June 12, 2018
Daily Pat Political Point. SCOTUS says business owners might have the Constitutional right to deny services based on religious freedom. Refresh the screen if the audio clip isn’t available at first.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to create a cake for a same-sex wedding for religious purposes.
While giving the baker and his supporters a victory, The Court failed to make a full decision on whether business owners have the right to deny services to others based on religious beliefs.
The majority also ruled that businesses can’t hide behind religion to violate Civil Rights laws.
However, this decision, while narrow, does give those citing religious freedom a little daylight to do just that.
A big shame in this case is that not one Justice challenged the baker on his belief.
The Constitution protects religious liberty. We are free to follow the faith of our choice, including the right not to believe.
While having that essential freedom, if a person is using the religious freedom argument to evade a law, shouldn’t there be some text in the cannon to support that argument?
Yes, the Old Testament in Leviticus states “man is the husband” and woman is “wife.”
But the New Testament is separate from the Old. In fact, Jesus overturns the old laws in Acts.
He says absolutely nothing about gay marriage. Not one word!
He never says it’s a sin. He never says gay marriage is wrong.
And if for some reason the baker says his religion is against gay marriage, one must assume he’s Jewish. Because we then have to assume he believes it’s a sin to eat shellfish, or for a man to trim his beard.
But in the end, that doesn’t matter because the baker isn’t Jewish! He’s Christian! And nowhere in the New Testament does Jesus say one negative word–no, strike that–he doesn’t say one word about gay marriage!
I thought Jesus’s whole point was to love one-another. This “Jesus preached to discriminate people” is a Jesus I’m not real familiar with.
I mean, in the Gospel Of John, I believe Jesus told us to “love one another as I have loved you.”
What kind of Christianity is this baker practicing?
Why this very important issue didn’t arise in this case is stunning.
However, Justice Kennedy’s opinion might play a key role in one upcoming case.
Kennedy ruled in favor of the baker due to the “hostile” questioning of his faith by state officials.
That reasoning could nullify a certain President’s ban on certain group of people who are of the Muslim faith from entering the United States.
Now, that would be ironic, wouldn’t it?