On Friday, the Supreme Court upheld the First Amendment right of conscience, 6-3, ruling that a designer can’t be forced to create wedding websites celebrating same-sex unions.
What’s truly appalling is that three of the justices got this one wrong.
Yes, the left keeps insisting this is a question of discriminating against a class of customers, but nothing in the majority opinion supports that: This is purely about the right not to be compelled to create content (“speech,” broadly defined) contrary to your beliefs.
And it wouldn’t be an issue if the left didn’t keep trying to force everyone to submit to its agenda.
After all, this case follows repeated progressive efforts to make a cake-baker celebrate gay weddings under the same Colorado law that bans discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
The Supremes wouldn’t allow that, either. Of course the same principle applies to other creators.
The issue isn’t the customer, but the work he, she, ze (or whatever the pronouns) seeks.
Refusing to see this is just another part of the modern left’s drive to equate speech with action.
It insists that even expressing disagreement is a form of violence — heck, even a college lesson on how people in the past once had “hurtful” opinions can be enough to get a tenured professor axed.
Thing is, this part (at least) of the progressive project is profoundly un-American and anti-constitutional: Freedom of conscience (freedoms of religion, of speech, of the press and more) is protected by the first item in the Bill of Rights for a reason.
Frankly, it’s appalling that three justices couldn’t see that.
The court’s “liberal” wing just proved itself the friend of totalitarianism.
This story originally appeared on NYPost
