Current Events > Supreme Court to hear "religious liberty" wedding cake case tomorrow.

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2
CiIantro 12/04/17 7:50:48 PM #1:	Looking forward to the court putting the "religious liberty" argument to rest. The religious extremist is expected to lose. The reason is that the Constitution guarantees a right to equal dignity, and turning people away from public accommodations or slicing up the public by granting individuals a license to opt out of the public weal denies people that dignity. No constitutional right is entirely unrestricted, but in deciding the balance between First Amendment and equal protection claims, the courts have already distinguished between the right to hold or espouse a belief considered absolute and the right to act on it with impunity. The free exercise of ones belief, the courts have said, is subject to regulation when religious acts require accommodation to a society. https://tinyurl.com/ydxyzpzs <cite>CiIantro posted [p:891596906] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote>Looking forward to the court putting the "religious liberty" argument to rest. The religious extremist is expected to lose. The reason is that the Constitution guarantees a right to equal dignity, and turning people away from public accommodations or slicing up the public by granting individuals a license to opt out of the public weal denies people that dignity. No constitutional right is entirely unrestricted, but in deciding the balance between First Amendment and equal protection claims, the courts have already distinguished between the right to hold or espouse a belief considered absolute and the right to act on it with impunity. The free exercise of ones belief, the courts have said, is subject to regulation when religious acts require accommodation to a society. https://tinyurl.com/ydxyzpzs</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CiIantro 12/04/17 7:51:25 PM #2:	A ruling will be delivered next Monday. <cite>CiIantro posted [p:891596946] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote>A ruling will be delivered next Monday.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#3	Post #3 was unavailable or deleted.
ChromaticAngel 12/04/17 7:54:40 PM #4:	CiIantro posted... The reason is that the Constitution guarantees a right to equal dignity, and turning people away from public accommodations or slicing up the public by granting individuals a license to opt out of the public weal denies people that dignity. No constitutional right is entirely unrestricted, but in deciding the balance between First Amendment and equal protection claims, the courts have already distinguished between the right to hold or espouse a belief considered absolute and the right to act on it with impunity. The free exercise of ones belief, the courts have said, is subject to regulation when religious acts require accommodation to a society. This times a million. It's why people try to do shit like "My religion believes in snorting coke and highway speed limits are literally Satan!" get shut down. If they reverse this shit here, they set an extremely dangerous precedent. --- https://puu.sh/tcLsT/24f4611235.png <cite>ChromaticAngel posted [p:891597147] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote>The reason is that the Constitution guarantees a right to equal dignity, and turning people away from public accommodations or slicing up the public by granting individuals a license to opt out of the public weal denies people that dignity. No constitutional right is entirely unrestricted, but in deciding the balance between First Amendment and equal protection claims, the courts have already distinguished between the right to hold or espouse a belief considered absolute and the right to act on it with impunity. The free exercise of ones belief, the courts have said, is subject to regulation when religious acts require accommodation to a society.</quote> This times a million. It's why people try to do shit like "My religion believes in snorting coke and highway speed limits are literally Satan!" get shut down. If they reverse this shit here, they set an extremely dangerous precedent.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CiIantro 12/04/17 7:56:51 PM #5:	Mr Hangman posted... This case is absurd. Why would you ever eat a cake that someone was forced against their will to bake for you? That can't end well. I doubt they knew he was a bigot when they went into his store. Besides, the case isnt really about cake at all. It is about whether or not being religious gives you a free pass to do literally anything you want. <cite>CiIantro posted [p:891597264] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mr Hangman posted...</cite> <quote>This case is absurd. Why would you ever eat a cake that someone was forced against their will to bake for you? That can't end well.</quote> I doubt they knew he was a bigot when they went into his store. Besides, the case isnt really about cake at all. It is about whether or not being religious gives you a free pass to do literally anything you want.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DK9292 12/04/17 7:58:41 PM #6:	...context? --- "If the heroes run and hide, who'll stay and fight?" ~Saitama <cite>DK9292 posted [p:891597371] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote>...context?