And notice that the Federal nor State Government cannot legislate tolerance
On the one hand, I believe that a business should be allowed to discriminate/Refuse Service against anyone they choose to. Gays, blacks, whites, chinese,Muslims, Catholics martians, single women, single men, Women with short hair, CisBiGenderQueersWhatever with(or without) purple hair, Fuzzies, dogs, unshaven men (or women), cats, sheep (especially sheep), etc…..Camels too.
Now, if they go out of business because someone objects to that discrimination and tells everyone about it on Social Media, and people stop buying at their business or decides not to use those services….then tough shit for them.
But they get the choice to be stupid and Walk their Talk, be it religious, bigotry, stupidity, or just plain muleishnes.
So, on the one hand, I find this Court of Appeals decision good.
On the other hand, the law has a bunch of language that essentially makes Christianity the State Religion, which I object to.
And the law allows public servants to choose to use a “Religious Objection” as a reason to not do their job….such as City and County clerks to choose to NOT issue marriage licenses. Which is wrong. If you are a Clerk, and you object to something your job requires, you can quit, but you can’t just not do your job.
So this is a halfway win for freedom, but a fail for Constitutionality and for making certain Public Servants do their job…
I’d expected better from the 5th Court…..