Quote:
Originally Posted by redwitch
Reality is this decision is so narrow in scope it will have no real effect one way or the other. It is really a wrist slap against one commissioner for speaking disdainfully of the baker’s religion (and religion in general). It really said nothing about civil rights nor freedom of religion, just that religious beliefs should be respected. A cheesy way to get out of making a decision.
As I said, there are other cases coming before the USSC. One of those is a videotographer, who I believe is simply an individual, not a company by any legal definition, who worked out of his home, it might be the compelling case or the court again will find a way to wiggle out without making a true decision
|
I agree with you on the actual 'reality' of the narrow decision, but it's still my opinion that those who would like to only serve/service those who they want (based on any reason)...will think they now have justification to do so.
We'll see I guess.
