Supreme Court to hear case of Web designer who objects to same-sex marriage - The Boston Globe

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

62% : " "Prohibiting companies from displaying what would amount to 'Straight Couples Only' messages is permissible," Weiser added, "because it restricts speech that proposes illegal activity and is therefore unprotected by the First Amendment."
47% : The precise question the justices agreed to decide in the new case is "whether applying a public-accommodation law to compel an artist to speak or stay silent violates the free speech clause of the First Amendment."
47% : The owners of businesses challenging those laws have argued that the government should not force them to choose between the requirements of their faiths and their livelihoods, citing constitutional protections for free speech and religious liberty.
43% : "The record contains no evidence," he wrote, "that anyone has asked the company to create a website for a same-sex wedding; that Colorado has threatened enforcement; or that any future wedding website would convey a message that would be attributed to the company."
24% : "She cannot create websites that promote messages contrary to her faith, such as messages that condone violence or promote sexual immorality, abortion or same-sex marriage," Smith's lawyers told the justices.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.