These days, people can get fired up about the littlest things. Stories buzz around gaining controversy faster than ever before thanks to social media. Lately, everyone squaring up to fight over a cake. A cake? Yes. A wedding cake, actually. In 2012, A Colorado baker by the name of Jack Phillips turned away a gay couple requesting a cake for their wedding. At the time, gay marriage was not yet legalized in Colorado. The couple, David Mullins and Charlie Craig, were inflamed and embarrassed. Recently, the case has made its way through the court system to the Supreme Court. Philips stands behind his decision that started the case, claiming that making a cake for the couple would go against his Christian religion. Furthermore, he refuses to make Halloween cakes in general for the same reason. In a personal account from him on CNN 10, he states that he offered them any cake in the shop, except a wedding cake.Philips doesn’t believe that he discriminated against the sexual orientation of Mullins and Craig. Instead, Philips backs his argument behind his first amendment rights. The First Amendment of the Constitution states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” The key part of the amendment states that the government grants the freedom of religion and speech to its people. This means that its people are free to worship and practice religion however they should choose, along with express themselves how they should choose whether it be verbally or artistically. Mullins and Craig feel rather different. In the story of conflict recalled by both Philips and the couple, Mullins and Craig had just sat down at the wedding table and begun to flip through the booklet when Philips entered the picture. He asked them who the cake was for, and they replied for themselves. Philips turned them away right after. This provides justification to Mullins and Craigs belief that they were discriminated against for being who they are. 25 years ago, the voters of Colorado pushed for an Amendment 2 that
The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress
Rule of law: First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." (Amendment I, U.S. Constitution).
What I think that the first amendment is that The federal government will do nothing to prevent the expression of thoughts to the ones which are interested in listening to or studying approximately them, nor will it do anything to promote or stifle the exercise of any spiritual religion. Nor will it save you the residents from peacefully protesting or expressing dissent. Which can also suggest by way of the first amendment guarantees freedom of faith, however, there are several other freedoms assured there as nicely. Congress is not allowed to create a "state" faith, or make any sort of regulation to maintain human beings from expressing their own nonsecular views. It additionally can 't make a law that would preserve a person from saying or publishing what they wish; it likewise can not prevent people from assembling peacefully, or from asking the authorities to accurate problems. the first change has five components to it; freedom of speech, faith, press meeting and petition.
The First Amendments is a blessing that the United States is fortunate enough to have. First and foremost, First Amendment protects the right to freedom of religion and expression, without any government interference ("First Amendment" n.p.). The freedom of expression includes the right to free speech, press, assembly, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances ("First Amendment" n.p.). Redress of grievances guarantees people the right to ask the government to provide relief for a wrong through courts or other governmental action ("First Amendment" n.p.). People are allowed to practice their own religions and do not have to conform to one religion, all because of the First Amendment. People's rights are protected with no government interference.
Our first amendment to the United States Constitution reads; Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
The first Amendment of the United States Constitution says; “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”[1] Our fore fathers felt that this statement was plain enough for all to understand, however quite often the United States government deems it necessary to make laws to better define those rights that are stated in the Constitution. Today the framers would be both encouraged and discouraged by our modern interpretation the First Amendment the United States
The First Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”. This Amendment was created to protect the first United States citizens, who were escaping religious persecution and sought the right to freedom of religion and expression without government interference. The United States government is the first in world history to deliberately allow religious freedom. Though the First Amendment states that there should be some kind of separation between church and state, even the highest branches of the United States government use religion to hold citizens and or themselves accountable; thus, many people
The First Amendment states that, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of
There have been many cases over the years regarding people objecting to things based on their religious beliefs. By doing so, these people are sometimes in violation of federal or state laws that protect people’s rights and prevent discrimination. An example of this is when Bob Smith refused to rent out his banquet hall to Adam and Steve, a gay couple who wanted to get married there. Bob, a California resident, refused to rent out the banquet hall because Adam and Steve’s gay wedding went against his religious beliefs and he found their lifestyle to be immoral and ungodly. This case brings up several legal, moral and philosophical issues that will be discussed in the following paragraphs.
Phillips "flat-out rejection of a wedding cake" sounded "more like a refusal to serve gay and lesbian couples rather than a conscientious objection to create particular "expression" on a confection" (S.M.). The couple also implied that "Phillips' rejection was more painful to them than the times they have been slurred in public" (Riccardi). To the couple, the refusal was also "like the institution and society...saying:" (Riccardi) they weren't equal. The charging party's "brief'"...questioned "whether the free-speech clause is implicated by a "neutral state law that does not target speech" and whether the free exercise clause could possibly be violated by a "state law that is neutral and generally applicable" (S.M.).
Every single person in the United States have the right to express their religion of preference or no religion at all, however him or her wants without offending anybody, and the best way to protect religion’s liberty was by keeping the government out if it and creating this First Amendment freedom of religion, to separate the church from the state.
The First Amendment states Congress will have no right to prohibit or create laws against free speech, press, or religion. This documents in written word that all forms of speech and press are legal in the United States. Therefore,
The First Amendment states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an established religion, or prohibiting the exercise thereof'; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." This amendment, founded on the strong and open minds of the Founding Fathers, made certain that free speech be incorporated into America's free and democratic society.