Top Reads of the Week: First Edition
I do a lot of reading every week, and I need to do new writing. I will start doing a weekly wrap up of good or important reads of the week. Fair warning, many reads right now will deal with current American politics and current events, but whatever I find most interesting in the week (regardless of topic) will go up here each week on Sunday.
My take away from this case so far is that the court simply used existing precedent and focused on the animus of the Commission towards the baker. There was evidence in the record that the feelings of those on the Commission towards the baker were not neutral with respect to his religion, and it is a pretty undisputed principle that the courts cannot make inquiries into the legitimacy of a religious belief. The court did not find any issue with the neutrality of the law itself. The issue was that it was not applied in a neutral manner. ( I have not read the dissent yet, so I cannot comment on what is said there about the holding.) What is not said, an what I think we can say this decision says without actually having to make a holding on the issue, is that businesses that fall under the definition of public accommodations in Colorado cannot discriminate based on sexual orientation. So, if the Commission had not shown animus towards the faith of the baker in their assessment, he would have lost. People who argue that it was not discrimination, because he would have sold them anything else completely miss the point. If anything, refusal to sell a wedding cake to a same sex couple is clearly discrimination based on sexual orientation. To argue otherwise is to be intellectually dishonest.
So, what is the answer? There is no easy answer here. What is needed sorely is dialogue, but opportunities for that continue to dwindle as people on both sides dig in, which brings me to read number two.
"As for the anti-religion comments, these are the same comments a lot of people now make about religion in the context of religious exemptions—they are routinely called a right to discriminate, rather than a right of conscience. So, the Court still has respect for religion. But a lot of Americans do not.
Religious believers should remember that they are not practicing live and let live here. There are plenty of people who would love to reverse the Obergefell same-sex marriage case if they could. Time for a grand bargain?"
It has definitely been my observation that both sides are talking past each other. By voting on their fears of religious discrimination, those in the religious right regularly fuel more anti-religious sentiment. I regularly see dismissive comments about religion as often as I see dismissive comments about how there was not really discrimination because they could have bought anything else. It is definitely time to step back and listen top the other side, if you have not already.
"Trump’s tweets were what first reminded me of the Kaiser. Wilhelm was a compulsive speechmaker who constantly strayed off script. Even his staff couldn’t stop him, though it tried, distributing copies of speeches to the German press before he’d actually given them. Unfortunately, the Austrian press printed the speeches as they were delivered, and the gaffes and insults soon circulated around Europe. “There is only one person who is master in this empire and I am not going to tolerate any other,” Wilhelm liked to say, even though Germany had a democratic assembly and political parties. (“I’m the only one that matters,” Trump has said.) The Kaiser reserved particular abuse for political parties that voted against his policies. “I regard every Social Democrat as an enemy of the Fatherland,” he said, and he denounced the German Socialist party as a “gang of traitors.” August Bebel, the Socialist party leader, said that every time the Kaiser opened his mouth, the party gained another hundred thousand votes."
I recommend reading the whole article for an interesting lesson in history. The downfall of his regime resulted in Hitler eventually, so there is a lot to ponder here.
I definitely recommend this read.
"By bringing recent developments in Augustine scholarship into conversation with modern Orthodox criticisms of Augustine, this article challenges the polemical Orthodox claim that Augustinian pneumatology logically undermines the doctrine of theosis. Indeed, in Augustine's own case, I argue that just the opposite is true: Augustine's “filioquist” pneumatology is precisely what leads him, ahead of his contemporaries, to advance a robustly ecclesial and trinitarian account of deification. Augustine should therefore be seen not as an opponent but as a crucial conversation partner for Orthodox theology, addressing in advance many of the ecclesiological and trinitarian questions with which the latter has engaged in recent centuries."
That is it for this week in reading. I will try to keep up with this weekly with five to ten articles or books I am reading each week.
This Week in Interesting Reading
Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd., et al. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission et al. (Decided June 4, 2018)
Some people read judicial opinions really quickly, I like to savor them. Too many people do not read them at all. If people had just read the syllabus instead of the headlines, perhaps they would not have been too quick to pronounce a "victory" for religious rights or to poo poo headlines about the "narrow" decision thinking that narrow refereed to the number of judge rather than the grounds. (The correct reference is narrow as a legal term of art referring to the basis of the decision not being broad in scope.) Monday into Tuesday on Facebook was an interesting explosion of opinions on the decision - informed and uninformed - that quickly dissipated as fast as it happened. Although I did skim the syllabus early in the week, I did not have a chance to do a full read until this weekend. I am still working though it, and I might post some deeper thoughts eventually. |
| It is also hard to read with cats always sitting on everything. |
My take away from this case so far is that the court simply used existing precedent and focused on the animus of the Commission towards the baker. There was evidence in the record that the feelings of those on the Commission towards the baker were not neutral with respect to his religion, and it is a pretty undisputed principle that the courts cannot make inquiries into the legitimacy of a religious belief. The court did not find any issue with the neutrality of the law itself. The issue was that it was not applied in a neutral manner. ( I have not read the dissent yet, so I cannot comment on what is said there about the holding.) What is not said, an what I think we can say this decision says without actually having to make a holding on the issue, is that businesses that fall under the definition of public accommodations in Colorado cannot discriminate based on sexual orientation. So, if the Commission had not shown animus towards the faith of the baker in their assessment, he would have lost. People who argue that it was not discrimination, because he would have sold them anything else completely miss the point. If anything, refusal to sell a wedding cake to a same sex couple is clearly discrimination based on sexual orientation. To argue otherwise is to be intellectually dishonest.
