Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

moniss

(6,462 posts)
6. Basically
Fri Jun 30, 2023, 11:37 PM
Jun 2023

what the SC decision does is set up the ability for anybody in a business to discriminate against any protected group(race, sex, sexual orientation etc.) and claim it is OK because it is something they deeply believe. Put another way they are saying the Constitution prohibits discrimination against you unless somebody really believes you should be discriminated against. The absurdity of such a position would be ripe fodder for a Monty Python sketch.

But what they have set in motion is chaos for their previous rulings about protection for religious beliefs. You can be quite sure that if a business were to post a sign saying "No Baptists Allowed" there would be an immediate run to the courthouse and a 24/7 scream fest would take place on Faux News. But the justices would be faced with the prospect of saying one kind of deeply held belief based discrimination is OK while another is not. But there is no possible basis to make this argument. I know that won't stop them from arguing two contrary things at once but the chaos of doing that would immediately affect a huge amount of other supposedly settled case law. In other words they would be saying the equivalent of 2+2=4 except when it equals something else. Logic is a thing after all and not just words strung together. If it were just that string then any pretense that something was argued and reasoned simply evaporates. So you could apply that chaotic thinking to past cases and dice them how you like. There would be no certainty to anything when you use the "it's OK if you deeply believe it" rationale.

The clear reality is that this court is not going to change any time soon and the exposure of their money entanglements etc. isn't going to lead to a resignation or a successful impeachment. I wish it would but we need to act quickly and aggressively to throw this chaos back in their face. I would strongly encourage businesses to start posting signs excluding religions, Republicans etc. and refusing to do business/provide services for them. The resulting chaos is not something we created. Just exercising our newly expanded First Amendment rights giving us this ability to discriminate as long as we "deeply believe" it.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Indeed! nt Wounded Bear Jun 2023 #1
You nailed it. Spread it. blm Jun 2023 #2
I'm religious, and I couldn't agree more. summer_in_TX Jun 2023 #3
Exactly. My religion is a guide to *my* life. Not anyone else's. unblock Jun 2023 #4
You are impressive, TY! arthritisR_US Jun 2023 #7
force others to life by their religious rules keithbvadu2 Jul 2023 #26
You will get no argument from me. I think you are spot on. LoisB Jun 2023 #5
Basically moniss Jun 2023 #6
Thank you for being so considerate of other people's feelings! But NO apology is necessary. calimary Jul 2023 #8
I Feel The Same ProfessorGAC Jul 2023 #19
Well. I count Kindergarten and Pre-Kindergarten as well as 1st-12th grades. calimary Jul 2023 #20
Our School Didn't Do Pre-K or K ProfessorGAC Jul 2023 #22
My biggest longterm takeaway from Catholic school was/is calimary Jul 2023 #23
The court's derision (sic) is establishment of religion. usonian Jul 2023 #9
I completely agree. dchill Jul 2023 #11
K&R Blue Owl Jul 2023 #10
Well Stated Luck Counts Jul 2023 #12
Welcome to DU, Luck Counts! calimary Jul 2023 #24
Did Jesus rail against homosexuality and abortion? Martin Eden Jul 2023 #13
NOPE. TigressDem Jul 2023 #15
As they drive more people away from their religion Martin Eden Jul 2023 #17
True TigressDem Jul 2023 #30
Very Well Said Martin Eden Jul 2023 #32
Thank you for the clarification. TigressDem Jul 2023 #37
Alas, even here at DU the broad brush is used all too often Martin Eden Jul 2023 #42
LOL You really think that he was against harming children ExWhoDoesntCare Jul 2023 #21
Yes. Because I know the difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament. TigressDem Jul 2023 #29
Honestly, separation of church and state protects both. TigressDem Jul 2023 #14
'protects both' keithbvadu2 Jul 2023 #28
Right. TigressDem Jul 2023 #31
When the 'right' religion takes over. keithbvadu2 Jul 2023 #33
I am not promoting that ANY religion should "take over" - just to clarify. TigressDem Jul 2023 #38
Agree. keithbvadu2 Jul 2023 #39
Not Offended at All NowISeetheLight Jul 2023 #16
AGREE! bluestarone Jul 2023 #18
I fixed your post for you Mosby Jul 2023 #25
Luck??? Are you serious? edisdead Jul 2023 #27
This Christian agrees with every word of your post. 11 Bravo Jul 2023 #34
People who are not religious at all may discriminate treestar Jul 2023 #35
Religion was given the boot in a lot of governments over time. Xolodno Jul 2023 #36
Good post. I would disagree about the "stroke of luck" comment... Caliman73 Jul 2023 #40
I agree with your points. Mine was specifically about Trump. bluesbassman Jul 2023 #41
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»This will offend some peo...»Reply #6