The decision appeared to suggest that the rights of L.G.B.T.Q. people, including to same-sex marriage, are on more vulnerable legal footing, particularly when they are at odds with claims of religious freedom.
Fucking Religious Reich and this bullshit court…throw it into the fire.
Only if you can make the argument that your business is artistic in nature… and if making a website is artistic in nature, surely serving food is too. Ironically this same argument could be applied to Katzenbach v. McClung and find the original ruling unconstitutional.
The court said that website design was a form of expression because its product was “original and custom-designed” for every customer in order to express the customer’s idea. The vast majority of restaurants and stores would not pass this test.
Only if you can make the argument that your business is artistic in nature… and if making a website is artistic in nature, surely serving food is too. Ironically this same argument could be applied to Katzenbach v. McClung and find the original ruling unconstitutional.
The court said that website design was a form of expression because its product was “original and custom-designed” for every customer in order to express the customer’s idea. The vast majority of restaurants and stores would not pass this test.