People Article Rating

The Bizarre -- and Hypothetical -- Case That Sparked the Supreme Court's Regressive LGBTQ+ Discrimination Ruling

Jun 30, 2023 View Original Article
  • Bias Rating

    10% Center

  • Reliability

    50% ReliableFair

  • Policy Leaning

    10% Center

  • Politician Portrayal

    N/A

Bias Score Analysis

The A.I. bias rating includes policy and politician portrayal leanings based on the author’s tone found in the article using machine learning. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral.

Sentiments

Overall Sentiment

N/A

  •   Conservative
SentenceSentimentBias
Unlock this feature by upgrading to the Pro plan.

Bias Meter

Extremely
Liberal

Very
Liberal

Moderately
Liberal

Somewhat Liberal

Center

Somewhat Conservative

Moderately
Conservative

Very
Conservative

Extremely
Conservative

-100%
Liberal

100%
Conservative

Bias Meter

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

50% : But this week -- when The New Republic got ahold of the Stewart whose name, email address, and cell phone number were included on that "same-sex marriage request" -- the man told the outlet he did not send the form, and that he was married to a woman at the time it was allegedly sent.
45% : On Friday, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to allow a Christian web designer to refuse her services to LGBTQ+ people, a historic decision that walks back hard-fought human rights battles and paves the way for businesses to legally discriminate based on a person's sexual orientation or gender identity.
43% : Smith has been represented by attorneys for the Christian rights group Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), which lobbies to expand Christian practices within public schools and in government, and to outlaw abortion.
42% : Still, Smith filed suit in Colorado in an attempt to block the enforcement of its anti-discrimination law, arguing that when she does begin designing wedding websites, she should not be forced to design them for LGBTQ+ clients, because creating messaging that she disapproves of would oppose her religious beliefs and potentially violate her right to free speech.
39% : Because she had not yet been confronted with a gay couple requesting her services -- or broken the anti-discrimination law -- the state sought to dismiss her case.
35% : Smith's lawsuit was built largely around a hypothetical scenario, in that she had not actually designed any wedding websites or tried to turn away same-sex couples when she sued.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.

Copy link