Religious Discrimination by the Republican State of Arizona?

Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by chris155au, Dec 18, 2018.

  1. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    13,290
    Likes Received:
    1,078
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Last week I became aware of what seems like a pretty significant First Amendment/religious freedom case coming out of Arizona. Christian artists Joanna Duka and Breanna Koski operate an art studio that creates hand-drawn invitations and paintings for weddings, businesses, and everyday moments.

    The girls are being represented by the very capable Kristen Waggoner over at Alliance Defending Freedom, who also represented Colorado baker Jack Philips (owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop) at the Supreme Court where he was GLORIOUSLY VICTORIOUS!

    Here are the full case details: https://www.adflegal.org/detailspages/case-details/brush-nib-studio-v.-city-of-phoenix

    In looking into this case, I also came across other religious discrimination cases from Arizona:

    https://www.adflegal.org/detailspag...a-church-needs-your-help-to-avoid-foreclosure

    https://www.adflegal.org/detailspages/case-details/state-of-arizona-v.-painter

    My question: How in the hell does a REPUBLICAN state like Arizona engage in acts of blatant religious discrimination?
     
  2. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    26,183
    Likes Received:
    7,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If Christians do not want to be discriminated against for discriminating, perhaps they should stop discriminating to avoid discrimination?

    This persecution complex is getting very annoying.
     
  3. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    13,290
    Likes Received:
    1,078
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Discrimination on the basis of what?
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2018
  4. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    79,594
    Likes Received:
    22,036
    Trophy Points:
    113
    if they want to discriminate they need to become a private club, they can't advertise as being open to the public and then discriminate... common sense

    we have legal ways for religions to discriminate, if they choose not to use them, them that is on them
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2018
  5. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    26,183
    Likes Received:
    7,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Seriously....Homosexuality. While I know you attempt distraction through feigning ignorance and asking questions as your debate answer technique, this one is so blatantly stupid as to be purposeful humor.
     
  6. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    79,594
    Likes Received:
    22,036
    Trophy Points:
    113
    false advertising for one, if you advertise it as for sale, you sell it if your a business open to the public

    if one can't stand the thought of a black person or a gay person buying their stuff, maybe they would do best with a online business so they don't know who is buying their products
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2018
    FoxHastings, tecoyah and Derideo_Te like this.
  7. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    13,290
    Likes Received:
    1,078
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    "Open to the public." So they cannot refuse service to ANYONE? Surely you can't be serious.

    What are you referring to?
     
  8. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    13,290
    Likes Received:
    1,078
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    How can it be discrimination on the basis of homosexuality if they serve gay people?
     
    AltLightPride likes this.
  9. TexMexChef

    TexMexChef Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2014
    Messages:
    2,333
    Likes Received:
    503
    Trophy Points:
    83
    First of all there was no discrimination against the artist in any form.

    The City of Phoenix anti-discrimination legislation does not violate anyone's constitutional rights by simply being on the books...as is the case here.

    No complaint was filed with the city of Phoenix for the shop's non-compliance with the law...NOR was there any fines or punishment by the city of Phoenix against the shop for the beliefs of it's owners or employees.

    This is a pre-emptive strike lawsuit against CoP in the belief that the City's anti-discrimination lawsuit...may....sometime in the future cause the shop harm to it's religious and artistic rights.

    Basically, this is the shop suing the city for harm not yet inflicted.
     
  10. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    13,290
    Likes Received:
    1,078
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You think that these two girls refuse to provide services for gay weddings because they "can't stand the thought" of a gay person buying their stuff? Surely you can't be serious. How about you learn the case before saying something so utterly stupid in response! That might be a good idea.
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2018
    Margot2 and AltLightPride like this.
  11. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    13,290
    Likes Received:
    1,078
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You've missed the point of my thread. Didn't you see the question in the OP and the other cases? I admit that these girls haven't faced any discrimination. My question: How in the hell does a REPUBLICAN state like Arizona engage in acts of blatant religious discrimination? Or to make you happier, how in the hell does a REPUBLICAN state like Arizona have such blatantly anti-religious laws on the books?
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2018
  12. TexMexChef

    TexMexChef Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2014
    Messages:
    2,333
    Likes Received:
    503
    Trophy Points:
    83
    It wasn't the state of AZ. it was the city of Phoenix.


    AZ just elected a Dem Senator.

    Democrat Kyrsten Sinema will be Arizona's senior U.S. senator
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2018
    dairyair and FoxHastings like this.
  13. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    13,290
    Likes Received:
    1,078
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Do constitutional rights have to be violated by a law in order for that law to be unconstitutional?
     
  14. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    13,290
    Likes Received:
    1,078
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So the state has zero control over the city?
     
  15. TexMexChef

    TexMexChef Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2014
    Messages:
    2,333
    Likes Received:
    503
    Trophy Points:
    83
    The shop owners are not claiming the law is unconstitutional...they are claiming the law violates their religious and artistic rights.

    As we saw in the case of the baker. The court ruled the way in which the law was adjudicated was at fault...and left the law standing as lawful.

    So yes... a law can be used incorrectly and violate rights and still be constitutional.
     
  16. TexMexChef

    TexMexChef Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2014
    Messages:
    2,333
    Likes Received:
    503
    Trophy Points:
    83
    More than 0 ....less than 100.
     
  17. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    13,290
    Likes Received:
    1,078
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Would you say that Arizona has the same control over Phoenix as any other state has over a city? Or can it vary state to state?
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2018
  18. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    13,290
    Likes Received:
    1,078
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Why do you mention this?
     
  19. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    13,290
    Likes Received:
    1,078
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What if the law was unconstitutional?
     
  20. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,111
    Likes Received:
    1,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How is the state discriminating? The law in question applies equally to all businesses regardless of the religion of the owners.

    They women appear to be arguing for discrimination, for a law which would say “You must not do this unless you’re religious”. What if a business owner had an equally strong personal objection to same-sex marriage but without any religious aspect? Should they be treated differently by the law?
     
    FoxHastings likes this.
  21. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    26,183
    Likes Received:
    7,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The entire issue here is that they do not....that is the point.
     
  22. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    13,290
    Likes Received:
    1,078
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Actually that was the wrong word entirely. I should have said religious attacks. I would consider the lack of religious protection an indirect attack, even though these girls haven't been taken to court. And in the other two cases, it was a DIRECT attack on religion.

    Absolutely not. Its just that religious people are at a distinct advantage in most western countries when it comes to fighting it legally, particularly in the US considering the First Amendment. However, it would be really interesting to see a case from the US involving a non-religious business owner refusing to bake a cake for a gay wedding. In light of the Supreme Court ruling in favour of Jack Philips, a non-religious person could have a very strong legal argument based on equal protection under the law proscribed in the Equal Protection Clause. If a religious person is cleared of any wrongdoing, then why should the non-religious person. And depending on the state, they could have any number of state based court decisions that went in the religious business owners favour.
     
  23. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    13,290
    Likes Received:
    1,078
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Where do I or the ADF case details say this?
     
  24. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    26,183
    Likes Received:
    7,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As seems your M.O. you are trolling for arguments and asking questions to answer questions.....I am not playing your game.

    Have A Nice Day:wall:
     
    FoxHastings likes this.
  25. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    13,290
    Likes Received:
    1,078
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If you read the case details, you would know that they serve gay people. Just like Christian baker Jack Philips. This is not about discrimination on the basis of homosexuality.
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2018

Share This Page