Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas
There was one part of the ruling before that was "narrow" in scope that the Supremes ruled ; that this was the one and only time that they will ever have to say as much: religious liberty (deeply held beliefs) will trump all else - the high court will not have to say it again in regards to this issue.
They are as good as telling WA's SC that stare decisis is now in effect which means it was not narrow in scope at all - not one bit. It is precedent setting and every other ruling will have to abide by that.
This is as black and white as it gets:
You do not get to break the will of Jesus Christ in a person here on Earth...simple as that.
They told the WA state SC that not only do they not get to do that but the high court will break the gay whoring (for lack of a better term) of the WA state SC. Not only will they rule against it though, they are going to make Olympia rule it themselves. Washington isn't going to get over ruled on this, they are going to have to climb down on the issue with all the humiliation that comes with it. The message was pretty clear from the Justices.
They had 3 choices. They could have left the lower case ruling stand / dismissed the appeal, they could have over-ruled or they could have sent it back down to the lower courts and force them to correct themselves, and recognize every person's right to worship in the name of Jesus Christ.
I know that some of the language in this was crass but none of it was aimed at you ; States have messed with Christianity too long and Kennedy has both defended the belief that Christians have, and has protected state's rights from an overarching federal statute by dictating that the states must recognize the religious freedom of the land.
Do not mess with God was the loud and clear message here. Every state that now rules injudiciously (in accordance with the precedent set by the previous ruling) will now be open to punitive civil and criminal punishment. This was as decisive a ruling as you can get Damien.
Like you said, the majority of opinions on the original ruling may have thought otherwise but they were wrong. Woefully so. I knew that I was correct on the issue and I stand by it - religious freedom wins the day and the media opinions that ruled it a "narrow" opinion were wrong, plain and simple. It was not narrow in scope and it was not narrow in majority. The ruling stands, sets precedent an the media got it wrong plain and simple.
|
I think you have got slightly carried away here?
Quote:
|
religious liberty (deeply held beliefs) will trump all else
|
I don't think so. The ability of someone to withdraw their labour or deny their business services to someone because their religion has a problem with the situation will always be contextual. You can not have an absolute here.
BTW, what on earth do you mean by "gay whoring"?
---------- Post added at 14:28 ---------- Previous post was at 14:25 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
|
The irony here is that Harley Davidson is an iconic American brand, one that many a Trump supporter would purchase over an imported alternative.