• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case[W:426, 1367]

TheGoverness

TheGoverness

Little Miss Sunshine
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
40,927
Reaction score
55,001
Location
Houston Area, TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/04/poli...do-gay-marriage-cake-supreme-court/index.html

Washington (CNN)The Supreme Court ruled narrowly in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to bake a cake to celebrate the marriage of a same sex couple because of a religious objection.

The ruling was 7-2.
The court held that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission showed hostility toward the baker based on his religious beliefs. The ruling is a win for baker Jack Phillips but leaves unsettled the broader constitutional questions the case presented.
The ruling, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, is not the wide-ranging ruling on religious liberty that some expected. It is tailored to the case at hand with the justices holding that members of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission showed animus toward Phillips specifically when they suggested his claims of religious freedom was made to justify discrimination.
The case was one of the most anticipated rulings of the term and was considered by some as a follow up from the Court's decision two years ago to clear the way for same sex marriage nationwide. That opinion expressed respect for those with religious objections to gay marriage.
Click to expand...

It's official. I pretty much had a feeling that this was going to go this way. Thoughts?
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

TheGoverness said:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/04/poli...do-gay-marriage-cake-supreme-court/index.html



It's official. I pretty much had a feeling that this was going to go this way. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

It is what it is. I find it interesting how SCOTUS seems to be tailoring their rulings to be as narrow as possible lately, setting it up for more cases later. Sometimes it makes sense, other times,. like here, not so much. I do not see what they gain by leaving the question open.

Edit: For some reason the site is running really slow today, and as I was waiting for the page to load back in, oh so slowly, after my post I thought that maybe the reason is to get agreement among the members. Let's agree to rule this way, but make it as narrow as possible, kinda thing. That is pure speculation based on no evidence(which hypocritical me usually bitches when people do), but I suppose is possible.
 
Last edited:
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

TheGoverness said:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/04/poli...do-gay-marriage-cake-supreme-court/index.html



It's official. I pretty much had a feeling that this was going to go this way. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

My thoughts are, Rastafarians have religious objections to the prohibition of MJ, so does that make the prohibition of MJ unconstitutional?

Have Rastafarian found a friend in the American conservative, because this USSC decision gives them firepower to argue that the War on MJ is unconstitutional.

Can we bet on Conservatives standing in principle here, to argue that the ban on MJ is religious persecution?

Anyway, I think the business should be able to turn away whoever they want to, even if it's for bigoted reasons. Who cares, they will ultimately lose business from discrimination. It doesn't make sense from an economic standpoint to discriminate against gays, and is a dumb business strategy, so **** 'em for being bigoted, it's their own ignorance that will make their business suffer.
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

Redress said:
It is what it is. I find it interesting how SCOTUS seems to be tailoring their rulings to be as narrow as possible lately, setting it up for more cases later. Sometimes it makes sense, other times,. like here, not so much. I do not see what they gain by leaving the question open.
Click to expand...

Neither do I. I expected them to address the religious freedom argument with his case, because it's the perfect case to do it with. But I guess we'll just have to wait until someone else brings a similar case to the SC.
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

TheGoverness said:
Neither do I. I expected them to address the religious freedom argument with his case, because it's the perfect case to do it with. But I guess we'll just have to wait until someone else brings a similar case to the SC.
Click to expand...

Note the edit to my post you replied to.
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

Winston said:
Anyway, I think the business should be able to turn away whoever they want to, even if it's for bigoted reasons. Who cares, they will ultimately lose business from discrimination. It doesn't make sense from an economic standpoint to discriminate against gays, and is a dumb business strategy, so **** 'em for being bigoted, it's their own ignorance that will make their business suffer.
Click to expand...

I am in agreement with that sentiment.
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

Redress said:
Edit: For some reason the site is running really slow today, and as I was waiting for the page to load back in, oh so slowly, after my post I thought that maybe the reason is to get agreement among the members. Let's agree to rule this way, but make it as narrow as possible, kinda thing. That is pure speculation based on no evidence(which hypocritical me usually bitches when people do), but I suppose is possible.
Click to expand...

It's happening on your end, too? Hmmm.

And that may be a plausible theory. Certainly doesn't sound out of the realm of possibility to me.
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

I'm still reading the actual opinion (included below.)

Not entirely surprised but the issue still will come down to rights vs. rights, in this case the 1st Amendment against Protected Classes and ultimately the 7-2 decision relies on the "religious hostility" and Free Exercise Clause.

The reason we got here is the main problem, the idea of religious reasons to exclude doing business with someone in the public space.

My concern now is signs in stores showing up saying "No Gays and Lesbians Served," which will end up a repeat of days gone by where "No Negros Served" could be seen. We are taking a step backwards even though the decision itself (of what I have read so far) tries to stay on this case and sidestep the ultimate question of Protected Classes in the public space. And that is another problem anyway, the idea of Protected Classes has ended up a little bit of a mess on when sexual orientation is and is not included in some regulation.

