Civil Rights and Discrimination
The Equality Act Targets Service Providers
Moreover:
“And while the Equality Act doesn’t alter the exceptions in the Civil Rights Act for religious organizations, it specifically notes that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 cannot be invoked as a defense for discriminating under these laws.”
In other words, courts can consider the “discrimination” of a LGBT activist being told “Sorry, I don’t want to decorate a cake with a same-sex couple because it’s against my religion but they’d be happy to bake you one next store,” but won’t be able to consider the religious freedom rights of the service provider with regard to the protections provided under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
RFRA requires that the authorities meet the high standard of showing that the government has a compelling interest to justify infringing on religious freedom when enforcing federal law. If stripping defendants of RFRA protections in these cases wasn’t a big deal—that is, if it were obvious that compelling service providers to craft messages in support of same-sex marriage or gender transitions clearly trumped any rights to religious protection—why would progressives be insisting on a RFRA exclusion?
More. In the comments to an earlier post, reader “Sebastian” wrote a response to the argument that conservative Christians have had a long record of working to deny LGBTQ people their legal rights, replying that:
Your identity is so bound up with being “the victim” that you’re unable to see that, in this situation, you’re now the oppressor. It reminds me of the communists who were persecuted and then took power and persecuted those who were of the class that had persecuted them. They couldn’t see that they were now the oppressor — they had no mental picture in which it was conceivable to them that good communists, who had been targeted and persecuted all of their adult lives, could now be the oppressor.
I think that’s spot on. When I hear the argument that we must force bakers to craft same-sex wedding cakes in order to “stop their hate”—as, for instance, a recent episode of Will & Grace reiterated the “need to struggle” against the “haters” who won’t bake same-sex cakes—it seems clear that LGBTQ activists (and those who go to court to force religious conservatives to craft supportive messages are by definition “activists”) have no mental template in which it’s possible to consider that they themselves have become the persecutors.
11 Comments
A Win for Freedom
More. The Colorado Civil Rights Commission was headed for another probable 7-2 loss before the Supreme Court, given that some of its members had shown the same religious animus against baker Jack Phillips that they had the first time around.
SCOTUS overturns Colorado Civil Rights Commission on grounds it showed religious animus. Later, in new case against same person, CCRC members say "we think those comments SCOTUS thought showed animus are actually fine and we endorse them."
— PresidentialHarassHat (@Popehat) March 6, 2019
And THAT'S what clients are like.
As The Federalist reports, Phillips’ attorneys:
found current commissioners publicly agreeing with 2015 comments from commissioner Dianne Rice that compared Jack’s Christianity to the ideologies motivating slavery and the Holocaust. Rice’s comments were specifically singled out by the Supreme Court as evidence of the commission’s bias.
That bias aimed to jettison Jack’s constitutional rights to free speech, freedom of association, and free expression of religion, all over a cake that could be had from any number of nearby shops. Yet when the commission discussed the Supreme Court ruling in summer 2018, two commissioners openly supported Rice’s comparison of Christianity to Nazism and racism. …
Faced with this evidence of their persistent animus against Christians, the commission folded its second case against Jack. But it still maintains the power to do this to anyone at any time, even still based on anti-religious bigotry so long as they keep that to themselves.
Related: Washington Post, The Senate just confirmed a judge who interned at an anti-LGBTQ group. She’ll serve for life.
21 Comments
Progressive Moral Superiority?
8 Comments
The Covington Kids
Imagine the coverage if the pro-life, MAGA-capped kids had shouted “faggots” and other insults at that black and Native American protestors, instead of what actually happened.
"This sad affair has allowed political charlatans, axe-grinders, and race baiters to wax poetic and connect the incident to their own personal bugaboos, be they experiences at the hands of high school bullies or racist white cisheteropatriarchy." https://t.co/K8jPiPWChd
— Quillette (@Quillette) January 21, 2019
Black adults to white kids: "F*ggots, crackers, bigots, incest kids."
— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) January 21, 2019
White kids: [smiling, not responding]
Everyone: "omg did you see that smile?! So disrespectful!"
A better way:
9 Comments
Bake Me a Cake, Redux
2 Comments
Religious Animus Revisited
…the first openly bisexual person elected to the U.S. Senate, didn’t place her left hand on a bible as per tradition. Instead, she used a book obtained from the Library of Congress which includes both the U.S. and Arizona constitutions.