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChainedRedone 12/04/17 8:01:14 PM #7:	Mr Hangman posted... This case is absurd. Why would you ever eat a cake that someone was forced against their will to bake for you? That can't end well. The absurdity is you not understanding it's not about forcing people to make cakes for you. --- Posted with GameRaven 3.3 <cite>ChainedRedone posted [p:891597514] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mr Hangman posted...</cite> <quote>This case is absurd. Why would you ever eat a cake that someone was forced against their will to bake for you? That can't end well.</quote> The absurdity is you not understanding it's not about forcing people to make cakes for you.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Annihilated 12/04/17 8:01:55 PM #8:	Except it's about freedom of expression, not religious liberty. Sorry to burst your anti-Christian edgelord bubble. <cite>Annihilated posted [p:891597556] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote>Except it's about freedom of expression, not religious liberty. Sorry to burst your anti-Christian edgelord bubble.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChromaticAngel 12/04/17 8:02:18 PM #9:	DK9292 posted... ...context? After the wedding cake disaster from a few years ago that ended up closing some bakery (note: they were sued because the owners of the bakery doxxed the couple to hate groups, not because of the cake) a bunch of state legislators introduced "religious freedom" or "religious liberty" laws stating you can't be compelled to do something against your religion. Those laws have gotten challenged and it's made it to the supreme court. Note that they're only okay with this when it's used in reaction to outrage at hateful anti-gay propaganda and not for outrage when Jehova's Witnesses refuses to stand for the pledge of allegiance or anything similar. --- https://puu.sh/tcLsT/24f4611235.png <cite>ChromaticAngel posted [p:891597577] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>DK9292 posted...</cite> <quote>...context?</quote> After the wedding cake disaster from a few years ago that ended up closing some bakery (note: they were sued because the owners of the bakery doxxed the couple to hate groups, not because of the cake) a bunch of state legislators introduced "religious freedom" or "religious liberty" laws stating you can't be compelled to do something against your religion. Those laws have gotten challenged and it's made it to the supreme court. Note that they're only okay with this when it's used in reaction to outrage at hateful anti-gay propaganda and not for outrage when Jehova's Witnesses refuses to stand for the pledge of allegiance or anything similar.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DK9292 12/04/17 8:03:41 PM #10:	ChromaticAngel posted... DK9292 posted... ...context? After the wedding cake disaster from a few years ago What wedding cake disaster? --- "If the heroes run and hide, who'll stay and fight?" ~Saitama <cite>DK9292 posted [p:891597652] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DK9292 posted...</cite> <quote>...context?</quote> After the wedding cake disaster from a few years ago</quote> What wedding cake disaster?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CiIantro 12/04/17 8:03:59 PM #11:	DK9292 posted... ...context? Guy owns a wedding cake bakery, finds out that some of this customers are gay, and refuses to serve them. Says his rights to "religious liberty" trump their right to equal treatment (which is the law in Colorado where this happened). The couple sues for discrimination, and the case goes all the way up to the supreme court. The question at stake is whether or not all businesses get a free license to discriminate against any class of people as long as it is done in the name of religion. <cite>CiIantro posted [p:891597670] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>DK9292 posted...</cite> <quote>...context?</quote> Guy owns a wedding cake bakery, finds out that some of this customers are gay, and refuses to serve them. Says his rights to "religious liberty" trump their right to equal treatment (which is the law in Colorado where this happened). The couple sues for discrimination, and the case goes all the way up to the supreme court. The question at stake is whether or not all businesses get a free license to discriminate against any class of people as long as it is done in the name of religion.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CiIantro 12/04/17 8:04:40 PM #12:	Annihilated posted... Except it's about freedom of expression, not religious liberty. Sorry to burst your anti-Christian edgelord bubble. See you next monday when the supreme court agrees with me. <cite>CiIantro posted [p:891597722] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Annihilated posted...</cite> <quote>Except it's about freedom of expression, not religious liberty. Sorry to burst your anti-Christian edgelord bubble.</quote> See you next monday when the supreme court agrees with me.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChromaticAngel 12/04/17 8:04:41 PM #13:	DK9292 posted... ChromaticAngel posted... DK9292 posted... ...context? After the wedding cake disaster from a few years ago What wedding cake disaster? https://aclu-co.org/court-rules-bakery-illegally-discriminated-against-gay-couple/ --- https://puu.sh/tcLsT/24f4611235.png <cite>ChromaticAngel posted [p:891597723] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>DK9292 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DK9292 posted...</cite> <quote>...context?</quote> After the wedding cake disaster from a few years ago</quote> What wedding cake disaster?