On the last day of their year, in a devastating blow to both religious freedom and LGBTQ+ rights, the Supreme Court ruled that businesses nationwide can turn away customers just because of who they are and who they love. This cannot stand.
The case, 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, was brought forth by a Colorado wedding website designer seeking to turn away same-sex couples. But religion is not a license to discriminate. That’s why Intefaith Alliance joined 30 faith-based and civil rights partners in an amicus brief earlier this year underscoring why religious freedom and LGBTQ+ freedom are complementary, not contradictory values.
Losses like these are difficult to digest, and this decision will inflict real harm on minority religious and nonreligious communities as well as LGBTQ+ people. It’s for their sake that we need to press on and strive to create a brighter tomorrow where true religious freedom and inclusive democracy are a reality.
There’s no other way to put it: this one hurts. And for many of us at Interfaith Alliance, it’s personal. When businesses open their doors to the public, they have a duty to serve all of their customers equally. But now, business owners have been granted a sweeping license to refuse service to customers who look, believe, or live differently than they do.
With your support, we will continue our work to advance an America that works for all of us, and where people of all faiths and beliefs can exercise their constitutional rights equally.
Here’s how you can join us in this ongoing fight:
Step Up: Donate to Interfaith Alliance to make sure that we have the resources to fight back against heinous legislation
Speak Out: Every act of advocacy is important, you can send a message TODAY telling your members of congress that you support the Equality Act
Learn More: Check out the press release for Interfaith Alliance’s full statement on the SCOTUS Decision
Listen to the latest episode of State of Belief with Elizabeth Reiner Platt, director of Columbia Law School’s Law, Rights, and Religion Project to discuss this case and how it could lead to a wide range of discrimination