The Pew Research Center for Religion & Public Life states that Sinema is the only member of Congress that identifies as “religiously unaffiliated.”
He’s doesn’t look at all uncomfortable. He’s giving her tips and laughing. https://t.co/tAbVDduXWw
— Some chick named Heather (@hboulware) January 4, 2019
I'm reading a fascinating book about how our ideology influences what we *want* to see the world and how that interferes powerfully with the actual information hitting our eyeballs and I can't think of a better example than this. https://t.co/QyaPyOOEms
— PoliMath (@politicalmath) January 4, 2019
He treated her exactly the same way he treated every other senator. This isn’t everything, this is nothing. https://t.co/E3NaVk2y4z
— Dave Rubin (@RubinReport) January 4, 2019
Progressives in general are increasingly showing their animus.He literally doesn't look uncomfortable at all, and says repeatedly he's looking forward to working with her. But okay.
— Brad Polumbo (@brad_polumbo) January 4, 2019
Y'all really will find any opportunity to be victims, won't you? https://t.co/CRytrJD5WK
8 Comments
There’s Always a Hierarchy
The cultural contradictions of progressivism.I’m going to miss 2018. Note that the ringleader with “Stay Woke” jacket has to check her phone for words to her chant. To any protestors out there: If you plan to shut down a speaker, have the decency to memorize your chants. https://t.co/Bo6vwFWxIo
— Christina Sommers (@CHSommers) December 31, 2018
Here's my main problem with intersectionality: It's adherents claim the oppressed are sole experts on their oppression, and we must defer to them. But also, it's not their job to educate you or lead the resistance. Thus we end up with this utter confusion. https://t.co/iPS8P1f4dF
— Robby Soave (@robbysoave) December 31, 2018
2 Comments
Racism and Political Correctness Have Much in Common
Wesley Yang writes:
We wouldn’t even be able to conceive of the microaggression were not the macroaggression stigmatized and on the retreat. My parents’ homes were reduced to rubble in Korea. To speak to them about a microaggression is just not credible, it’s simply absurd.
On the other hand, it’s also true that there’s a lot of pain that goes with being an Asian-American, which I write about. …
But… when one looks at remediating that through a system of policing speech and thought, then you cross over into this whole other territory where you’re talking about extinguishing human freedom for the purpose of pursuing some person’s ill-defined therapeutic grievance.
Similarly:
Has the message of anti-racism become as harmful a force in American life as racism itself?https://t.co/fD2DELPqIr
— reason (@reason) December 1, 2018
21 Comments
DeVos–and Due Process–vs. the ACLU
Before you fan the flames of the firestorm, I'd suggest taking a moment to ask yourself how these changes are anything but reasonable. You can hate Trump and love Obama and still recognize that the Obama administration's guidelines on this were an overreach. https://t.co/TTCluE81Wx
— Meghan Daum (@meghan_daum) November 16, 2018
Not only will the Department of Education's proposed rules restore basic due process and fairness to college tribunals, but they also — given how basic the changes are — highlight just how ridiculous university kangaroo courts have become: https://t.co/14gZExPL0E
— David French (@DavidAFrench) November 16, 2018
Put another way, her reforms will restore due process. https://t.co/2gQRtmySTm
— Christina Sommers (@CHSommers) November 14, 2018
I occasionally need the reminder why I'll never give the ACLU a single damned cent, despite the many things we agree on (and despite the positive interactions I've had with several of their lawyers). https://t.co/oFgqSHC4xv
— Scott Shackford [Blue Checkmark] (@SShackford) November 16, 2018
If only there was a national civil liberties organization that would stand up for the rights of the accused, rather than let the yahoos get away with claiming that adhering to due process "inappropriately favors" the accused. If only. https://t.co/shyUMOVCxN
— David Bernstein (@ProfDBernstein) November 16, 2018
More. As Camille Paglia notes: “The headlong rush to judgment by so many well-educated, middle-class women in the #MeToo movement has been startling and dismaying. Their elevation of emotion and group solidarity over fact and logic has resurrected damaging stereotypes of women’s irrationality that were once used to deny us the vote.”
Furthermore.
It's hard to know where to start with this dangerous suggestion from @anncoffey_mp that jury trials should be scrapped for rape cases. "Rape myths" do need to be addressed but defendants are still entitled to a presumption of innocence https://t.co/bYfFgQbvMQ
— Dr Hannah Quirk (@HannahQuirk1) November 21, 2018