Friday's Supreme Court decision to not review the case of a Washington Christian florist involved in same-sex marriage was announced. This is yet another punt on fundamental constitutional issues pertaining to religious freedom.Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas, expressed their support for the case. However, to hear a case it requires at least four votes from the nine justices.It declined to hear Arlenes Flowers against Washington. This effectively upholds Washington's Supreme Courts ruling that Barronelle Stutzman was a Christian florist and had refused to design a flower arrangement for Robert Ingersoll or Curt Freed's same-sex marriage.>>> Find out more about Barronelle StutzmanStutzman was friends with Ingersoll before the lawsuit.Although this case's outcome is sad, it is important that we continue to protect the First Amendment freedoms for all Americans, stated Kristen Waggoner (general counsel of Alliance Defending Freedom), a religious liberty public-interest law firm that represented Stutzman.Waggoner stated in the public statement that no one should be forced or forced to celebrate an event they don't agree with.Barronelle was a kind and generous customer who served gay men for almost ten years, but she declined to make art to celebrate one sacred ceremony. A government that can destroy Barronelle can use its power to kill any of us regardless of political views or political ideologies. Other courts have recognized that this is not allowed by the Constitution. Contrary to the Washington Supreme Court's decision in Barronelles, the Arizona Supreme Court has ruled that creative professionals cannot be forced to create art that is contrary their religious beliefs. We believe that the Supreme Court will join these courts and affirm the constitutionally protected right of creative professionals to live in harmony with their most fundamental beliefs.Ria Tabacco Mar, an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer, represented the couple. She said that the decision to not hear the case was a confirmation that LGBTQ people should be treated equally.Rob and Curt had a wonderful time planning their wedding, until they were turned away at their local florist. The ACLU lawyer stated that no one should have to worry about being turned away by a shop because of their gender. We have antidiscrimination laws to prevent this kind of humiliation or hurt. 60 percent of states do not have explicit protections for LGBTQ persons like Washington. We are still working on this.In pursuit of broad court consensus, the Supreme Court issued narrow rulings on religious liberty in cases such as Stutzmans since 2015's Obergefell case.The high court in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia ruled 9-0 last month. This decision allowed a Catholic social services agency in Philadelphia to continue a government-funded foster program without being required to change its marriage beliefs. The high court didn't make any other rulings on religious freedom.In a similar case, in 2018, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2, that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission was hostile to Jack Phillips Christian faith when he tried to force him to make a wedding cake to celebrate the union of two men.The high court made its decision without establishing a precedent for freedom speech and religion.The Obergefell ruling was based on the majority opinion of then-Justice Anthony Kennedy, which stated that the belief that marriage is between a man and woman is grounded in decent and honorable premises. Emilie Kao, director at The Heritage Foundation's DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society, commented.We see the government punishing people who believe this belief in the country, Kao said to The Daily Signal, The Heritage Foundation's news outlet. They've used the law to force foster care and adoption agencies as well as bakers, florists, and photographers to change their views about marriage.Kao also added:Barronelle Stutzman is available to all, even the gay client in this lawsuit. Because her beliefs regarding marriage are sacred to her Christian faith, she can't create custom art for a wedding that would be in violation of her religious beliefs. Progressive left insists on same-sex marriages being celebrated by every florist and baker, regardless of the fact that there are many. Washington state is intolerant of people who disagree on the nature and meaning of marriage. These violations of religious freedom should be addressed by the Supreme Court quickly and thoroughly.Do you have a comment about this article? Send us an email at [email protected] with your comments. We may publish them in our We Hear You section. Include the article's URL or headline, along with your name and the address of your town and/or the state.