</quote> https://aclu-co.org/court-rules-bakery-illegally-discriminated-against-gay-couple/</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DK9292 12/04/17 8:05:04 PM #14:	CiIantro posted... DK9292 posted... ...context? Guy owns a wedding cake bakery, finds out that some of this customers are gay, and refuses to serve them. Says his rights to "religious liberty" trump their right to equal treatment (which is the law in Colorado where this happened). The couple sues for discrimination, and the case goes all the way up to the supreme court. The question at stake is whether or not all businesses get a free license to discriminate against any class of people as long as it is done in the name of religion. Thank you. --- "If the heroes run and hide, who'll stay and fight?" ~Saitama <cite>DK9292 posted [p:891597754] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DK9292 posted...</cite> <quote>...context?</quote> Guy owns a wedding cake bakery, finds out that some of this customers are gay, and refuses to serve them. Says his rights to "religious liberty" trump their right to equal treatment (which is the law in Colorado where this happened). The couple sues for discrimination, and the case goes all the way up to the supreme court. The question at stake is whether or not all businesses get a free license to discriminate against any class of people as long as it is done in the name of religion.</quote> Thank you.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Annihilated 12/04/17 8:05:52 PM #15:	CiIantro posted... Annihilated posted... Except it's about freedom of expression, not religious liberty. Sorry to burst your anti-Christian edgelord bubble. See you next monday when the supreme court agrees with me. It's so hilariously ironic to see someone like you complaining about hate. <cite>Annihilated posted [p:891597803] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Annihilated posted...</cite> <quote>Except it's about freedom of expression, not religious liberty. Sorry to burst your anti-Christian edgelord bubble.</quote> See you next monday when the supreme court agrees with me.</quote> It's so hilariously ironic to see someone like you complaining about hate.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CiIantro 12/04/17 8:06:22 PM #16:	Annihilated posted... CiIantro posted... Annihilated posted... Except it's about freedom of expression, not religious liberty. Sorry to burst your anti-Christian edgelord bubble. See you next monday when the supreme court agrees with me. It's so hilariously ironic to see someone like you complaining about hate. ok <cite>CiIantro posted [p:891597827] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Annihilated posted...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Annihilated posted...</cite> <quote>Except it's about freedom of expression, not religious liberty. Sorry to burst your anti-Christian edgelord bubble.</quote> See you next monday when the supreme court agrees with me.</quote> It's so hilariously ironic to see someone like you complaining about hate.</quote> ok</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Darmik 12/04/17 8:09:24 PM #17:	Forcing to provide a paid service to a customer you dislike because you own and run a business that provides the requested service is SLAVERY --- Kind Regards, Darmik <cite>Darmik posted [p:891598010] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote>Forcing to provide a paid service to a customer you dislike because you own and run a business that provides the requested service is SLAVERY</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mikablu 12/04/17 8:10:25 PM #18:	Darmik posted... Forcing to provide a paid service to a customer you dislike because you own and run a business that provides the requested service is SLAVERY My sarcasm detector must be malfunctioning. I certainly hope that was sarcasm, but this IS CE, after all... <cite>Mikablu posted [p:891598086] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Darmik posted...</cite> <quote>Forcing to provide a paid service to a customer you dislike because you own and run a business that provides the requested service is SLAVERY</quote> My sarcasm detector must be malfunctioning. I certainly hope that was sarcasm, but this IS CE, after all...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Phantom_Nook 12/04/17 8:10:57 PM #19:	Mikablu posted... Darmik posted... Forcing to provide a paid service to a customer you dislike because you own and run a business that provides the requested service is SLAVERY My sarcasm detector must be malfunctioning. I certainly hope that was sarcasm, but this IS CE, after all... He's being sarcastic, but that's something people have argued. --- When a girl has sex with a bunch of guys, they call her a slut, but when a guy does it, they call him gay. ~ Antifar <cite>Phantom_Nook posted [p:891598122] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mikablu posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Darmik posted...</cite> <quote>Forcing to provide a paid service to a customer you dislike because you own and run a business that provides the requested service is SLAVERY</quote> My sarcasm detector must be malfunctioning. I certainly hope that was sarcasm, but this IS CE, after all...</quote> He's being sarcastic, but that's something people have argued.