Professional Homophobe Jonathan Turley has confused the
issues -- as he is prone to do. He -- and some others -- are insisting
there is a freedom of religion issue at stake in a new case. The issue
is equality, actually.
The Supreme Court is
hearing the case Monday of a Christian graphic artist who objects to
designing wedding websites for gay couples, a dispute that's the latest
clash of religion and gay rights to land at the highest court.
The designer and her supporters say that
ruling against her would force artists — from painters and
photographers to writers and musicians — to do work that is against
their faith. Her opponents, meanwhile, say that if she wins, a range of
businesses will be able to discriminate, refusing to serve Black
customers, Jewish or Muslim people, interracial or interfaith couples or
immigrants, among others.
[. . .]
Like Phillips, Smith says her objection is not to working with gay people. She says she'd work with a gay client who needed help with graphics for an animal rescue shelter, for example, or to promote an organization serving children with disabilities. But she objects to creating messages supporting same-sex marriage, she says, just as she won't take jobs that would require her to create content promoting atheism or gambling or supporting abortion.
Smith says Colorado’s law violates her free speech rights. Her opponents, including the Biden administration and groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union, the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, disagree.
She
says she'd work with a gay client on "an animal rescue shelter"? Then
it's really not a valid objection, is it? Her refusing to work with a
gay client on a wedding? The Bible, her source document, doesn't give
her leeway like that, does it?
Would
she also reject Marjorie Taylor Greene as a client? The House
Republican has been rebuked by her former roll dog, White supremist Nick
Fuentes who declares, "She
wants to be the face of Christian nationalism. She's divorced, and
she's actively an adulterer. How are you going to be the face of
Christian nationalism when you're a divorced woman girlboss? It doesn't
even make any sense. I'm so glad I don't have to pretend to support that
anymore."
Would that be a 'religious' reason for rejecting Greene as a client?
She
designs websites, that's what she needs to do. If she's not willing to
serve the public, she should find another occupation and do so
immediately. Allowing her to discriminate against this group or that
group is a sliding slope. We are supposed to be all equal in the eyes
of the law but Lorie wants to bend the law to make it state that it's
okay for her to discriminate.
It's not okay.
The Court will likely find that it is okay -- because we have an illegitimate Court.
Meanwhile, as Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Lorie Smith's Special Rights" noted, Jonathan Turley can't take his goo-goo eyes off Lorie Smith.
