CT Blue

It will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court handles these cases if they make it to the highest court in the land:

The ACLU is bringing a suit against Indiana’s regressive, sadistic abortion ban based on the fact that it infringes on the religious rights of anyone who doesn’t subscribe to the fantasy that life begins at dinner the night before. Jewish people, for instance, don’t believe the fetus has a soul until it draws its first independent breath. We prioritize the life of the pregnant person above the life of the fetus for the entirety of the pregnancy, including in situations that put the pregnant person’s emotional health at risk. With the imposition of the GOP’s fetus-fetish laws all over the nation, however, Jews and others whose religions don’t subscribe to the ideology of these nutters are fighting fire with fire.

Right now the court is poised to rule that a business can refuse to do business with gay people on religious grounds. There have already been a host of rulings exempting Christian fundamentalists from following facially neutral laws, such as the Hobby Lobby decision in which the court essentially ruled that a corporation, a creature of statute and not, despite what Mitt Romney and most other Republicans may think an actual human being, can have a religion and is therefore entitled to some of the protections provided in the so called Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

So, eventually, the court is going to have to come up with a rationale for ruling that a cake maker can refuse to make a cake for a gay wedding based on his or her deeply held religious conviction that gay people should not be allowed to marry, while at the same time ruling that the extreme religous beliefs of extreme Christian sects should bind people who do not share those religious beliefs.

It should be an easy task for a court that is willing to look to the writings of a 17th century witch burner to determine what women can do with their bodies in the 21st century. Besides throwing democracy out the window, the court has pretty much given up on being consistent or intellectually honest.