 |
| Alice freely exercises her claws. |
Hallowed Secularism Blog
My Constitutional Law professor, for whom I was research assistant for in my 3L year keeps a blog, and I like to check in periodically to see if he has thoughts on the hot topics of the week. This weeks post on Trump's pardon claims and the Masterpiece Cakeshop decision included the following thoughts:"As for the anti-religion comments, these are the same comments a lot of people now make about religion in the context of religious exemptions—they are routinely called a right to discriminate, rather than a right of conscience. So, the Court still has respect for religion. But a lot of Americans do not.
Religious believers should remember that they are not practicing live and let live here. There are plenty of people who would love to reverse the Obergefell same-sex marriage case if they could. Time for a grand bargain?"
It has definitely been my observation that both sides are talking past each other. By voting on their fears of religious discrimination, those in the religious right regularly fuel more anti-religious sentiment. I regularly see dismissive comments about religion as often as I see dismissive comments about how there was not really discrimination because they could have bought anything else. It is definitely time to step back and listen top the other side, if you have not already.
What Happens When a Bad-Tempered Distractible Doofus Runs An Empire?
Things I leaned about Kaiser Wilhem II from this New Yorker article: you do not need internet or Twitter to publish your stupidity to the world. (Okay, technically we already knew that.)"Trump’s tweets were what first reminded me of the Kaiser. Wilhelm was a compulsive speechmaker who constantly strayed off script. Even his staff couldn’t stop him, though it tried, distributing copies of speeches to the German press before he’d actually given them. Unfortunately, the Austrian press printed the speeches as they were delivered, and the gaffes and insults soon circulated around Europe. “There is only one person who is master in this empire and I am not going to tolerate any other,” Wilhelm liked to say, even though Germany had a democratic assembly and political parties. (“I’m the only one that matters,” Trump has said.) The Kaiser reserved particular abuse for political parties that voted against his policies. “I regard every Social Democrat as an enemy of the Fatherland,” he said, and he denounced the German Socialist party as a “gang of traitors.” August Bebel, the Socialist party leader, said that every time the Kaiser opened his mouth, the party gained another hundred thousand votes."
I recommend reading the whole article for an interesting lesson in history. The downfall of his regime resulted in Hitler eventually, so there is a lot to ponder here.
Do Americans Know How Much Trouble They're In?
This one popped up in my news feed today. It contains some interesting reflections on what America is becoming under Trump with reference to some of this weeks events including Trump's claim that he can pardon himself and alienating our allies. I am more hopeful than the author because we have procedures (Impeachment) if he does pardon himself. What is far more concerning is the damage that is being done to our place in the world the longer he is in office. Even once he is gone, is anyone going to want to work with us since they now know we are willing to elect people like Trump?I definitely recommend this read.
Final Read
Filioque, Theosis, and Eccelsia: Augustine in Dialouge with Modern Orthodox Theology
A link to this article popped up in my feed this week, and I have printed it out to read. It is always good to return to contemplation of theological debates that I enjoyed before I went to law school. I preferred the Eastern Fathers myself. Augustine is extremely dry, but maybe that is just the translations. The abstract definitely drew me in, and I have it printed out to read."By bringing recent developments in Augustine scholarship into conversation with modern Orthodox criticisms of Augustine, this article challenges the polemical Orthodox claim that Augustinian pneumatology logically undermines the doctrine of theosis. Indeed, in Augustine's own case, I argue that just the opposite is true: Augustine's “filioquist” pneumatology is precisely what leads him, ahead of his contemporaries, to advance a robustly ecclesial and trinitarian account of deification. Augustine should therefore be seen not as an opponent but as a crucial conversation partner for Orthodox theology, addressing in advance many of the ecclesiological and trinitarian questions with which the latter has engaged in recent centuries."
That is it for this week in reading. I will try to keep up with this weekly with five to ten articles or books I am reading each week.
 |
| Alice is sleepy from all that legal reading. |
Comments
Post a Comment