Originally Posted by
stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2614724
Arrogant, no, scewing the first amendment, no.
I really wish you would have read all of my posts. You are right it does work both ways. If someone walks into my Dad's photography shop, the precident says I can't tell a homosexual couple no I will not photograph your wedding or civil union. Personally I feel that participating by taking photos would be condoning an action I do not condone because of religious beliefs. But the courts have said that I have to or else they'll fine me, based on a trio (I don't think the supreme court ruled on it) of district judges who decided to apply a law (civil rights act) that has nothing to do with homosexuality to homosexuals. Basically the government is telling me to disregard my religious convictions because I'm not allowed to discriminate. That would be a government saying a portion of my RELIGIOUS BELIEVE STRUCTURE IS ILLEGAL!
-Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Second, the legislation passed by 20%! Four judges overturned the vote of 60% of the californian legislation.
If anything those four judges are forcing their belief system on the majority of the population. Constitutionally it is up to the states, the people voted, the state decided then the judicial system said no your votes are irrelevent. (that is my main hangup)
I fail to see how this is forcing my religion on anyone. I said nothing about humping goats. (other than explaining to rylan about the court case)
That morning after pill was a private business being sued for what it did not sell. Yeah that isn't forcing beliefs one anybody you are right. They were wrong for not wanting to sell an item in their inventory. Seriously, there were other drug stores in the area, go somewhere else instead of trying to force someone to carry something you think they should carry. These are people out to start something. To force their belief stucture on someone else. It does work both ways.
But before you call me arrogant, at least read what I've said, and quit getting mad at me for wanting to live my life without being forced to do thing I don't want to do in the name of equality. And quit getting fed up with people for not doing something they think is wrong.
Why do you keep bringing up this frivioulous photographer lawsuit? The only reason it made the news is because the ultra conservatives trying to keep the marriage ban wanted it plastered all over the media to dispell the judges decision. As several people have said, this lawsuit could have been filed by any minority (yes, homosexuals are a minority).
You also keep bringing up the point that these judges overturned the decision of a popular vote. Look at the history of the US Supreme Court, or virtually any State Supreme Court, and you'd find numerous cases similiar to this one where the courts overruled a popular public decision. But hey, it's the homosexuals wanting the freedom to marry, so that's different.
The morning after pill wasn't just an isolated case with a single business. It has occurred with numerous moralistic pharmacists. The difference is, a pharmacist isn't just a business owner selling their wares. They have to have a license to dispense prescription medicines. Just like a doctor, it is their duty to perform their jobs as prescribed by the Accreditation Council for
[hr]
Education. If they don't, they lose their license. Refusing to dispense a drug prescribed by a medical doctor is such a vilolation. If they don't want to abide by the ENTIRE laws governed by what is stated in their license because of religious beliefs, then find another occupation where you don't have to worry about the rules and laws.
You want to live your life with your moral beliefs, I have absolutely no problem with that. At the same time, don't encroach into my personal beliefs simply because they are different from yours. You seem to think your beliefs are above mine, and I should abide by yours. Sorry, a democracy doesn't work that way.
