As we told you before, the SCOTUS ruling was not just about compelled speech around wedding websites, writings on cakes, photographies for weddings, et cetera, et cetera. It was yet another arrow in the quiver of the Republican Party and the judges they've loaded the federal courts and SCOTUS benches with to unwind same-sex marriage rights and LGBT rights in general. This is the second time this week, not even a month since the ruling, that this has happened. I implore people and the MSM to stop buying their bullshit messaging on this already. Thanks. #uspoli #LGBTRights #lgbt
Texas judge still fighting to deny wedding ceremonies to gay couples
McLennan County Justice of the Peace Dianne Hensley filed a lawsuit after a state agency warned her about refusing to marry gay couples. She hopes a recent U.S. Supreme Court case about religious freedom helps her cause.Rebecca Schneid (The Texas Tribune)
like this
reshared this
randygalbraith
in reply to Hank G ☑️ • • •JW children refuse to say the pledge because the government can't compel speech. Such compelled speech also takes away meaning from those who do speak. But notice it is the school system that is compelling a child to speak. When the FBI demanded Apple write break-in code for an iPhone the same issue was raised. The government can't make Apple "speak" via code like this. Again, notice the actor is the government. But was the web designer being compelled to speak? And who would be doing the compelling? Contractors can decline work without disclosing the reason. This web designer wanted a shield to proactive discriminate. Yet, she is happy to use government infrastructure to run her business.
When a football player takes a knee during the singing of the national anthem how do we feel then? Being disgusted and disagreeing with such protests is not the issue. Rather it is the desire to compel the player to assume a particular posture. I saw several comments suggesting that's okay. But then what does it mean for the players who stand and cover their heart? Is it a display
... show moreJW children refuse to say the pledge because the government can't compel speech. Such compelled speech also takes away meaning from those who do speak. But notice it is the school system that is compelling a child to speak. When the FBI demanded Apple write break-in code for an iPhone the same issue was raised. The government can't make Apple "speak" via code like this. Again, notice the actor is the government. But was the web designer being compelled to speak? And who would be doing the compelling? Contractors can decline work without disclosing the reason. This web designer wanted a shield to proactive discriminate. Yet, she is happy to use government infrastructure to run her business.
When a football player takes a knee during the singing of the national anthem how do we feel then? Being disgusted and disagreeing with such protests is not the issue. Rather it is the desire to compel the player to assume a particular posture. I saw several comments suggesting that's okay. But then what does it mean for the players who stand and cover their heart? Is it a display of patriotic respect for our national anthem or a performance? Where a failure to perform can result in loss of employment?
Or consider the case of the couch who insisted on gathering his players mid-field to say a prayer. SCOTUS said freedom of speech and religion must allow for this. Really? Surely we should be able to see the chilling effect on the freedom of religion and speech felt by players who do not wish to participate. If one day a majority Muslim-majority high-school team brings out prayer mats and bow to Allah I wonder our a Christian "its free speech" will feel then?
Cheers, -Randy
Hank G ☑️ likes this.
John Mark Schofield
in reply to Hank G ☑️ • • •Hank G ☑️ likes this.