The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that a web designer can refuse to create websites for same-sex weddings on religious grounds. The case involved a Colorado web designer named Lorie Smith, who refused to create a website for a same-sex couple’s wedding. The couple filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, alleging that Smith’s refusal violated their civil rights.

  • outrageousmatterM
    link
    English
    2811 months ago

    Well, they opened a way for businesses to refuse anyone for religious reason. The future doesn’t look bright now.

    • @joeOP
      link
      English
      1911 months ago

      It doesn’t really even have to be “religious”. Any so-called “strongly held belief” now lets people discriminate.

      • outrageousmatterM
        link
        English
        311 months ago

        Agreed, bet in some states people will hang signs stating “No lgbtq people allowed” or “No black people or asian people allowed” even though under the 14th amendment it protects them but supreme court choice to ignore it because of there own beliefs of hating people because they rather be rich then live under a progressive nation that is back-sliding because of our courts.

    • @cerevant
      link
      English
      1511 months ago

      Yep, they seem to have forgotten that it wasn’t that long ago a strongly held religious belief that blacks were lesser beings and needed to be segregated from proper folk.

      • @macarthur_park
        link
        English
        1011 months ago

        Oh they didn’t forget. That’s just a bonus to them.

    • @Donjuanme
      link
      English
      311 months ago

      The last time the future looked bright for this country I was listening to the radio and heard about the new “grass roots” movement called the"tea party"

    • eltimablo
      link
      fedilink
      211 months ago

      This doesn’t protect them from being socially boycotted though, which will hurt their bottom line more anyway.

    • IHeartBadCode
      link
      fedilink
      111 months ago

      Sotomayor condemned the Court, the very bench she sits on, today in her dissent.

      When the civil rights and women’s rights movements sought equality in public life, some public establishments refused. Some even claimed, based on sincere religious beliefs, constitutional rights to discriminate. The brave Justices who once sat on this Court decisively rejected those claims.

      And the majority’s opinion, they pat themselves on the back by attempting to indicate a limited nature to the degree that the first amendment overrides the protected class status.

      the First Amendment protects acts of expressive association.

      Which all of this does is now hinge “protected classes” on “expressive association”. And where is the line? In this case, the line was “the website will be using the webmaster’s words”. That is the person designing the website is speaking about an event the occurred rather than the people in the event talking about the event that occurred.

      And it’s important to understand, that there is a major difference between “public accommodations” and “private clubs”. Private clubs can openly discriminate as they see fit, they openly indicate they hold no duty to accept the public at large. 303 Creative (the web company in question) is explicitly operating as a public accommodation. And SCOTUS has seen fit today to accept that a company operating as such may openly discriminate because the end product the website will produce has some magical (but ill-defined) amount of their expressiveness put into the end product, that it somehow is more the person who created it and less the person who bought it.

      Sotomayor is rightly so to be beside herself in her dissent. This is a crack in something that’s been pretty rock solid. And with any crack, while today this doesn’t open season discrimination, but this sure as shit gives a big fucking door for that “expressiveness” line to be broaden. And given how quickly we’ve gone from Dobbs to 303 Creative (again that speed is also noted by Sotomayor), that “expressiveness” is absolutely going to be broaden considerably within the lifespan of everyone who is reading this comment.

      It’s not just 303 Creative finally cracking the protective shell of “protected class”, it is the speed at which SCOTUS has been dismantling things that should absolutely bring chills. 303 is one thing, the blinding speed at which all of this has been happening is otherworldly in even the most optimistic attempt to take today’s loss for the LGBTQA+ community. If the last three years have been the tip of the iceberg, the iceberg itself is something no words have the ability to convey properly the degree of horrors that await the LGBTQA+ community.