George goes on to write:
So what does the decision mean? Has the court discovered a constitutional right of business owners and service providers to discriminate on religious grounds against homosexuals or people in same-sex relationships? No. Not a single member of the court drew any such conclusion. Nor did it resolve the bigger question that this case raised: What does the Constitution require when such prohibitions on discrimination conflict with business owners’ religiously informed dictates of conscience?Of course Dr. George would have preferred a different outcome than I. He wanted a ruling that would have aligned with religious supremacy while I wanted a ruling in favor of nondiscrimination and civil rights. However, we agree on what actually happened.
Local nondiscrimination laws remain enforceable providing that the ruling body is religiously neutral.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.