community going forward. the attorney for the website designer was on cnn earlier talking about this decision. she said that this isn t about gay marriage specifically. this is what she told my colleague, boris sanchez. it s not about gay marriage specifically. it s about whether the government can force an american to say something that they don t believe. so, what are the other issues that she refuses to design websites about or other messages she refuses to endorse? think of all the different websites that a website designer would be asked to create, websites that would denigrate people, political views she disagrees with, websites that would promote atheism or some other viewpoint that contradicts her faith. what s your response to that? well, i would love to know when this web designer will say and post the ten commandments. i always thought the ten commandments were the big top ten in the christian faith. being gay is not one of those.
she refuses to endorse on her website? think of all the different websites that a website designer would be asked to create, websites that would denigrate people, political views she disagrees with, websites that would promote atheism or some other viewpoint that contradicts her faith. what s your response to that? well, i would love to know when this web designer will say and post the ten commandments. i always thought the ten commandments were the big top ten in the christian faith. being gay is not one of those. nor is being in a same sex marriage. i would love to hear from this web designer when she will refuse to design a website for someone who has committed adultery or any one of those other ten commandments. this is clearly about hatred towards the lgbtq+ community. and the fact that it s coming out that she did not truly have this client, and there are questions about the legitimacy
to do with same-sex marriage, but there are lots of other messages she won t create that have nothing to do with sexuality. and this ruling protects the lgbt website designer just as much as it protects someone like lori. so you re arguing, essentially, that this isn t about gay marriage specifically? it s not about gay marriage specifically. it s about whether the government can force an american to say something that they don t believe. so what are the other issues she refuses to design websites about or the other messages she refuses to endorse on the website? think of the different websites a designer would be asked to create. websites that might express different political views she disagrees with. websites that would promote atheism or some other particular viewpoint that contradicts her faith. sure. what about the argument that there was no actual harm? the question of standing in this case, because this was a hypothetical that was brought before the supreme court. was