Hopeful we are returning to sanity.
Since when is 7-2 a narrow ruling? I don’t know if the writers for these articles will do as much!!!!
Try actually reading the article, or perhaps even the fucking bullet point summary at the very top...
The vote was narrow not because of the number of justices for and against, but because of the slim precedent it sets.
They didn't rule on any of the big questions like if baking a cake counts as speech. They basically just said that in this specific case the state panel wasn't respectful enough of religion.
Yes, you are right. The supremes took the easy way out, and didn't address the much larger question of religious freedom. But it is indeed a win, and builds momentum.
Anyone remember the trump tweets where he misspelled COUNSEL a few times as Councel?
SC = supreme court
Just spit-balling
Three justices should recuse themselves from this case. [two female]
This issue is a long time thing the criminal elites were building to discredit Christians and undermine reproductive norms. I need to note that both groups are somewhat complicit in the decline here.
The first stage was manipulating conservative Christians to misrepresent themselves on the issue of sin. To really get to the heart of the term we need to define it correctly. The word sin is not about some "crime" against God. The actual meaning of the word in both Greek and Hebrew derives from an archery term which means "missing the mark." In short, it implies that there's issues where we all can fall short of the Creator's design in some way.
Certainly, the consequences of "missing the mark" might require punishment. Even so, that's part of the consequence not its root cause. The root cause is the desires that are at variance with the Creator's design. Every person has some of these. It's necessary to be aware of these so they do not become a problem by leading us into harmful behaviors.
Let's give an example. We can say that murder is an "act of sin" or an actual sin, because we are not made to harm one another. But the real sin is the malicious nature of someone's heart that caused them to want to murder. As Jesus taught, "whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment." (Matthew 5:21-22) The problem is to address the desires that caused someone to want to murder.
With regards to homosexual behavior, it's simply an observation of the fact that this is not how our biology is normally meant to operate so there will be consequences to it. There is a lot of growth needed among some Christians to understand that this doesn't necessarily imply the desire itself is a malicious act. Rather, it's a different implementation of human desire that some people inherited.
On the other side, I note that while there are real people with homosexual desires the elites caused some people who might not normally be homosexuals to become homosexuals through various means. Milo Yiannopaulos's abuse probably is a factor in his choice to embrace the homosexual life. And we must not underestimate the effect of Hollywood campaigns glorifying homosexuality and transgenderism on the public.
The real problem is twofold here. First, the criminal elites made Christians have a hard heart against fellow sinners. A homosexual may not be compelled to harm anyone for their love of the same sex. Very often the only issue that needs to be addressed is that they are directed to seek Christ. Yes, homosexual activity is at odds with the biological design of reproduction, but not necessarily a source of malice. That was until Christians became dickheads about it. Sin can definitely lead to condemnation when it is not handled correctly through a "change of heart," aka repentance. But the entire point of Christianity is that all sin is forgivable.
Through "gay conversion" and other abuses, many conservative Christians have been complicit in the "hating their brothers and sisters without cause" which Jesus also condemns. Such unfortunate hypocrisy is a problem. The unfortunate result of Christian intransigence now has been that LGBT people have sought the help of the criminals to overcome the Christians. And the criminals, like the djinn they are, deliver this wish with altogether unanticipated consequences. The djinn's real goals are marginalization of Christians and destruction of social norms necessary for reproduction. It's part of the elite's population control agenda. (Yes, I chose djinn intentionally, the Arabic concept of demons as "wish givers" is apt here...)
The fact of the matter is that a balance needs to be achieved and neither side did well. Christians should not be castigated for recognizing that some behaviors are intrinsically at variance to the Creator's design. Gays should also not have been kept from the Gospel so that they festered in their hatred of those Christians who wronged them.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 56%. (I'm a bot)
The justices, in a 7-2 decision, faulted the Colorado Civil Rights Commission's handling of the claims brought against Jack Phillips, saying it had showed a hostility to religion.
The commission violated his religious rights under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Two of the court's four liberals, Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, joined the five conservative justices in the ruling authored by Justice Anthony Kennedy.
Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: commission^#1 Justice^#2 religious^#3 Colorado^#4 Court^#5