Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mmarsh --------------------------------------------------------------------
Your example is not exactly the same.
The Bible says "Thou shall have no other God other than the Lord"
A Catholic priest could say (with a great deal of legal backing) that forcing him to preform a Wiccan ceremony is a violation of his Constitutional rights to practice his religion as by doing this ceremony he is being forced to recognize a deity other than the Christian God.
Here its different, the Bible only forbids heterosexual sex. It does not say anything about forbidding to snap a photograph. Which means the 1st Amendment doesn't apply, which means its a violation of the defendants 14th Amendment right.
We have already had one court recognize this, and judging from the way the court has acted in the past they are likely to uphold it.
As somebody said above, the defendants were stupid to argue 1st Amendment protection as a reason to deny service, they would have been better to refuse service from a business standpoint. Instead they had to make a political statement and they are going to pay a price for it. |
The Constitution doesn`t mention any certain religion for situations like this. So the Christian Bible doesn`t enter into the conversation at any place. The right to practice their religion as they see fit includes not being compelled by the Government to do or support anything that is considered sinful as long as no common law is violated.
Lower court decisions are often overturned. The first ammendment paints a broad enough swath to protect all religious beliefs so this case is textbook example of ifringement of a religious belief.