boundaries if they want to be in a creative business? Colorado believes that it does and has been busy doing so. Constitutionally, there is a conflict between modern interpretations of the 14th Amendment and the classic definition of the 1st. Who wins? Who should win? I myself crossed the old " color line" with my choice of mate in the 1970's...In Birmingham, Alabama...it was NOT popular! It did cost me a portion of my family for nearly 20 years. However, my African-American wife and I never once thought of filing a suit ( Loving v Virginia was clearly the law and will never be struck down). We left those who believed us anything from wrong to evil, alone! We focused on friends, allies and fellow travelers. And now, all of these years later, nearly 20% of the American public are us! Perhaps a step back from the "forcing" idea might be a timely idea.
Confusing issue Bernie but I'm confused from another perspective. Maybe you can set me straight.
Bear with my limited law knowledge, but it appears to me this is another advocacy case that's not up to SCOTUS as it is not in the Constitution. Therefore, state law applies. My memory fades with age but I thought that the purpose of the court system, including SCOTUS, was to settle disputes and not to make law. I'm confused why SCOTUS would even take this on? I hope the conservative members of the court remember how they handled abortion. It's up to the states unless state laws violate the constitution. And if they want to regulate from the federal level, it's up to congress to do so. They tried a few years ago and it never made it out of congress.
Further, I consider myself a Christian Conservative. If I was in Ms. Smith's shoes I would fully provide my web services to gay marriages. God is God and Business is Business. That's my two cents.