The GOP is too scared of losing power to acknowledge lunacy when they see it

“How is this possible?” I find myself increasingly asking regarding American politics – from Donald Trump’s election in 2016 to abortion rights being rolled back in the summer of 2022. The twists and turns land with morbid humor, the same way you can’t help but smile during days when everything goes incomprehensibly wrong. 

Last month, I was once again haunted by this rhetorical question upon hearing the Supreme Court sided with plaintiff Lorie Smith, the Christian graphic designer suing for the right to discriminate under the veil of artistic freedom. 

Related:

Supreme Court rules in favor of anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination in Christian web designer case

Split along party lines, the Supreme Courts conservative majority sided with a Christian web designer who doesn’t want to make sites for LGBTQ+ people.

In the case of 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, Smith argued that the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA) hindered her business expansion into wedding websites by requiring her to service queer clients. 

Dive deeper every day

Join our newsletter for thought-provoking commentary that goes beyond the surface of LGBTQ+ issues

Daily

Weekly

Good News

Of course, the unethical ruling wasn’t a mystery. With Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation in 2020, the LGBTQ+ community braced for an uphill battle. Barrett further solidified a six-Republican conservative majority within the nine-person court.  

But I was nowhere near creative enough when I pictured worst-case scenarios. How does one predict the consequences of right-wing fantasy? 

“How is this possible?” I questioned again upon learning that “Stewart and Mike,” the gay couple Smith claimed asked for her services, were figments of her imagination. The catalyst her case was built on was fiction; the defendant listed in the case was a married straight man who, ironically, was a graphic designer.

For the first time, I literally needed someone to explain the logistics: How did a Saturday Night Live skit make it all the way up the Supreme Court? How did nine justices rule on a case involving a person who didn’t exist? In the US, fraud or negligence can result in the loss of employment, fines, or imprisonment. Yet all we have heard from the system is Oopsie Daisy!

But once I read that Smith was represented by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the vein on my forehead nearly popped. The same anti-LGBTQ+ hate group represented the infamous Christian baker who didn’t want to make a wedding cake for a queer couple. 

LGBTQ Nation reported that Smith initially filed her lawsuit in 2016 and lost because the judge said that you can’t sue in metaphorical situations. Regardless, ADF argued the mere existence of the Colorado anti-discrimination law stifled her free speech. 

Perhaps, her real issue is society requiring her to coexist with queer people, which inhibits her homophobia. 

But the icing on the cake of idiocracy is that it was only after her initial loss that the online inquiry from the nonexistent “Stewart” requesting Smith to make a gay wedding website appeared as evidence. One can’t help wondering if ADF plagiarized a page out of their own Christian playbook? 

The situation is as if the phenomenon of Karen had morphed into a court case. As journalists continued to prove themselves more capable than lawyers or the nine highest positions in the US judicial system, we learned that the key to her argument – that Smith feared creating wedding websites – wasn’t true. She had done so years earlier for a heterosexual couple but eventually deleted it from her portfolio. When she decided to sue in court, she claimed she never had. 

So how is this possible? For starters, Republicans are too scared of losing power to acknowledge lunacy when they see it. And a large portion of America doesn’t just disapprove of gay marriage, but also the mere existence of queerness. 

So when you have hate groups and their mouthpieces offering the possibility of establishing their ideologies as the status quo, conservative leaders and their followers will continue turning a blind eye to the individuals tampering with liberal structures, unscrewing our rights with lies. 

Just like politicians such as Donald Trump and Ron Desantis have propelled politics away from logic, empathy, and decorum, the court ruling in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis threatens the very essence of justice. It makes a parody out of the court system, undermining – if not theatricalizing – the principles it is meant to uphold. The case must be invalidated as the scam that it was before it creates a precedent enabling victimhood out of false pretenses. 

It’s okay to make a mistake, but it’s a crime against humanity to set it in stone. 

My community keeps getting accused of the “gay agenda” when only one side tries to inflict their religious beliefs – and uneducated, hateful opinions – as law. I’m not a politician, so I won’t sugarcoat calling predatory liars and scum out when I see them. Being born LGBTQ+ doesn’t make you lesser, but depending on where you’re born, the people in charge can make it feel that way.

I’m one of the lucky queer people who has never faced much prejudice or vitriol (not including the unhinged emails I treat like fan mail). And because I know such a reality for the pursuit of happiness exists, I’ll keep asking how it’s possible that millions cannot live without fear because of individuals like Smith and her lawyers plaquing the places where equality could’ve been.