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Darmik 12/04/17 8:11:09 PM #20:	Mikablu posted... Darmik posted... Forcing to provide a paid service to a customer you dislike because you own and run a business that provides the requested service is SLAVERY My sarcasm detector must be malfunctioning. I certainly hope that was sarcasm, but this IS CE, after all... It's sarcasm inspired by CE --- Kind Regards, Darmik <cite>Darmik posted [p:891598134] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mikablu posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Darmik posted...</cite> <quote>Forcing to provide a paid service to a customer you dislike because you own and run a business that provides the requested service is SLAVERY</quote> My sarcasm detector must be malfunctioning. I certainly hope that was sarcasm, but this IS CE, after all...</quote> It's sarcasm inspired by CE</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mikablu 12/04/17 8:11:52 PM #21:	Phantom_Nook posted... He's being sarcastic, but that's something people have argued. Darmik posted... It's sarcasm inspired by CE I thought so. But like I said, this is CE, so you never know. <cite>Mikablu posted [p:891598183] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Phantom_Nook posted...</cite> <quote>He's being sarcastic, but that's something people have argued.</quote> <cite>Darmik posted...</cite> <quote>It's sarcasm inspired by CE</quote> I thought so. But like I said, this is CE, so you never know.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
sylverlolol 12/04/17 8:13:19 PM #22:	Is OP someone's alt? I feel like I should know this. I want to say sillyknees but I'm not sure --- This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine. <cite>sylverlolol posted [p:891598265] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote>Is OP someone's alt? I feel like I should know this. I want to say sillyknees but I'm not sure</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 12/04/17 8:14:21 PM #23:	CiIantro posted... the Constitution guarantees a right to equal dignity [citation needed] <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:891598335] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote> the Constitution guarantees a right to equal dignity</quote> [citation needed]</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CiIantro 12/04/17 8:14:24 PM #24:	From what I have read, the bakery owner is a massive scumbag. He said he would make a wedding cake for 2 dogs before he would make one for 2 women. <cite>CiIantro posted [p:891598339] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote>From what I have read, the bakery owner is a massive scumbag. He said he would make a wedding cake for 2 dogs before he would make one for 2 women.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CiIantro 12/04/17 8:17:52 PM #25:	Questionmarktarius posted... CiIantro posted... the Constitution guarantees a right to equal dignity [citation needed] It has been established as historical precedent by the supreme court. Whether or not you agree with it, that is how they have interpreted the constitution in past cases. https://www.theodysseyonline.com/powerful-quotes-justice-kennedy-supreme-court https://harvardlawreview.org/2015/11/equal-dignity-speaking-its-name/ <cite>CiIantro posted [p:891598541] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Questionmarktarius posted...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote> the Constitution guarantees a right to equal dignity</quote> [citation needed]</quote> It has been established as historical precedent by the supreme court. Whether or not you agree with it, that is how they have interpreted the constitution in past cases. https://www.theodysseyonline.com/powerful-quotes-justice-kennedy-supreme-court https://harvardlawreview.org/2015/11/equal-dignity-speaking-its-name/</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ScazarMeltex 12/04/17 8:18:03 PM #26:	If this case is decided in favor of the couple it will hopefully be a blow against pharmacists who refuse to fill birth-control prescriptions due to religious objections. --- "If you wish to converse with me define your terms" Voltaire <cite>ScazarMeltex posted [p:891598550] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote>If this case is decided in favor of the couple it will hopefully be a blow against pharmacists who refuse to fill birth-control prescriptions due to religious objections.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Axiom 12/04/17 8:19:11 PM #27:	ScazarMeltex posted... If this case is decided in favor of the couple it will hopefully be a blow against pharmacists who refuse to fill birth-control prescriptions due to religious objections. Does that still happen. Wtf <cite>Axiom posted [p:891598615] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>ScazarMeltex posted...</cite> <quote>If this case is decided in favor of the couple it will hopefully be a blow against pharmacists who refuse to fill birth-control prescriptions due to religious objections.</quote> Does that still happen. Wtf</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ScazarMeltex 12/04/17 8:24:30 PM #28:	Axiom posted... ScazarMeltex posted... If this case is decided in favor of the couple it will hopefully be a blow against pharmacists who refuse to fill birth-control prescriptions due to religious objections. Does that still happen. Wtf There are some states where it's actually enshrined in law. https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/refusing-provide-health-services Has nice chart on which states allow refusals of certain things. --- "If you wish to converse with me define your terms" Voltaire <cite>ScazarMeltex posted [p:891598902] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Axiom posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ScazarMeltex posted...