Published 12:00 am, Sunday, June 10, 2018
There appears to be some confusion about the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling about a Colorado baker’s refusal to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.
It is not a sweeping ruling that grants the right to Americans to refuse service to people based on their sexual orientations or personal disagreement with same-sex marriage.
It is a narrow ruling. One that does not address the question of whether a person could refuse service to same-sex couples based on their religious views, but that means that issue will be resolved in future cases.
If anything, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s written opinion warns of potential discrimination based on sexual orientation. Kennedy wrote that gays “cannot be treated as social outcasts or as inferior in dignity and worth.”
The issue, he wrote, “must be resolved with tolerance, without undue disrespect to sincere religious beliefs, and without subjecting gay persons to indignities when they seek goods and services in an open market.”
So, no, this is not a landmark ruling, as Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton claimed. But it does, importantly, protect people from being discriminated against based on their faith. The court, in its 7-2 decision, found that Colorado baker Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, did not get a fair shake from the state’s Civil Rights Commission. Members expressed disparaging views about religion.
Such acts, in and of themselves, are intolerant and unacceptable.
No one should be discriminated against because of his or her faith. But that’s a much different ruling than saying faith can be used to discriminate.
In fact, Kennedy’s language suggests a future ruling will say just the opposite.
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Wedding cake ruling was narrow"
Post a Comment