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:
- HOW 2013 BEME THE GREATT YEAR IN GAY RIGHTS HISTORY
- THE SUPREME COURT L FOR A SIGNER WHO DON’T WANT TO MAKE WEDDG WEBS FOR GAY UPL
- I WAS PART OF 303 CREATIVE'S CASE. I BACK GAY MARRIAGE—BUT SCOTUS IS RIGHT
- THE SUPREME COURT’S BLSG OF ANTI-LGBTQ+ DISCRIMATN WILL HNT GAY COUPL
- WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT A SEEMGLY FAKE DOCUMENT A GAY RIGHTS CASE
HOW 2013 BEME THE GREATT YEAR IN GAY RIGHTS HISTORY
Gays and lbians celebrated historic gas Wednday their fight agast laws limg same-sex marriag. * supreme court 2013 gay *
While the lgs fell short of the goal same-sex marriage advot have set – elimatg all laws limg the rights of gays and lbians to marry – celebratns epted outsi the Supreme Court, as well as San Francis and around the untry. A divid high urt also hand a victory to same-sex proponents when cleared the way for gay and lbian upl to marry California, dismissg an appeal to the state’s voter-approved Proposn 8 that banned such marriag. “Today’s historic cisns put two giant cracks the dark wall of discrimatn that separat mted gay and lbian upl om full equaly, ” said Chad Griff, print of the Human Rights Campaign, who lled the lgs “a joyo tone.
ImageLorie Smh said her Christian fah requir her to turn away ctomers seekg servic to celebrate same-sex unns.Cred...Rachel 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.Jtice Neil M.
THE SUPREME COURT L FOR A SIGNER WHO DON’T WANT TO MAKE WEDDG WEBS FOR GAY UPL
From the Whe Hoe and the Supreme Court on down, gay rights advot have won a strg of victori this year. Many Amerins rema opposed to same-sex marriage, but support for gays and gay marriage has been risg — particularly among young people. * supreme court 2013 gay *
“Those servic are no ls protected speech today bee they are nveyed wh a ‘voice that ronat farther than uld om any soapbox.’”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 Christians.The cisn also appeared to suggt that the rights of L.G.B.T.Q.
The liberal jtic viewed as somethg else entirely — a dispute that threatened societal protectns for gay rights and rolled back some recent progrs.In 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. “More broadly, today’s cisn weakens longstandg laws that protect all Amerins agast discrimatn public acmodatns — cludg people of lor, people wh disabili, people of fah, and women.”A Colorado law forbids discrimatn agast gay people by bs open to the public as well as statements announcg such discrimatn.
I WAS PART OF 303 CREATIVE'S CASE. I BACK GAY MARRIAGE—BUT SCOTUS IS RIGHT
The Supreme Court’s nservative majory led a Christian graphic artist who wants to sign weddg webs n refe to work wh gay upl, a setback for LGBTQ+ people and another w for relig platiffs. * supreme court 2013 gay *
“Lbian, gay, bisexual, and transgenr (L.G.B.T.) people, no ls than anyone else, serve that digny and eedom.”Jtice Gorsuch rpond directly to the dissent the majory opn, wrg that the two sis looked at the same se and saw totally different issu.“It is difficult to read the dissent and nclu we are lookg at the same se,” he wrote. The dissentg jtic, he wrote, foced on “the stris gay Amerins have ma towards securg equal jtice unr law.”But the nservative jtic did not see the se through that lens, he said, wrg that “none of this answers the qutn we face today: Can a state force someone who provis her own exprsive servic to abandon her nscience and speak s preferred msage stead?”When the Supreme Court agreed to hear the se, 303 Creative L.L.C.
Kavangh and Amy Coney Barrett, shifted the urt to the right.Lower 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 orientatn.The 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.
THE SUPREME COURT’S BLSG OF ANTI-LGBTQ+ DISCRIMATN WILL HNT GAY COUPL
A baker refed to make a weddg ke for their receptn on relig grounds.Cred...Nick 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.L.C.
Irish-Amerin Gay, Lbian and Bisexual Group of Boston, Inc., a se om 1995 which the urt sid wh the anizers of a veterans para that blocked a group of gay, lbian and bisexual people om marchg the event. Jtice Sotomayor seemed pecially ncerned about the way the urt’s opn would send a disapprovg msage to the public about people who are gay, lbian, bisexual or transgenr, or who were same-sex relatnships.
WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT A SEEMGLY FAKE DOCUMENT A GAY RIGHTS CASE
Addnally, several stat terpret existg laws agast sex discrimatn to apply to bias relatg to sexual orientatn and genr inty, even though they do not have laws explicly forbiddg such discrimatn.In stat that do not offer protectns to gay and transgenr people on those grounds, municipal laws ver many rints.The Human Rights Campaign, an L.G.B.T.Q.
ETFriday’s lg was another reassurg cisn for relig nservativ.ImageA celebratory moment outsi the Supreme Court on Friday, after the urt livered the latt a strg of judgments favor of relig nservativ.Cred...Mariam Zuhaib/Associated PrsConservativ who have moral and theologil objectns to gay marriage saw the Supreme Court’s cisn on Friday as reassurance that they would be able to assert their beliefs a public square that they see as creasgly hostile to them.In a 6-to-3 vote, spl along iologil l, the jtic agreed wh a web signer Colorado who said she had a First Amendment right to refe to provi servic for same-sex marriag, spe a state law that forbids discrimatn agast gay people.“If the ernment n pel an dividual to speak a certa way or create certa thgs, that’s not eedom — ’s subjugatn,” said Brent Leatherwood, the head of the Southern Baptist Conventn’s policy arm, a statement after the lg. He scribed the cisn as havg granted eedom to all Amerins to speak nsistently wh their beliefs, “even when those beliefs are emed culturally unpopular.”Acrdg to pollg om 2021 by the Public Relign Rearch Instute, majori of most major relig groups — cludg Catholics, Jews and Mlims — oppose allowg small-bs owners to refe to serve gay and lbian people on relig grounds.
Several siar s have centered on nservative Christian small bs owners who object to workg on gay weddgs specifilly, cludg a baker Colorado, two vatn signers Arizona and a Kentucky-based photographer.In a news nference shortly after the lg was issued, Krist Waggoner, general unsel for Alliance Defendg Freedom, which reprented Ms. Smh’s portfol clus webs for church, real tate pani and polil ndidat.While many nservative Christians hailed the cisn on Friday, drew cricism om some progrsive Christians and terfah groups, cludg those that serve gay people of fah.“Broad exemptns to allow relig-based discrimatn hurts people of fah, too,” Francis DeBernardo, executive director of New Ways Mistry, which advot for gay Catholics, said a statement.