>> I am assuming you have some alternative view that departs from the objectionable version of the story we've been hearing and reading?
But you're an ultra leftwinger with no grasp on reality.
So, the reality is that there are valid arguments on both sides of the issue and it is a very difficult call, pitting the religious rights of one against the right of another to not suffer unreasonable discrimination. It is a question of which of those two rights trumps the other.
The Framers obviously placed religious rights above all others. This seems very simple to resolve -- if gays are being harmed in some way by being denied service, that is one problem. If they're not, it is another problem. It is abundantly clear they are not, so the problem is simple. Religious rights trump the discrimination issue, although my gay friends are having their feelings hurt which is too bad.
There is a reason that our Bill of Rights escalated religion to the top of the list of enumerated rights. And that is because it is the most personal and private right we have -- that is, the right to worship, believe, not believe, or not worship or whatever, as we see fit without retribution from any government.
If discrimination against gays is being a real problem it can be addressed, but if it isn't a real problem we should put religion first. That's how this must work if it is to be constitutional. I'm sure if they can get it in the Supreme Court, over time, the Court will totally ignore the Constitution and give the gays what they want. |
