Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You're missing the point... The First Amendment applies in all 50 states.
My point was that you openly admitted that the bakers have the free will to move their business. You simply don't even understand what you posted. Too funny.
I think it's because "moral" laws are scary. You know, like having to wear covering if you're a women because they're(God man) finds it morally questionable if you don't. That kind of thing. Like I said, oily territory.
It's a moral law based on a minority of people in the U.S. It's not akin to murder or robbery, well maybe in Mississippi but not nation wide. What I'm hoping for is a draw of other fundamentalist to Mississippi. That way we can be clear where to go and where NOT to go. Safety first!! We all know what kind of behavior comes after these "justified" moral laws.
Actually, it really has nothing to do with 'moral law'.
If someone asks you to perform a service, and you refuse to do so, the ONLY thing that matters is this: Were the civil rights of the person asking for the service violated? The reason for refusing the service is almost irrelevant. As long as their civil rights aren't violated by your refusal then there is no reason they should be allowed to COMPEL you to do something.
Anybody that mentally effed up needs to be seriously medicated.
I maybe not agree on their morals or lifestyle -but they can use the rest room- get medical care, get a sandwich, or buy groceries- rent a car- get license -- what they heck?
DO people NOT see the same pattern over the years- they just have to HATE somebody! maybe not be the same from 10 yrs ---ago but you will find a new set of folks to hate- what a waste of money to be spent in court in instead of feeding the poor children!!
Actually, it really has nothing to do with 'moral law'.
If someone asks you to perform a service, and you refuse to do so, the ONLY thing that matters is this: Were the civil rights of the person asking for the service violated? The reason for refusing the service is almost irrelevant. As long as their civil rights aren't violated by your refusal then there is no reason they should be allowed to COMPEL you to do something.
It's nothing but "moral" law. mor·al law
noun
plural noun: moral laws
(in some systems of ethics) an absolute principle defining the criteria of right action (whether conceived as a divine ordinance or a truth of reason).
The notion of gays insulting Christians is conceived as a divine ordinance or a truth regarding the belief of some higher power above that cannot be proven to those on earth. It's not based on fact of any kind. It's a belief, like aliens or Allah.
Similar scenario could be hair dressers refusing to do people with blonde hair. Stating that even if born that way, can buy some dye, and conform to dark hair as to be in good moral standing with their God. (Even if you think you are born gay, you can refuse to follow your natural path with religious counsel)
Their belief is just a belief. Their God tells them that people with blonde hair are against what they stand for. Therefore, they have a religious based moral belief to uphold. If not, they are going against their God. People with blonde hair will offend them, and put them through emotional trama. They can't imagine dying blonde roots. There is no difference is these scenarios. It's all based on a belief held. Morals. Plain and simple.
I'm just surprised we can get away with this. I mean, this is America, not the middle east where religious moral law is common.
I maybe not agree on their morals or lifestyle -but they can use the rest room- get medical care, get a sandwich, or buy groceries- rent a car- get license -- what they heck?
DO people NOT see the same pattern over the years- they just have to HATE somebody! maybe not be the same from 10 yrs ---ago but you will find a new set of folks to hate- what a waste of money to be spent in court in instead of feeding the poor children!!
Well said. Yes, agreeing with it or not is fruitless. There are bigger problems. Given the climate, and what we are at war with, I think this could have been put on the back burner for sure.
I'm quite sure that this will not stand in the court challenge that will follow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
That depends. Did anyone expect Hobby Lobby to win their SCOTUS case?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest
The Supreme Court's ruling in Hobby lobby gave birth to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
What that ruling did was establish the legal precedent that a privately held business does not have to compromise the owner/s' religious beliefs if a less-restrictive means of achieving the same result is available. It will overwhelmingly be true that other vendors with no such religious objections to providing goods/services, etc., is available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest
It opened up the door to consider other applications, after all, it was a landmark ruling, notable because it significantly changed the law on this particular issue.
Even Hobby Lobby had to consider the implications or natural consequences to its own business practices. For example, the 401k package of investment choices included offerings in businesses that produced or were involved in the production or sale of birth control products. Would it be consistent to still offer those same investments? I haven't followed up on this aspect but at the time, their investment portfolios included. & there are companies who manage portfolios to avoid the contradiction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
It didn't change the law. It struck down a law that was unConstitutional, providing certain conditions are met (notably: a less-restrictive means of achieving the same result). The First Amendment has always provided the Constitutional Right upheld by SCOTUS in the Hobby Lobby ruling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest
Short on time & this is a large conversation. Do you agree it was a landmark decision? Maybe we could start there. See you next time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
No. It simply upheld individual Rights that had already been established in the First Amendment. But it did go a bit further by requiring the necessity of the availability of a less-restrictive means of achieving the same result in order for the First Amendment Right to remain intact. IMO, that's fair to all. Neither side gets an unrestricted position on the issue.
Can't get abortifacients with your Hobby Lobby health insurance? They can be acquired via other means. So the Court has ruled.
Can't order a wedding cake in one bakery? Order from another which has no such objection.
Etc.
The Supreme Court's ruling in Hobby Lobby Stores Inc. v. Sebelius was a landmark decision.
The Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission was another landmark decision.
Once the Supreme Court recognized constitutional protection for a corporation’s political expression (please see Citizens United ) it was inevitable that corporations would seek recognition for religious expression as well (please see Hobby Lobby Stores Inc.).
Previously, the Bill of Rights applied to people only & not to corporations, artificial persons, legal fictive entities, etc.
Actually, it really has nothing to do with 'moral law'.
If someone asks you to perform a service, and you refuse to do so, the ONLY thing that matters is this: Were the civil rights of the person asking for the service violated? The reason for refusing the service is almost irrelevant. As long as their civil rights aren't violated by your refusal then there is no reason they should be allowed to COMPEL you to do something.
The "reason" is the only thing that matters, all else is irrelevant.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
