I hope that this is not a harbinger of court rulings to come from the Supreme Court.
For almost 240 years the First Amendment has been interpreted to mean that laws aimed at certain religion are prohibited while laws that are equally applied to everyone do not violate the First Amendment and now that is being challenged by the religious far right who want to be able to discriminate against people.
At one time there was a compelling government interest test where the government's interest is balanced against the individual's constitutional right to be free of law. But that is being chipped away and is giving carte blanche to “religious freedom.”
What I think is that the Trump courts are narrowly focused on LGBTQ+ discrimination and ignoring the broad issue of using “religious freedom” to overture all discrimination laws protesting minorities.
You can find in religious scripture bases to discriminate against anyone; interracial marriages, other religions, the mixing of sexes, and scriptures were used to justify slavery. The Southern Baptists used the doctrine of the “Curse Of Ham” as a justification for racism so when I see the courts using “religious freedom” to justify discrimination against us I see it as a “slippery slope” opening the door to all discrimination.
Supreme Court sides with Oregon bakery that refused to make cake for same-sex weddingFrom what I could tell of the case, the Oregon courts were very cognizant of the Colorado case and avoided all references to religion.
CNN
By Ariane de Vogue and Devan Cole
June 17, 2019
Washington (CNN) The Supreme Court on Monday wiped away a ruling that went against a bakery in Oregon that refused to make a cake to celebrate the wedding for a same-sex couple.
The justices sent back the case pitting religious liberty concerns against LGBTQ rights to the lower courts for further consideration in light of last term's ruling in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to make a cake for a same-sex couple.
The move puts off a major case that could have been heard next term during the heart of the presidential election and allows the issue to further percolate in the lower courts.
[…]
It was an order of two sentences with no noted dissents.
For almost 240 years the First Amendment has been interpreted to mean that laws aimed at certain religion are prohibited while laws that are equally applied to everyone do not violate the First Amendment and now that is being challenged by the religious far right who want to be able to discriminate against people.
At one time there was a compelling government interest test where the government's interest is balanced against the individual's constitutional right to be free of law. But that is being chipped away and is giving carte blanche to “religious freedom.”
What I think is that the Trump courts are narrowly focused on LGBTQ+ discrimination and ignoring the broad issue of using “religious freedom” to overture all discrimination laws protesting minorities.
You can find in religious scripture bases to discriminate against anyone; interracial marriages, other religions, the mixing of sexes, and scriptures were used to justify slavery. The Southern Baptists used the doctrine of the “Curse Of Ham” as a justification for racism so when I see the courts using “religious freedom” to justify discrimination against us I see it as a “slippery slope” opening the door to all discrimination.
I'm an Oregon lawyer. Oregon appellate courts have not been shy when dealing with remands from the US Supreme Court. I'd bet money the Oregon Court of Appeals stands its ground and affirms it's prior decision on remand.
ReplyDelete