1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

SCOTUS hears arguments on "free speech" against providing a web-site for same-sex couple.

Discussion in 'North American Politics' started by Evangelicalhumanist, Dec 5, 2022.

  1. Evangelicalhumanist

    Evangelicalhumanist "Truth" isn't a thing...
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2013
    Messages:
    14,854
    Ratings:
    +18,434
    Religion:
    None.
    Supreme Court leans toward web designer over refusal to work on same-sex weddings

    So let's talk about that. During oral arguments, Justices in the conservative majority seemed generally supportive of the notion that Smith should not be forced to express sentiments to which she disagrees.

    But the question that bugs me most about this, is that she is not being asked to "express sentiments to which she disagrees." She is being asked to express the sentiments and words of other people, where she is nothing more than the medium -- a loudspeaker, if her customers were addressing a crowd, a technical platform which knows nothing whatever about the sentiments being spoken.

    I mean, think about it. If I'm a typesetter on an old linotype machine (@Revoltingest I've run those, just so you know), laying out a page for a newspaper, amd I expressing sentiments that have anything at all to do with me? Well what the heck's the difference when it's a website?

    Here's the real question: when a newspaper reports somebody else's words, is the newspaper expressing the paper's own sentiments, or those of the person they are reporting? If a bake makes a cake with two grooms, are they expressing somehow involved in the ceremony, or are they just baking a cake (same as for the company that rented them the chairs everybody sat on)?

    Or are they -- really and truly -- merely being just as bigotted as they can possibly be and hoping for approval?
     
    #1 Evangelicalhumanist, Dec 5, 2022
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2022
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. Father Heathen

    Father Heathen Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Messages:
    38,203
    Ratings:
    +25,115
    So from the conservative perspective, if a business (bakery) refuses to offer service to a customer (gay), it's okay.
    But if a business (twitter) refuses to offer service to a customer (bigot), it's not okay.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  3. Koldo

    Koldo Incredible Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2011
    Messages:
    13,033
    Ratings:
    +2,633
    I genuinely see it as fair to refuse the order if the customly designed product contains a message that you personally disapprove. In other words, it is alright to refuse to create a certain product, but it is not alright if you are merely refusing to sell it to someone, or a group, in specific.
     
  4. Aštra’el

    Aštra’el Aštara, Blade of Aštoreth

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2014
    Messages:
    2,873
    Ratings:
    +2,060
    Religion:
    3127
    “Smith sued the state in 2016 because she said she would like to accept customers planning opposite-sex weddings but reject requests made by same-sex couples wanting the same service. She argues that, as a creative professional, she has a free speech right under the Constitution’s First Amendment to refuse to undertake work that conflicts with her own views.”


    I completely approve.

    Artists come in many forms. In America, I would not wish to see someone forced by law to create art which conflicts with- or opposes- their Weltanschauung.

    Besides. If someone is not passionate about what they are working on, they are not the right artist for the job anyway.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Father Heathen

    Father Heathen Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Messages:
    38,203
    Ratings:
    +25,115
    True. If someone is making something begrudgingly, it would negatively impact the quality, and if they're malicious, spit in it. Personally, I would rather not give my money to someone who hates me, anyway.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. Shaul

    Shaul Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2016
    Messages:
    6,782
    Ratings:
    +3,277
    Religion:
    Judaism
    This is a simple misunderstanding. This suave coder knows that computers operate on 1's and 0's. It would not work right with 1's and 1's.
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
  7. Shadow Wolf

    Shadow Wolf Registered People sTabber

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    89,047
    Ratings:
    +41,508
    Religion:
    God is in the Rain
    Yup. They sure have some serious explaining, especially with DeSantis' government mingling of business.
    And the, words I can't say here, she doesn't even do web design. It's crap they even took her case.
     
    #7 Shadow Wolf, Dec 5, 2022
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2022
    • Informative Informative x 1
  8. Heyo

    Heyo Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    13,467
    Ratings:
    +13,057
    Religion:
    none
    Bad analogy. Twitter doesn't refuse to offer service to bigots. They refuse to continue the service when the bigot brakes the TOS.
     
