by William Thornton » Tue May 09, 2017 5:07 am
The legal principle that is being used involves the "least restrictive" imposition on religious liberty. Keith, naturally, has his own principles of religious liberty which involves "teeny weeny" costs and declares that principled religious objectors are "grandstanding" and should accommodate themselves to violating their religious views. Thank God and sober judges that more serious considerations are given to such things.
It's a complex matter.
My stray thoughts on SBC stuff may be found at my blog,