Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Designer Who Refuses to Make Same-Sex Wedding Websites

SCOTUS announced some tremendous rulings this week. Very thankful that Hilary Clinton was not our 45th president.

Which illustrates the need for "the bigger picture" approach to politics. Without Trump, we would not have these significant rulings that seriously impede the recent tidal wave of progressive degeneracy. Those who won't vote for Trump because he's a scum bag (agreed) are, by default, helping to empower the progressive agenda. It's not simply one man, but which party controls the levers of government. The distinctions between the two major parties could not be more obvious, ominous, and growing further apart every year. One party stands for constitutionalism and morality (to a degree), the other stands for destruction of the constitution and everything Christian. Knowing this, Christians are doing the right thing to hold their noses and vote for individuals who are not fit for office because they are not voting for one person, but for control of the white house, congress and the courts. Who controls government makes a huge and long-lasting difference in American society.

Totally agree. Additionally, much was made about the authoritarian tendencies of the Bad Orange Man on these threads, but I've heard nothing but crickets here regarding SCOTUS smacking down the current occupant of the White House for his egregious authoritarian overreaches repeatedly.

We’re all aware that “it’s not only the obvious costs that exist.”

Undeniable: We have a better court than we would have had under Hillary.

Also clear: We did not have to nominate Donald Trump to accomplish that.

Also clear: Along with the gains, there are many costs to conservatism, ethics, the GOP, rule of law, and American public discourse that we are still paying for having elected Trump as President. Given the substantial costs along with the gains, the real bottom line is not as obvious as many seem to think.

And finally: If we keep voting for unqualified people that the nomination system spits out (or perhaps vomits out), we are never going to get better candidates.

At this moment, a likely 2024 scenario is DT nominated again, loses again. Maybe at that point GOP starts to finally learn. But I pray I’m wrong. I very much do not want to see another Trump nomination and another victory for the left. There are still many reasons to be hopeful that this will not happen.

Aaron, you reject my conclusion because it is based upon "selective appeal to evidence," but you offer no competing evidence, only hypotheticals. You say, "we didn't have to nominate Donald Trump to accomplish this." (The most dramatic swing in the direction of the Supreme Court in recent history) Is this a fact, or a hypothetical? Who can say that if a different Republican had been nominated that he would have defeated Hillary? That is certainly not a fact, but it is a fact that a few thousand more "Never Trumpers" in 2016, would have gotten us Clinton. There was no other realistic possibility, and then what kind of Supreme Court would we have today?

I think I like decisions based upon facts better than those based on hypotheticals. Wishing for a better playing field doesn't make it so. We've got to play the cards we're dealt as wisely as possible. "Big Picture" politics is more principled than hypothetical nit-picking.