April 13, 2024
Share this post!

This made me laugh. There was a court case that the Supreme Court declined to hear that was about a jury trial in which the person who brought the civil lawsuit was gay and asked that several people being examined for juror duty said that homosexuality was a sin be excused. The state of Missouri appealed that, saying that the jury process had been discriminatory on religious grounds. Appeals court said the jurors had not been excused for being christians but for their homosexuality beliefs. Keep in mind that the whole case being heard was a discrimination case.

The case stemmed from a lawsuit filed by Jean Finney, who is lesbian, against her longtime employer, the Missouri Department of Corrections, for workplace discrimination and retaliation due to her sexuality.

If you have a case being heard where already in the beginning you know that some jurors might not rule for you because they already think your, as a homosexual, are sinning against God, you bet you should not have them on the jury. Alito is apparently mad about that

I agree that we should not grant certiorari in this case, which is complicated by a state-law procedural issue. But I write because I am concerned that the lower court’s reason-ing may spread and may be a foretaste of things to come.
In this case, the court below reasoned that a person who still holds traditional religious views on questions of sexual morality is presumptively unfit to serve on a jury in a case involving a party who is a lesbian. That holding exemplifies the danger that I anticipated in Obergefell v. Hodges, 576
U. S. 644 (2015), namely, that Americans who do not hide their adherence to traditional religious beliefs about homo- sexual conduct will be “labeled as bigots and treated as such” by the government. Id., at 741 (dissenting opinion). The opinion of the Court in that case made it clear that the decision should not be used in that way, but I am afraid that this admonition is not being heeded by our society

Hah, well YEAH. If Christians or any other sect want to run around and say that they can’t seem to treat people well, even if they don’t agree or adopt their lifestyle, WHILE IT IS LEGAL TO BE LBGTQ in the United States, then they should not be surprised that a whole heck of lot of people believe they are BIGOTS and hopefully won’t hesitate to tell them so. Nobody has to listen to that christian bigotry nonsense, especially if you are an American.


In Obergefell, same-sex couples merely asked for the same legal recognition when filing taxes as Alito’s own family enjoys. Alito dissented, objecting that the decision to give them that recognition “will be used to vilify Americans who are unwilling to assent to the new orthodoxy.” More recently, he and Justice Clarence Thomas complained that recognition of same-sex couples’ right to marry “enables courts and governments to brand religious adherents who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman as bigots.” The branding certainly happens, but it is silly to think it is caused by Obergefell or would stop if that decision were overturned.

More importantly, the movement for same-sex marriage is not a conspiracy against those religious conservatives. When same-sex couples seek recognition for their families, they don’t do it because they want to diss others. It is not okay to attack others’ families because their existence makes people think less well of you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.