Among the first to lose rights and status with the predominance of religion over law are those in the LGBTQ+ community.  When Obergefell was decided the court used the human rights language of dignity to establish the right to marry.  What the court failed to do was frame the right of all people to marry as a civil right and create a suspect classification.  In shying away from civil rights law the court prevented whole scale cultural change for sexual minorities to fully participate in American life.  Without suspect classification status the right to dignity cannot be ensured.  Now the predictable is happening.   The backlash against gay rights comes from those claiming they can discriminate because their religious convictions (however tenuous) protect them from serving same sex couples.  

The latest challenge is from Minnesota where a married straight couple refused to videograph the wedding of gay couple.  They argue that the videos are a form of speech and thereby protected under the first amendment.  If this particular company was selected for strategic reasons, the strategy is probably doomed as the company in question, Telescope Media Group, calls itself a Christian business. The website says “Telescope Media Group exists to glorify God through top-quality media production.”  Writing for the panel’s 2-1 majority, Judge David Stras ruled that the first amendment permits the Larsens to choose when to speak and what to say.  Otherwise, he wrote, their free speech rights would be violate risking penalties under Minnesota’s Human Rights Act.   I fail to see how videotaping someone else’s event, in which the videographers had no input, constitutes their speech.  Here we go again.

“The ruling prompted a sharply worded dissent from Judge Jane Kelly, who described the decision as a ‘major step backward in ‘this country’s long and difficult journey to combat all forms of discrimination.’ “

Let’s hope that this case is not appealed further.  The case has the markings of Masterpiece Cake.  The lower court ruling is based upon a state law and free speech and religion are the business owners’ defenses.   The outlook is not good.