That restriction on government applies only to the Congress of the United States but it represents a first principle of our Republic. Now a story of some people who make cakes from two different perspectives:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
The religious freedom perspective: http://www.onenewsnow.com/perspectives/ ... tian-faith" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The anti discrimination perspective: http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.co ... e_is_false" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Though the headline of the article with the anti discrimination perspective says that what I've heard about the case is false, I don't see any factual information in the article to indicate that. Both articles indicate the same bottom line: The State of Oregon is telling some people who bake cakes that if they want to make a living doing that they have to violate their religious beliefs.
I think it's important to note that the principle involved isn't just being able to believe what you want, go to church, etc. It's the free exercise of religion. And when you tell people that they have to do something they think is wrong according to their religion or else they cannot be in the business they want to be in you are prohibiting the free exercise of religion in that case. There is just no intellectually honest way around that.
And there is no way we should be saying someone's purported "right" to force someone else to deal with them trumps someone else's fundamental right to the free exercise of religion. I think we are and it'll probably get worse. But we shouldn't be saying it. The fact that we are is a sad comment on the State of this nation and how far we've wandered from what this country is supposed to be about (which is NOT the idea of forcing people to deal with each other).