</cite> <quote>If this case is decided in favor of the couple it will hopefully be a blow against pharmacists who refuse to fill birth-control prescriptions due to religious objections.</quote> Does that still happen. Wtf</quote> There are some states where it's actually enshrined in law. https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/refusing-provide-health-services Has nice chart on which states allow refusals of certain things.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Callixtus 12/04/17 8:25:56 PM #29:	CiIantro posted... DK9292 posted... ...context? Guy owns a wedding cake bakery, finds out that some of this customers are gay, and refuses to serve them. Says his rights to "religious liberty" trump their right to equal treatment (which is the law in Colorado where this happened). The couple sues for discrimination, and the case goes all the way up to the supreme court. The question at stake is whether or not all businesses get a free license to discriminate against any class of people as long as it is done in the name of religion. That's not what happened. He only refused to bake them a wedding cake. He didn't refuse to serve them in general. --- It will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. \| I did not come to bring peace to the earth, but the sword. -Jesus <cite>Callixtus posted [p:891598991] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DK9292 posted...</cite> <quote>...context?</quote> Guy owns a wedding cake bakery, finds out that some of this customers are gay, and refuses to serve them. Says his rights to "religious liberty" trump their right to equal treatment (which is the law in Colorado where this happened). The couple sues for discrimination, and the case goes all the way up to the supreme court. The question at stake is whether or not all businesses get a free license to discriminate against any class of people as long as it is done in the name of religion.</quote> That's not what happened. He only refused to bake them a wedding cake. He didn't refuse to serve them in general.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 12/04/17 8:26:41 PM #30:	CiIantro posted... Questionmarktarius posted... CiIantro posted... the Constitution guarantees a right to equal dignity [citation needed] It has been established as historical precedent by the supreme court. Whether or not you agree with it, that is how they have interpreted the constitution in past cases. https://www.theodysseyonline.com/powerful-quotes-justice-kennedy-supreme-court https://harvardlawreview.org/2015/11/equal-dignity-speaking-its-name/ That's good enough for me. Thanks. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:891599041] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Questionmarktarius posted...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote> the Constitution guarantees a right to equal dignity</quote> [citation needed]</quote> It has been established as historical precedent by the supreme court. Whether or not you agree with it, that is how they have interpreted the constitution in past cases. https://www.theodysseyonline.com/powerful-quotes-justice-kennedy-supreme-court https://harvardlawreview.org/2015/11/equal-dignity-speaking-its-name/</quote> That's good enough for me. Thanks.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChromaticAngel 12/04/17 8:27:17 PM #31:	Callixtus posted... CiIantro posted... DK9292 posted... ...context? Guy owns a wedding cake bakery, finds out that some of this customers are gay, and refuses to serve them. Says his rights to "religious liberty" trump their right to equal treatment (which is the law in Colorado where this happened). The couple sues for discrimination, and the case goes all the way up to the supreme court. The question at stake is whether or not all businesses get a free license to discriminate against any class of people as long as it is done in the name of religion. That's not what happened. He only refused to bake them a wedding cake. He didn't refuse to serve them in general. That's not what happened either. He refused to bake them a wedding cake, they left, he posted their contact info and home address on Facebook to fundamentalist groups in his neighborhood that sent them threatening letters and vandalized their property and they had to leave their house for safety concerns. What you hear on TV: "Couple sues bakery over cake." --- https://puu.sh/tcLsT/24f4611235.png <cite>ChromaticAngel posted [p:891599078] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Callixtus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DK9292 posted...</cite> <quote>...context?</quote> Guy owns a wedding cake bakery, finds out that some of this customers are gay, and refuses to serve them. Says his rights to "religious liberty" trump their right to equal treatment (which is the law in Colorado where this happened). The couple sues for discrimination, and the case goes all the way up to the supreme court. The question at stake is whether or not all businesses get a free license to discriminate against any class of people as long as it is done in the name of religion.</quote> That's not what happened. He only refused to bake them a wedding cake. He didn't refuse to serve them in general.</quote> That's not what happened either. He refused to bake them a wedding cake, they left, he posted their contact info and home address on Facebook to fundamentalist groups in his neighborhood that sent them threatening letters and vandalized their property and they had to leave their house for safety concerns. What you hear on TV: "Couple sues bakery over cake."