Actor Michael Imperioli has something to say about the Supreme Court’s Friday ruling in favor of a Christian web designer who refuses to create websites to celebrate same-sex weddings.

  • Parallax@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I 100% disagree with the ruling, but this is apparently what the court had to say. They effectively sectioned out “expressive services” as able to discriminate, versus non-expressive services, like restaurants , which are still covered by the first amendment.

    The decision suggests that artists, photographers, videographers and writers are among those who can refuse to offer what the court called expressive services if doing so would run contrary to their beliefs. But that’s different from other businesses not engaged in speech and therefore not covered by the First Amendment, such as restaurants and hotels.

    https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-gay-rights-website-designer-aa529361bc939c837ec2ece216b296d5

    • admiralteal@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That distinction is horsecrap. A hotel manager can be forced to offer their wedding package for a gay wedding and a chef can be forced to cook for a gay wedding because they run venues that have been declared “nonexpressive” by 6 people who don’t know the first thing about those professions. But a website designer cannot be forced to sell websites while running a website shop.

      They don’t believe in that distinction. They’re just taking a step towards outright illegalizing queerness. They’ll tear down that separation as soon as doing so can result in more discrimination.