It's Official: Religious Beliefs > Anti-Discrimination

Processing feelings around a radical Supreme Court

Photo by Richard Cohrs on Unsplash

We talk about religious trauma on here, but I kinda have a special interest in politics and if you’re here, sometimes you get to come along with me. Where other people binge The Bachelor and watch Great British Baking Show to relax, I listen to political podcasts and documentaries about conservative movements and religious abuse (see: Shiny Happy People). Is that you too? Let’s hang out.

Don’t know if you’ve been paying attention, but the Supreme Court has been up to some dirty rotten tricks lately, stuff that rings very familiar with what evangelicals (who used to howl about an “activist Supreme Court”) have been begging for for decades. Since it infuriates me so much, one release valve I have is…writing about it!

I posted a version of this last December when the Supreme Court was deciding the homophobic Colorado website designer case (303 Creative LLC vs Elenis), and just recently the decision was released… with bad news for those interested in a society where discrimination is not codified into law. Less than a third of you all were around the first time I posted this, though, so I figured it’s a good time to revisit.

---

303 Creative LLC vs Elenis

What drives me (and others) most nuts about this case is how much it is based on hypotheticals and is basically pre-empting an imagined problem. Lorie Smith, the website designer of 303 Collective, wants to put a statement on her site that she will not design websites for same-sex couples. No one has asked her to design such a site. Her business wasn’t even fully operating yet when the suit was started. The Supreme Court is deciding all this based on a hypothetical problem.

Nevertheless, Smith sued the state. Why? Because Colorado has an Anti Discrimination Act that would disallow her from blatantly discriminating against same-sex couples. And SCOTUS decided they could help reshape the culture of America by choosing to take this case up.

Don’t just take my word for it, though.

Law Dork, with Chris Geidner describes the case as such:

This case, like Moore v. Harper, isn’t really a case either — but for different reasons. Here, the plaintiff, Lorie Smith, hasn’t started making wedding sites, let alone denied a same-sex couple her wedding website services, let alone faced legal consequences from Colorado because of it. And yet, here we are.

Oof. I have some thoughts.

First is just the general pattern of certain Christians to read some kind of persecution / discrimination / unfairness when expected to do things that involve, well, not discriminating against people. (At least not openly discriminating, as in flagrantly challenging the law). And some churches and religious institutions would like to keep their tax-exempt status while discriminating in their preferred ways.

The fact that SCOTUS is even taking up the case is mind-boggling in itself, given that this woman hasn’t even had her religious “freedoms” tested by being requested by a gay couple to do her website. But unfortunately, certain Christians perceive other people’s rights to live in a free, fair, and non-discriminatory society as persecutory.

Second, what I fail to understand (by which I mean I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THE FEAR-MONGERING SHE’S PROBABLY INDOCTRINATED WITH AND HATE IT) is why she thinks the gays are surely going to come pounding down her door demanding she design their website. Like… hey, Lorie, but there is no gay agenda, sorry. Or there is, but it’s just wanting to be treated with decency and respect. The gay couples that I know want to pick providers that actually support and care about them, not those who think they shouldn’t exist.

I don’t think that if you were the hypothetical web designer who was asked to make a web page for a gay wedding, that you would be sent to hell if you agreed to do it. The designer could even see it as a chance to share the love of Jesus with those whose “lifestyle” she disagreed with. Not that I’m condoning proselytizing, but wouldn’t it be a better witness to agree to do a service for someone than to refuse them service?

Besides, if proselytizing doesn’t interest you, there’s plenty of ways to indicate your close-mindedness on your advertising. Only have sample pictures of heterosexual couples. Use lots of language about “man and woman” and “holy matrimony” and “husband and wife” and “groom and bride.” Make sure you don’t say anything about pronouns. Throw in a couple Bible verses on your website in cutesy font, maybe something from Song of Songs and the Jeremiah verse about God knowing the plans he has for you. If I was looking for services, I’d run the other way real quick!

You just gotta know your target audience, right??

Third is that you can technically agree to see someone but be polite about referring out. As a mental health counselor, part of my education was in ethics. We learned things like the importance of being culturally competent, and not discriminating against who we would see based on things like sex, sexual orientation, race, etc. But we can ALSO refer out if we don’t feel competent to handle something, or if it doesn’t fit our specialty.

Hey Lorie: here’s something you could try to say to the hypothetical gay couple seeking your services. “Thanks so much for reaching out! Unfortunately, I don’t think I would be the best fit for doing your website design, and you deserve to work with someone who would be a great fit. I recommend ___ or ____ [affirming designers]!”

I can imagine SO many options that don’t involve SCOTUS making a national ruling that people’s individual religious beliefs get to outweigh protecting LGBTQ+ people from blatant discrimination.

---

Oy. Now that I’ve gotten my blood pressure up, shall we do some breathing and relaxing together? I found myself taking some nice deep breaths when I noticed the fiery ball of anger in my belly. The anger’s important, but right now it’s not going to be productive, so it’s okay to breathe it out. Meanwhile, I’ll write, and support causes I believe in, and vote, and spread awareness, and make sure my own website is as queer and trauma friendly as possible. I will make the impact I can, in my own circles.

In other news: I’ve decided to go to the EMDRIA conference in late August to continue deepening my learning of EMDR! It’s in DC and I’m SUPER stoked. Maybe I’ll go share my thoughts with SCOTUS 😂

Be well, my friends. Come process your thoughts and feelings in the comments if you feel so inclined! Do you too get extra triggered when evangelical-y political decisions get passed nowadays? Let’s show up for each other together.