CFFS Condemns SCOTUS Ruling as Attack on Religious Liberty
The Supreme Court’s June 15 ruling that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act applies to transgenderism and sexual orientation provides a harrowing view of the future of religions liberty in the United States, warns Citizens for Free Speech (CFFS), a 501(c)(3) organization dedicated to preserving the First Amendment rights of all citizens.
“This was a devastating blow to religious organizations and their ability to make hiring and retention decisions based on the tenets of their faith,” said CFFS Executive Director Patrick Wood.
_________________________________________________________________________
BLOGGER NOTE: Houses of worship are exempt
_________________________________________________________________________
“CFFS is dedicated to preserving freedom of speech, but we are equally defensive of all five elements of the First Amendment, and this Supreme Court ruling puts religious liberty in serious jeopardy.”
At issue is the Court’s ruling that the 1964 Civil Rights Act protecting citizens from discrimination on the basis of their sex (among other factors) should be expanded to include sexual identification and orientation. In the 6-3 decision, Justice Neal Gorsuch, writing for the majority, determined that,
“An employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender violates Title VII” of the CRA. The ruling is problematic for multiple reasons, . . .
. . . In addition to the grave threat the Court’s ruling poses for the free exercise of religion, there are free speech ramifications as well. The recognition of gender identity as a protected class brings with it a host of new language complications in the form of new pronoun usage, real and imagined. In many workplaces, supervisors and employees are already being reprimanded in certain circumstances for not using plural pronouns such as “they” and “them” to refer to an individual who does not wish to be identified by the pronoun associated with males or females.
___________________________________________________
READ MORE > EIN News
Supreme Court of the United States (2020)
High Court redefined “sex” in Civil Rights Act to include sexual identity and orientation
News Provided By
June 17, 2020, 17:43 GMT
“religious organizations need employees who actually live the faith.” ”
MESA, ARIZONA, USA, June 17, 2020 /EINPresswire.com/ --
— Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito
The Supreme Court’s June 15 ruling that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act applies to transgenderism and sexual orientation provides a harrowing view of the future of religions liberty in the United States, warns Citizens for Free Speech (CFFS), a 501(c)(3) organization dedicated to preserving the First Amendment rights of all citizens.
“This was a devastating blow to religious organizations and their ability to make hiring and retention decisions based on the tenets of their faith,” said CFFS Executive Director Patrick Wood.
_________________________________________________________________________
BLOGGER NOTE: Houses of worship are exempt
_________________________________________________________________________
“CFFS is dedicated to preserving freedom of speech, but we are equally defensive of all five elements of the First Amendment, and this Supreme Court ruling puts religious liberty in serious jeopardy.”
At issue is the Court’s ruling that the 1964 Civil Rights Act protecting citizens from discrimination on the basis of their sex (among other factors) should be expanded to include sexual identification and orientation. In the 6-3 decision, Justice Neal Gorsuch, writing for the majority, determined that,
“An employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender violates Title VII” of the CRA. The ruling is problematic for multiple reasons, . . .
. . . In addition to the grave threat the Court’s ruling poses for the free exercise of religion, there are free speech ramifications as well. The recognition of gender identity as a protected class brings with it a host of new language complications in the form of new pronoun usage, real and imagined. In many workplaces, supervisors and employees are already being reprimanded in certain circumstances for not using plural pronouns such as “they” and “them” to refer to an individual who does not wish to be identified by the pronoun associated with males or females.
___________________________________________________
READ MORE > EIN News
