A supposed requt for a webse for a same-sex weddg played a mor role a major clash between ee speech and gay rights at the Supreme Court.
Contents:
- SUPREME COURT TO CI WHETHER SOME BS N REFE TO SERVE GAY CTOMERS
- GAY RIGHTS VS. FREE SPEECHSUPREME COURT BACKS WEB DIGNER OPPOSED TO SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
- WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT A SEEMGLY FAKE DOCUMENT A GAY RIGHTS CASE
- FIRG OF GAY CATHOLIC SCHOOL TEACHER ULD TT LATT SUPREME COURT LG
- TEN REASONS TO SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE
SUPREME COURT TO CI WHETHER SOME BS N REFE TO SERVE GAY CTOMERS
The bans on gay marriage 13 stat across Ameri have been led unnstutnal. * gay marriage legal services *
Comparg that evolutn to society's views of gays and lbians, Kennedy noted that for years, "a tthful claratn by same-sex upl of what was their hearts had to rema unspoken. Together, they volve a dozen upl who challenged same-sex marriage bans Oh, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennsee — the only stat wh bans on marriage between gay and lbian upl that had been staed by a feral appeals urt. Before Friday's lg, gay marriage had already been ma legal 37 stat and the District of Columbia — by eher legislative or voter actn or by feral urts that overturned state' bans.
As NPR's Na Totenberg reported when the Supreme Court heard the current se back April, nservative jtic had poted qutns for the attorneys: "Jtice Slia asked whether misters would be able to refe to marry two gay men. He said, but that uld happen — uld happen that a mister would be forced to marry two gay men, vlatn of his beliefs. The urt noted the change thkg, statg: "Well to the 20th century, many Stat nmned same-sex timacy as immoral, and homosexualy was treated as an illns.
Qutns about the legal treatment of gays and lbians soon reached the urts, where they uld be discsed the formal disurse of the law.
GAY RIGHTS VS. FREE SPEECHSUPREME COURT BACKS WEB DIGNER OPPOSED TO SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
* gay marriage legal services *
By one vote, the urt l that same-sex marriage nnot be banned the Uned Stat and that all same-sex marriag mt be regnized natnwi, fally grantg same-sex upl equal rights to heterosexual upl unr the 1971, jt two years after the Stonewall Rts that unofficially marked the begng of the stggle for gay rights and marriage equaly, the Mnota Supreme Court had found same-sex marriage bans nstutnal, a precent which the Supreme Court had never challenged.
As homosexualy gradually beme more accepted Amerin culture, the nservative backlash was strong enough to force Print Bill Clton to sign the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), prohibg the regnn of same-sex marriag at the feral level, to law 1996.
WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT A SEEMGLY FAKE DOCUMENT A GAY RIGHTS CASE
Obergefell origated wh a gay uple, Jim Obergefell and John Arthur, who were married Maryland, where same-sex marriage was legal, but whose marriage was not regnized by Oh thori. In a landmark cisn, the ne jtic of the US Supreme Court led that the US Constutn guarante marriage as a right for all, cludg gay and lbian upl.
FIRG OF GAY CATHOLIC SCHOOL TEACHER ULD TT LATT SUPREME COURT LG
Wrg for the urt, Jtice Kennedy said gay and lbian upl have a fundamental right to marry: “no unn is more profound than marriage, for embodi the hight ials of love, fily, votn, sacrifice, and fay, ” he wrote. They clud Judh Kasen-Wdsor, widow of gay rights activist Edie Wdsor; Matthew Hayn, -owner of Club Q, the LGBTQ club Colorado Sprgs where a gunman last month killed five people a mass shootg; Club Q shootg survivors Jam Slgh and Michael Anrson; and a number of platiffs om s that culmated the landmark civil rights se Obergefell vs. Philanthropist and Democratic donor David Boht, who has been an outspoken gay- and transgenr-rights activist and longtime supporter of Bin, told CNN that Tuday’s bill signg uld not e at a more ccial moment.
“[Bin] has monstrated his support for s for lbian and gay civil rights, and Tuday’s signg to law is a reaffirmatn of that durg this time when rights are unr asslt, ” Boht said.
TEN REASONS TO SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE
Acrdg to the Texas judicial missn’s 2019 warng, Hensley referred gay upl who wanted her to pri over their marriage ceremony to other people who would officiate. The Supreme Court said Tuday will ci whether certa bs wh relig objectns n refe to offer their servic for same-sex weddgs, a qutn has nsistently ducked sce s landmark gay marriage lg se volv a Colorado webse signer, Lorie Smh, who planned to expand her bs to serve upl gettg married. ImageLorie Smh said her Christian fah requir her to turn away ctomers seekg servic to celebrate same-sex Woolf for The New York TimThe Supreme Court sid on Friday wh a web signer Colorado who said she had a First Amendment right to refe to sign weddg webs for same-sex upl spe a state law that forbids discrimatn agast gay people.
’”The se, though amed as a clash between ee speech and gay rights, was the latt a seri of cisns favor of relig people and groups, notably nservative cisn also appeared to suggt that the rights of L. The liberal jtic viewed as somethg else entirely — a dispute that threatened societal protectns for gay rights and rolled back some recent an impassned dissent, Jtice Sonia Sotomayor warned that the oute signaled a return to a time when people of lor and other mory groups faced open discrimatn. ”A Colorado law forbids discrimatn agast gay people by bs open to the public as well as statements announcg such discrimatn.
The dissentg jtic, he wrote, foced on “the stris gay Amerins have ma towards securg equal jtice unr law. Kavangh and Amy Coney Barrett, shifted the urt to the urts have generally sid wh gay and lbian upl who were refed service by bakeri, florists and others, lg that potential ctomers are entled to equal treatment, at least parts of the untry wh laws forbiddg discrimatn based on sexual owners of bs challengg those laws have argued that the ernment should not force them to choose between the requirements of their fahs and their livelihoods. A baker refed to make a weddg ke for their receptn on relig Cote for The New York TimHad there been an actual gay person who was refed a weddg-related service at the center of 303 Creative L.