</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CiIantro 12/04/17 8:28:07 PM #32:	Callixtus posted... CiIantro posted... DK9292 posted... ...context? Guy owns a wedding cake bakery, finds out that some of this customers are gay, and refuses to serve them. Says his rights to "religious liberty" trump their right to equal treatment (which is the law in Colorado where this happened). The couple sues for discrimination, and the case goes all the way up to the supreme court. The question at stake is whether or not all businesses get a free license to discriminate against any class of people as long as it is done in the name of religion. That's not what happened. He only refused to bake them a wedding cake. He didn't refuse to serve them in general. lolwut? A wedding cake bakery offers only one service: baking cakes. Refusing to bake cake=refusing service <cite>CiIantro posted [p:891599121] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Callixtus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DK9292 posted...</cite> <quote>...context?</quote> Guy owns a wedding cake bakery, finds out that some of this customers are gay, and refuses to serve them. Says his rights to "religious liberty" trump their right to equal treatment (which is the law in Colorado where this happened). The couple sues for discrimination, and the case goes all the way up to the supreme court. The question at stake is whether or not all businesses get a free license to discriminate against any class of people as long as it is done in the name of religion.</quote> That's not what happened. He only refused to bake them a wedding cake. He didn't refuse to serve them in general.</quote> lolwut? A wedding cake bakery offers only one service: baking cakes. Refusing to bake cake=refusing service</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChainedRedone 12/04/17 8:30:06 PM #33:	Callixtus posted... CiIantro posted... DK9292 posted... ...context? Guy owns a wedding cake bakery, finds out that some of this customers are gay, and refuses to serve them. Says his rights to "religious liberty" trump their right to equal treatment (which is the law in Colorado where this happened). The couple sues for discrimination, and the case goes all the way up to the supreme court. The question at stake is whether or not all businesses get a free license to discriminate against any class of people as long as it is done in the name of religion. That's not what happened. He only refused to bake them a wedding cake. He didn't refuse to serve them in general. Lmao --- Posted with GameRaven 3.3 <cite>ChainedRedone posted [p:891599224] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Callixtus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>DK9292 posted...</cite> <quote> ...context? </quote> Guy owns a wedding cake bakery, finds out that some of this customers are gay, and refuses to serve them. Says his rights to "religious liberty" trump their right to equal treatment (which is the law in Colorado where this happened). The couple sues for discrimination, and the case goes all the way up to the supreme court. The question at stake is whether or not all businesses get a free license to discriminate against any class of people as long as it is done in the name of religion.</quote> That's not what happened. He only refused to bake them a wedding cake. He didn't refuse to serve them in general.</quote> Lmao</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 12/04/17 8:30:37 PM #34:	CiIantro posted... A wedding cake bakery offers only one service: baking cakes. Refusing to bake cake=refusing service In before wedding cake clubs become a thing somehow. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:891599248] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote>A wedding cake bakery offers only one service: baking cakes. Refusing to bake cake=refusing service</quote> In before wedding cake clubs become a thing somehow.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Paragon21XX 12/04/17 8:31:42 PM #35:	ChromaticAngel posted... Callixtus posted... CiIantro posted... DK9292 posted... ...context? Guy owns a wedding cake bakery, finds out that some of this customers are gay, and refuses to serve them. Says his rights to "religious liberty" trump their right to equal treatment (which is the law in Colorado where this happened). The couple sues for discrimination, and the case goes all the way up to the supreme court. The question at stake is whether or not all businesses get a free license to discriminate against any class of people as long as it is done in the name of religion. That's not what happened. He only refused to bake them a wedding cake. He didn't refuse to serve them in general. That's not what happened either. He refused to bake them a wedding cake, they left, he posted their contact info and home address on Facebook to fundamentalist groups in his neighborhood that sent them threatening letters and vandalized their property and they had to leave their house for safety concerns. What you hear on TV: "Couple sues bakery over cake." Colorado baker did no such thing. Oregon baker is the scumbag that doxxed the lesbian couple. --- Hmm... <cite>Paragon21XX posted [p:891599299] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Callixtus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DK9292 posted...</cite> <quote>...context?