Isn’t it illegal to reject a customer due to religious belief? This does comes back to the question of “what is speech?” Maybe it’s like porn where you know it when you see it :P

I don’t exactly disagree with the ruling, just with the conservative backsliding the Supreme Court has been doing, I’m concerned about what this ruling might encourage in terms of growing the interpretation of speech and creative expression to provide work arounds to the civil rights act for those who wish to discriminate.

But hey, I could be overly worried for nothing. I sure hope I am.

I agree that forcing speech is wrong, the risk is what constitutes "speech” and people/groups trying to expand “speech” to all sorts of business activity.

If in another scenario, this website creator had templates where a user just has to upload their own text and images, but the creator has to click a “publish” button to render and host the pages, does that constitute speech? Was the creating of templates and their final rendered state speech?

I acknowledge this is a false dilemma/slippery slope argument, though clearly corporate personhood has only grown in its interpretation over time (e.g. citizens united) and not reduced.

Ah yes, the eponymous Asian noodles. Not to be outdone by the European noodles.

How else are you supposed to cast a fire blast if not a 360 no-scope?

Or at least much further up the street

Doesn’t this open up rejecting for any protected class?

How does one diagnose a goat with anxiety?