  9. Shadow Wolf

    Shadow Wolf Registered People sTabber

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    89,047
    Ratings:
    +41,508
    Religion:
    God is in the Rain
    And Conservatives have been complaining about that last part, insisting free speech must reign.
    But with people who serve the public claim to have some Christian thing going on, suddenly the only rights that matter are the Christians. Just as their rights matter more than business owner's rights to their own business in the Twitter example.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. PureX

    PureX Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    23,838
    Ratings:
    +13,210
    Religion:
    Philosophical Taoist/Christian
    A business that is open to the general public has to serve the general public, fairly. Free speech has nothing to do with anything. If the business wants to discriminate against factions of the general public, it can become a private co-op. As a private co-op it can discriminate against who it will accept as members so long as it makes it's policy clear when offering membership applications to the public.

    None of this has anything to do with free speech or free expression of religion. It's all about fair business practices. Bigots WANT to reject and insult and inconvenience people they feel they are superior to, to show those people how superior they think they are. And some of them want to use commerce to do that. Just as they did back in the days of Jim Crow. This is all just a return to Jim Crow and the blatant commercial bigotry that went with it.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Winner Winner x 2
  11. Guitar's Cry

    Guitar's Cry The "I" in Reality

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2006
    Messages:
    16,276
    Ratings:
    +7,431
    Religion:
    Panreligious mystical paganism
    Which, she would not be regardless since she can choose not to offer her services publicly.
     
  12. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    42,947
    Ratings:
    +17,802
    Religion:
    Judaism
    Were I a highly skilled web designer, there is simply no way in hell that I would lend my services to Trump's re-election campaign.
     
  13. Heyo

    Heyo Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    13,467
    Ratings:
    +13,057
    Religion:
    none
    Pecunia non olet.
    I wouldn't send away any potential customer. That's bad for business and for your reputation and possibly illegal. Though in Trumps case I'd insist on payment before I start to work.
     
  14. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    42,947
    Ratings:
    +17,802
    Religion:
    Judaism
    Thanks for sharing your ethics.
     
  15. loverofhumanity

    loverofhumanity Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2016
    Messages:
    10,782
    Ratings:
    +5,818
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    It’s a difficult situation. But why would a group supporting same sex marriage want a person who opposes their cause to design their webpage? As a Baha’i I would certainly not want a person who was anti-Baha’i to design a Baha’i website for me.

    In ‘non-essential’ matters I believe conscience should be respected but with essential services such as a doctor or ambulance this stance can in no way be taken.

    As stated. Why would I even think of hiring someone dead against my cause to promote it however indirectly? Look at it another way. Smith will lose business.
     
  16. wellwisher

    wellwisher Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2018
    Messages:
    2,047
    Ratings:
    +689
    Religion:
    Catholic
    The question also becomes do LGBTQ people have the right to sabotage creative businesses? One would naturally assume that if someone is forced to do something, they do not wish to do, that goes against their principles, they will not be able to do their best work; angry and depressed. Their subpar work will then give the customer an excuse to bad mouth them on the net, where now the crook will look like the victim. The crook knew better, but it did not matter, since they were really out for blood.

    Maybe Trump can ask Biden's speech writers to write his speeches. If the speeches, from these die hard Democrats, come out bad, he can get his money back and bad mouth them? They can work for nothing and lose their reputation by being poor speech writers for Trump. Could the speech writer sue or does the business have to bend over and take it? Or will the dual standard apply in this case?
     
  17. loverofhumanity

    loverofhumanity Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2016
    Messages:
    10,782
    Ratings:
    +5,818
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    My understanding is that when it comes to promoting a cause we cannot force others to directly or indirectly help promote it if they are against it. And they would likely not do a good job.
     
  18. PureX

    PureX Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    23,838
    Ratings:
    +13,210
    Religion:
    Philosophical Taoist/Christian
    How would you even know what the cake-maker believes, and you are assuming there are other convenient options. Why can't we just keep our beliefs to ourselves and make cakes for whomever wants them? No religion I know of says it's a sin to make a cake and sell it. No religion I know of says that we are guilty of other people's homosexuality because we sold them a cake celebrating it.

    This is all about feeling morally superior and wanting all those 'sinners' to know it. Which, incidentally, Jesus DID preach against.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  19. Shadow Wolf

    Shadow Wolf Registered People sTabber

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    89,047
    Ratings:
    +41,508
    Religion:
    God is in the Rain
    Then go into a different business where your beliefs will not be put into such a position.
     
  20. loverofhumanity

    loverofhumanity Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2016
    Messages:
    10,782
    Ratings:
    +5,818
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    Everyone has different standards causing conflicts of interest to appear. Neither party should force their standard upon the other. If it’s just a cake no problem. As long as it isn’t taken further trying to gain an endorsement then no problem.
     
Loading...