Related reading: The Mysterious Case of the Fake Gay Marriage Website, the Real Straight Man, and the Supreme Court (<a href="https://newrepublic.com/article/173987/mysterious-case-fake-gay-marriage-website-real-straight-man-supreme-court" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://newrepublic.com/article/173987/mysterious-case-fake-...</a>)
Is there anything wrong with this? There are thousands of web designers out there. If someone doesn’t want to serve you, then you take your business to another one interested in the money.<p>Suppose a gay web designer gets offered a deal to design a website for a notoriously anti-LGBT church…they should be allowed to say no because it conflicts with their values. Pretty sure they’ll find another designer willing to do it.
Like banning books based on content without context, this will have unintended consequences.<p>But in the more immediate term, I fear for what will happen as traditional restaurants turn their existing biases against serving black people (who are sterotypically labeled as poor patrons) into bans. I don't think this will end peacefully.
That’s one hot take on the ruling. It was quite narrow, and has nothing to do with same-sex weddings, but is about compelled speech and free association.
I really don't understand this one. I turn down clients with projects I don't want to do all the time. How is "I don't want to make your crypto-scam website." substantially different than "I don't want to make your same-sex wedding website."?<p>If you were a McDonalds of websites, and any person could walk in and order a stock website it would be a different matter entirely. To refuse to sell an item off of your shelf to a customer based on sex/religion/skin-color/etc would be entirely wrong, but to refuse to enter a contractual agreement with someone to create a bespoke thing seems different.<p>Then again, I may be some sort of terrible despicable bigot, because I've turned down *EVERY* contract to write PERL that I've ever been offered, so maybe I'm just a warped individual.
When you're so homophobic you invent a company, then fraudulently claim someone wants you as a client, and then sue to say you should be able to discriminate against people if their existence is against your beliefs.<p>So yes they did commit perjury, and the Supreme Court said "who cares, our goal is to make it illegal to be gay again"
I had a friend who used to work as a PM for a conservative outfit in DC. (Something like the Koch foundation) He said it was impossible to get Web Design agencies to work on their products. (Which, to me, should continued to be allowed.) This decision seems to fit that same situation.