New challenges forthcoming to force the courts to address what they sidestepped today? (Unsure myself.)

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2018/images/06/04/16-111_j4el.pdf
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

TheGoverness said:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/04/poli...do-gay-marriage-cake-supreme-court/index.html



It's official. I pretty much had a feeling that this was going to go this way. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I thought it might be coming as well. And, I think it's a fair ruling. The answer to bigoted bakers is for open-minded people to boycott those business in favor of a more welcoming baker. Money talks, and I, for one, would never buy from a bakery that discriminated. I think social pressure is what eventually changes the world.
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

Felis Leo said:
I'm going to have to read the actual reasoning behind the Court's decision before commenting. I'll try and give my thoughts on it later today.
Click to expand...

Alrighty, friend.
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

Winston said:
My thoughts are, Rastafarians have religious objections to the prohibition of MJ, so does that make the prohibition of MJ unconstitutional?

Have Rastafarian found a friend in the American conservative, because this USSC decision gives them firepower to argue that the War on MJ is unconstitutional.

Can we bet on Conservatives standing in principle here, to argue that the ban on MJ is religious persecution?

Anyway, I think the business should be able to turn away whoever they want to, even if it's for bigoted reasons. Who cares, they will ultimately lose business from discrimination. It doesn't make sense from an economic standpoint to discriminate against gays, and is a dumb business strategy, so **** 'em for being bigoted, it's their own ignorance that will make their business suffer.
Click to expand...

When used in particular religious practices, the use of some prohibited drugs (e.g., peyote) has been protected. It was pretty much the point of the RFRA.
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

Renae said:
Stupid question, but how is a 7-2 ruling "narrowly"
Click to expand...

I think narrow was intended to refer to the scope of the ruling and not the margin
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

Renae said:
Stupid question, but how is a 7-2 ruling "narrowly"
Click to expand...

Scope of the ruling. It doesn't really address the question of religious freedom.
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

Winston said:
My thoughts are, Rastafarians have religious objections to the prohibition of MJ, so does that make the prohibition of MJ unconstitutional?

Have Rastafarian found a friend in the American conservative, because this USSC decision gives them firepower to argue that the War on MJ is unconstitutional.

Can we bet on Conservatives standing in principle here, to argue that the ban on MJ is religious persecution?

Anyway, I think the business should be able to turn away whoever they want to, even if it's for bigoted reasons. Who cares, they will ultimately lose business from discrimination. It doesn't make sense from an economic standpoint to discriminate against gays, and is a dumb business strategy, so **** 'em for being bigoted, it's their own ignorance that will make their business suffer.
Click to expand...

MJ? Michael Jackson?
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

TheGoverness said:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/04/poli...do-gay-marriage-cake-supreme-court/index.html



It's official. I pretty much had a feeling that this was going to go this way. Thoughts?
Click to expand...
I thought it was a cowardly ruling by them. They didn't answer if the baker was within his rights to refuse to make the cake or not.

I'm not even sure what this ruling means. Do we have a new trial in the lower court to answer the original question now?

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

Renae said:
Stupid question, but how is a 7-2 ruling "narrowly"
Click to expand...

Narrow in scope, not narrow in terms of vote.
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

TheGoverness said:
Neither do I. I expected them to address the religious freedom argument with his case, because it's the perfect case to do it with. But I guess we'll just have to wait until someone else brings a similar case to the SC.
Click to expand...

Most people did, but there are other cases coming.

Note, though, that religious freedom isn't the only matter. Free speech -- specifically, compelled speech -- was just as big of an issue, if not even the larger issue, in the case.
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

Felis Leo said:
I'm going to have to read the actual reasoning behind the Court's decision before commenting. I'll try and give my thoughts on it later today.
Click to expand...

Hey, I want to hear them now, I have lunch in 25 minutes.
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

HowardBThiname said:
I thought it might be coming as well. And, I think it's a fair ruling. The answer to bigoted bakers is for open-minded people to boycott those business in favor of a more welcoming baker. Money talks, and I, for one, would never buy from a bakery that discriminated. I think social pressure is what eventually changes the world.
Click to expand...

I kinda go back and forth on this issue, tbh. But I do see that argument as valid. Which is why most businesses to begin with aren't stupid enough to refuse service to gay people. I'm just hoping I'll never ever have to run into a situation like this ever.
 
Re: Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case

trouble13 said:
I thought it was a cowardly ruling by them. They didn't answer if the baker was within his rights to refuse to make the cake or not.

I'm not even sure what this ruling means. Do we have a new trial in the lower court to answer the original question now?

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I think the question is still open. I think we'll have to wait for another case similar to this to go to the SCOTUS, to address the issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom