For decades, conservatives argued allowing gay marriage would be a slippery slope with unforeseen and unintended consequences.
While the LGBT community hurled slurs of “homophobia,” almost immediately after the Supreme Court issued their ruling the radical Left began moving to the next goal down the slope.
And now the nine Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States will have to decide on one of those unintended consequences.
The moment gay marriage became law of the land, it wasn’t enough to go along with the SCOTUS decision.
No, instead you must celebrate it – and be compelled by force to take part in it as well.
At that point, some gay couples began seeking out business owners who had religious objects to gay marriage and refused to participate in their weddings – and were ready and willing to forgo the revenue from those missed business opportunities.
The couples then began suing those business on “discrimination” grounds.
Meanwhile, woke radicals would picket and protest the business, driving many mom-and-pop shops out of business.
But now one of those business owners will get her day in court.
In fact, her day will come in front of the highest court in our country.
And this time, instead of a court with a four-to-four ideological divide and one swing vote – thanks to President Donald Trump’s three Supreme Court appointments – this case will be heard by a court with five fairly reliable conservative Justices, three incredibly predictable Liberal Justices and one swing vote in Chief Justice John Roberts.
CNS News is reporting SCOTUS has decided they will indeed hear the case of Lorie Smith.
Smith is a Christian business owner in Colorado, running a graphic design business.
She makes it clear upfront on her 303 Creative LLC website that she refuses to design sites for gay weddings.
Smith says the reason is it would violate her religious beliefs and “contradicts God’s true story of marriage.”
However, her state law forbids Smith from choosing her own customers, based on the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA).
Smith was then charged with a $500 fine for violating CADA.
“The Supreme Court will be ruling on whether applying a public-accommodation law to compel an artist to speak or stay silent violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment,” CNS’ Emily Robertson wrote.
Smith says, as an artist, she creates website designs for her customers regardless of their race, gender, religious beliefs, and sexual orientation as long as the message does not conflict with her religious beliefs.
“I am so excited and thankful that the Supreme Court is willing to hear this case because free speech is worthy of protecting and I just look forward to them hearing the points of this case and ultimately ruling in favor of free speech for myself, but for all Americans,” Smith said.
With the new makeup of SCOTUS, thanks to former President Trump, Barack Obama will be watching with bated breath, hoping one of his most radical legacies isn’t dashed, simply due to a small thing like freedom of speech and religious freedom.