Author Topic: Supreme Court rules in favor of Catholic foster agency  (Read 182 times)


Tom Eckstein

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 693
  • Tom Eckstein
    • View Profile
    • Concordia Lutheran Church, Jamestown, ND
Re: Supreme Court rules in favor of Catholic foster agency
« Reply #1 on: June 17, 2021, 12:13:46 PM »
Now, if only the Supreme court could apply this same unanimous agreement to, let's say, someone who doesn't want to decorate a cake in such a way that would conflict with their religious convictions.
I'm an LCMS Pastor in Jamestown, ND.

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12265
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court rules in favor of Catholic foster agency
« Reply #2 on: June 17, 2021, 01:23:34 PM »
Just wait, this case will likely end up being a warm up for more cases testing this point of law. Besides Jack Pillips could well be heading back to the Supreme Court.
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

David Garner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 7034
    • View Profile
    • For He is Good and Loves Mankind
Re: Supreme Court rules in favor of Catholic foster agency
« Reply #3 on: June 17, 2021, 03:38:35 PM »
Just wait, this case will likely end up being a warm up for more cases testing this point of law. Besides Jack Pillips could well be heading back to the Supreme Court.

One hopes this case is bounced well before it gets back to the Supreme Court, but the hubris of these lower court judges apparently knows no bounds.  To wit:

“The anti-discrimination laws are intended to ensure that members of our society who have historically been treated unfairly, who have been deprived of even the every-day right to access businesses to buy products, are no longer treated as ‘others.'"

-- Judge A. Bruce Jones, Denver District Court

It doesn't occur to this buffoon that by making a content based judgment on who can and cannot speak, he is literally othering a much larger class of people, declaring their sincerely held beliefs to be out of bounds.  No, because we have not "historically been treated unfairly" (history lasting only the past few hundred years apparently), we must NOW be treated unfairly, driven from the public square and marketplace unless we endorse with full throat the prevailing orthodoxy (as defined, of course, by government and major corporate interests).

Of course, this is precisely what the Supreme Court forbade in the first Masterpiece Cakeshop case, and in Fulton v. Philadelphia today.

Source for the above quote.

https://denver.cbslocal.com/2021/06/16/jack-phillips-transgender-cake/

At some point, we have to start suing under anti-SLAPP laws to punish the fools who persist in abusing the process of the Courts to impose said orthodoxy.
Orthodox Reader and former Lutheran (LCMS and WELS).