Conservative Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito says the ruling legalizing marriage equality nationwide marked “perhaps the decisive point” in America’s turn “against religious liberty.”
In his new book So Ordered, Alito focuses on Obergefell v. Hodges. The 5-4 decision was a landmark in civil rights, establishing a constitutional right for same-sex couples to marry nationwide. But Alito, who dissented from the 2015 ruling, portrays it as a turning point against religious freedom.
Alito points to disputes involving LGBTQ+ rights as evidence that “support for religious liberty has cratered.” He cites cases involving businesses seeking religious exemptions from requirements governing services for same-sex couples or employee health coverage, including those that refuse to provide wedding services to gay couples or seek to limit health care for employees based on religious beliefs.
The ruling gives freedom, you are free to marry whoever you want.
If you and your religion preach to not marry the same sex, then you are free to follow that rule for yourself.
You are however not free to force your religious views on others. Hasn’t he heard about separation of church and state? Go back to law school.
Conservatives are always eager to force their views on others.
🤣 Alito’s understanding of the law and the world is so idiotic you could write a book about it.
Christian supremacy is not the same thing as religious freedom, you fucking knob
Uhhhuh… Well, he makes a very compelling argument for political violence, though.
Religious liberty means that I have the liberty to not give a flying fuck about your stupid religion. Marriage equality has expanded religious liberty.
Plus, at a more conceptual level, he’s confused correlation with causation.
Surely, it’s more likely that legalized gay marriage and intolerance of the homophobia of Christianity are both driven by society becoming more tolerant of homosexuality.
It’s scary to think that there are powerful people who are unable to reason at even the most basic level.
Shut the fuck up, Alito.
Religious liberty. The freedom to oppress and abuse anyone in the name of whatever flavor of sky wizard you worship.
No no, not whatever flavor. Just the one. The others are crazy!
The difference between a Christian and an atheist is that there’s just one additional god the Christian believes in that the atheist doesn’t.
They are pretty much the same. If you are a apathist you notice how alike they are.
If your religion forbids you from providing service for someone because of their sexuality, you and your religion is the problem.
Well apparently the only definition of religious liberty is to hate queers. I never hear it used elsewhere.
If your liberty requires the stifling of other’s liberty, then it’s not liberty you see at all.
Removed by mod
If I can’t oppress you, then you must be oppressing me!!! Stop oppressing me and let me oppress you!!
If your religion requires you to hate and condemn and persecute others for their mere existence, for circumstances far from their control, for the who they love, what they look like, and where they came from, you worship evil, and no I will not support your right to harm others because it’s your “Faith.” And for those who think that’s persecution, good. Because bad ideas deserve to be persecuted. You don’t have to hold those beliefs. That’s a choice. If you value hate more than you love your neighbours, then you’ve made a choice. Make better choices.
And stop calling yourself a Christian. I may not believe in any mythology, but there’s nothing more disgusting than watching people twist old myths into an excuse for cruelty, and I don’t care if it’s Christian Extremists, Islamic Extremists, or Heathen Extremists pretending to worship Odin. Cosplaying a zealot is not exercising “Religious liberty”, you’re just a sadist whatever your rationalization is.
If Trollito’s version of “religious liberty” means special privileges for xtians, then, well, no fucking thanks, asshole.
Which proofs that Samuel Alito is an idiot who does not know American law and how it works. Seems rather disqualifying for his job, doesn’t it?
In a just America sure…but I don’t think we’ve ever had one of those
SCOTUS Justice who doesn’t understand the First Amendment, because he doesn’t need it. He rules based on Vibes.
