A Colorado designer says she has a First Amendment right to refuse to create websites for same-sex weddings, despite a state anti-discrimination law. The case will be argued Monday before a Supreme Court that has transformed since a similar case years ago. nyti.ms/3Fq6JOD
@nytimes Sign behind her says stay humble lol 😂 How can you be humble yet be hateful towards others love?
@nytimes Liberals: This is awful. Also, Liberals: We need to exclude white people from certain places so they are safe spaces.
@nytimes If only she had lived in the 1850s and her specialty was picking cotton, it would be clear that it's slavery (involuntary labor, not as punishment) they're trying to force on her.
@nytimes No one should be forced to provide a service to anyone they don't want to. And no one has to pay anyone who doesn't want their business.
@nytimes And today the NYT offered their front page to someone arguing the right-wing case. nytimes.com/2022/12/04/opi…
@nytimes Say what it is, this is a case of human rights versus hatred and discrimination.
@nytimes The first amendment says that the government can't make laws affecting the establishment of religion. However, designing web sites is not a religious practice nor an establishment of religion. It is a commercial practice with no 1A protection.
@nytimes Nobody should be forced to something based on a legitimate religious objection. It is similar to conscientious objector defenses for the draft.
@nytimes It’s not ‘a new clash between faith and gay rights’; it’s a clash between the bigoted, and those who are targets of that bigotry. The problem with those saying “shop elsewhere” is this: what if ALL ‘web designers’ decide gay people aren’t acceptable clients?