It is looking like the Supreme Court is going to rule that a Colorado graphic
designer who has an issue with designing certain sorts of websites for same sex
couples, it looks like they're gonna rule in favor of that graphic designer.
I wanna tell you about this case so that you're prepared for
the ruling when it comes.
Case concerns Lorie Smith who owns a design company that says it
serves gay customers, but it intends to limit
a proposed wedding-related service to celebrations of heterosexual unions.
She argued that requiring her to provide those services to gay and
lesbian couples violated her right to free speech.
Colorado law forbids discrimination based on sexual orientation by businesses open
to the public, as well as statements announcing such discrimination.
Ms smith who has not yet begun that wedding business or posted such
a statement for fear of running afoul of the law sued to challenge it.
Yeah, and like all of these,
it's just about this individual person's actual beliefs.
It's not like a stand-in for
a conservative opposition to this sort of thing or whatever.
Well, whatever, maybe she really believes it.
Maybe she is losing sleep every night about the possibility that she might
have to type in two male names next to each other rather than a male and
a female name before clicking, go live on a website.
I don't know, maybe that's what she's actually concerned about.
The important thing isn't really Laurie Smith,
it's the conservative supermajority in the Supreme Court.
That regardless of whatever they might have tried to reassure us after destroying
Roe v Wade, they do seem like they want to destroy the right to same sex marriage.
That said,
we wanna give you a little bit of what some of the justices have been saying.
Here's Brett Kavanaugh who shouldn't even be on the court in the first place.
He says, the case comes down to a fairly narrow question.
Are they more like the restaurants and the jewelers and the tailors, or
they more like the publishing houses and the other free speech analogues?
Well, what do you think, Kavanaugh?
A wedding announcement website, do you think it's the New York post?
But that's actually a bad example.
What about maybe a real journalistic enterprise?
Or do you think it's more like a wedding-related service like getting
flowers, or a cake, or a macaroon tower or something?
It's a temporary thing, it's a service for a wedding.
But whatever.
Again, we can read a million of these statements, we'll read some more.
They're not expressing real opinions.
These are not, I don't know.
I don't know what people were taught about the Supreme Court and
judges generally growing up.
These are not angelic beings free from sin who simply read
the divine legal texts and then opine based on them.
They're political people, they're gonna deliver political verdicts.
But at least, what do you think?
>> Yeah, this is again, the walking the line between being a populist and
being for the people you mask off, always support.
I thought this was the party that's putting profit first and
the economy first except when it comes to, we don't like gay people,
so we're going to allow for discrimination in regards to sexual orientation.
So it's hypocrisy yet again.
And I think that the majority of people, and tell me if the polls are wrong, but
the majority of people don't want to discriminate based on sexual orientation.
This is a business, and you can't discriminate based on race.
We've established this decades ago.
This is the same exact framework, same exact logic,
we're applying it to orientation now.
So. >> Yeah,
the last I saw it was like a week ago.
>> I think it was 71% nationally, support same sex marriage.
So look, it's not a divisive thing.
I mean, sure, there's tens of millions of people who are entirely backwards, and
I would say to them what I would say to Laurie smith which is, get a life, Jesus,
seriously.
Get a hobby, hang out with your friends, stop basing your life around trying to
inconvenience people based on immutable characteristics of their life.
That is what I would say.
Honestly, why do you care?
Why do you care?
Just do your job.
It's so simple to just do your job and
to not make this about trying to discriminate.
And I'm also gonna say this.
And this is where I just totally get into my own personal opinions or whatever.
And bear in mind,
I'm an atheist although I went to church growing up and everything.
She's saying, they're saying, it's her religious belief.
No, it's not.
No, it's not, it's your belief.
And you're saying you believe that because you're religious, but
plenty of Christians don't believe that.
I don't think.
You're acting as if you're mandated.
The reason they say religious belief rather than just belief is because it
sounds better, it sounds bigger, it sounds more durable, it sounds more real.
It's a belief.
Who cares what aspect of your life or your interest or
your hobbies you've linked to your belief?
It's just your belief.
You're not mandated by this.
Clearly, the presence of a majority of Christians who are perfectly fine with
same sex marriage implies that you are not required by your religion to
believe this thing.
You just believe it and you say it's a religious thing.
I believe we should adjudicate it in the same way that we would any
other form of belief.
It's my geographic belief.
I was raised in a Southwestern Connecticut, and so
that's just the way we believe.
Nobody would say that cuz that doesn't sound cool, it doesn't sound convincing.
If you were to say it's your culinary belief or it's your,
I'm really into beach volleyball, so that's my belief,
that's just a thing about you that you're linking to it.
Again, justice is in the same way that the fact that I was born
in Bridgeport Connecticut doesn't mean I have to believe a certain way.
The fact that you're in a religious tradition that plays host to many
different sorts of belief does not imply that you have to act a certain way based
on your religion.
And that's just my opinion.
At least being on the show should reflect anything on her religious beliefs or
opinions.
That's just what I think.
>> No, I'm also an atheist.
But at the same time, so you can't just say that your belief
is based on religion and then say whatever you want because of that.
A belief can be a bad belief, and have it based on anything.
And it's a bad opinion, and it's a bad belief to want to discriminate against
a group of people, and [LAUGH] it really doesn't matter what your reasoning is.
So I'm fully with you, John [LAUGH].
>> Sometimes, remember, I'm just a regular person or whatever.
I'm not even trying to confuse you into thinking that I'm something better by
wearing a tie, just a regular person.
Maybe I'm being an a-hole, maybe I'm being contrarian, I don't know.
We don't let people do things that are otherwise illegal because if you were to
be like, it's my religious belief that I have to kill you, I'd be like,
I don't give a damn that it's your religious belief.
So what's the difference?
If something is your religious belief and it's not infringing on anyone else,
I believe that it should be protected.
But I also believe that about every other form of belief.
If you're not infringing on other people, it should be protected.
Again, all of this is about civility, it's about having a society.
And that means that you should be free to do the things that don't hurt other
people, and also that you should be stopped from doing the things that hurt
other people, religious or otherwise.
I'm just sick of this stuff being thrown on top of it that doesn't have anything
to do with it.
Anyway, so we'll see.
We'll see what ends up happening at the Supreme Court and this same sex ruling.
And obviously, a lot of states have legalized it there.
There's the recent bill that's kind of weak sauce moving through the Senate and
everything.
But I got some Republican support, so that's good.
But anyway, we'll see.
[MUSIC]