SCOTUS Rules About Colorodo Baker

[BmorePat87]

(06-04-2018, 11:42 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: I think SCOTUS ruled the way they did because it would be extremely hard to prove religious beliefs as a reason to not sell to someone.

Where is the line drawn?

A person who is deeply religious but doesn't go to church has no way to prove they are deeply religious. 
A person who isn't deeply religious and is just a bigot can claim they are religious.
What about a bakery knowingly makes a cake for a couple for the couples third marriage who committed adultery on their previous spouses?

For the state to prove someone doesn't have religious convictions is impossible.

These cases need to be handled on a case by case basis.

The phrase "since religious beliefs" is repeated numerous times in the opinion, but it is important to not that in the opinion Kennedy questions where the line is draw, suggesting using this religious argument could be applied to nearly any public accommodation to create a stigma against gay people. He also states that a state can limit someone's religious freedom if they make an argument for public interest (preventing discrimination).