</quote> Guy owns a wedding cake bakery, finds out that some of this customers are gay, and refuses to serve them. Says his rights to "religious liberty" trump their right to equal treatment (which is the law in Colorado where this happened). The couple sues for discrimination, and the case goes all the way up to the supreme court. The question at stake is whether or not all businesses get a free license to discriminate against any class of people as long as it is done in the name of religion.</quote> That's not what happened. He only refused to bake them a wedding cake. He didn't refuse to serve them in general.</quote> That's not what happened either. He refused to bake them a wedding cake, they left, he posted their contact info and home address on Facebook to fundamentalist groups in his neighborhood that sent them threatening letters and vandalized their property and they had to leave their house for safety concerns. What you hear on TV: "Couple sues bakery over cake."</quote> Colorado baker did no such thing. Oregon baker is the scumbag that doxxed the lesbian couple.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DifferentialEquation 12/04/17 8:32:14 PM #36:	I think it's stupid for business owners refuse service like this, but they should be able to do so if they want. Plus, considering that the tax bill passed and that the travel been can now taken effect, we could have a glorious trifecta of liberal tears if the court decides in favor of the bakery. --- There's no business to be taxed. <cite>DifferentialEquation posted [p:891599329] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote>I think it's stupid for business owners refuse service like this, but they should be able to do so if they want. Plus, considering that the tax bill passed and that the travel been can now taken effect, we could have a glorious trifecta of liberal tears if the court decides in favor of the bakery.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChromaticAngel 12/04/17 8:33:35 PM #37:	Paragon21XX posted... Colorado baker did no such thing. Oregon baker is the scumbag that doxxed the lesbian couple. Sorry, I must have merged the two incidents together in my head. --- https://puu.sh/tcLsT/24f4611235.png <cite>ChromaticAngel posted [p:891599394] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Paragon21XX posted...</cite> <quote>Colorado baker did no such thing. Oregon baker is the scumbag that doxxed the lesbian couple.</quote> Sorry, I must have merged the two incidents together in my head.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Callixtus 12/04/17 8:34:03 PM #38:	CiIantro posted... Callixtus posted... CiIantro posted... DK9292 posted... ...context? Guy owns a wedding cake bakery, finds out that some of this customers are gay, and refuses to serve them. Says his rights to "religious liberty" trump their right to equal treatment (which is the law in Colorado where this happened). The couple sues for discrimination, and the case goes all the way up to the supreme court. The question at stake is whether or not all businesses get a free license to discriminate against any class of people as long as it is done in the name of religion. That's not what happened. He only refused to bake them a wedding cake. He didn't refuse to serve them in general. lolwut? A wedding cake bakery offers only one service: baking cakes. Refusing to bake cake=refusing service He offered them plain cakes in lieu of making a wedding cake. https://www.npr.org/2017/12/04/566070515/a-supreme-court-clash-between-artistry-and-the-rights-of-gay-couples --- It will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. \| I did not come to bring peace to the earth, but the sword. -Jesus <cite>Callixtus posted [p:891599425] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Callixtus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DK9292 posted...</cite> <quote>...context?</quote> Guy owns a wedding cake bakery, finds out that some of this customers are gay, and refuses to serve them. Says his rights to "religious liberty" trump their right to equal treatment (which is the law in Colorado where this happened). The couple sues for discrimination, and the case goes all the way up to the supreme court. The question at stake is whether or not all businesses get a free license to discriminate against any class of people as long as it is done in the name of religion.</quote> That's not what happened. He only refused to bake them a wedding cake. He didn't refuse to serve them in general.</quote> lolwut? A wedding cake bakery offers only one service: baking cakes. Refusing to bake cake=refusing service</quote> He offered them plain cakes in lieu of making a wedding cake. https://www.npr.org/2017/12/04/566070515/a-supreme-court-clash-between-artistry-and-the-rights-of-gay-couples</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nomadic View 12/04/17 8:36:19 PM #39:	CiIantro posted... Mr Hangman posted... This case is absurd. Why would you ever eat a cake that someone was forced against their will to bake for you? That can't end well. I doubt they knew he was a bigot when they went into his store. Besides, the case isnt really about cake at all. It is about whether or not being religious gives you a free pass to do literally anything you want. Supreme Court cases are rarely that broad in their rulings. I think as far as selling the cake the Court will hold that someone cannot deny the simple sale, but as far as forcing someone to create a cake that is contrary to religious beliefs, the Court will hold that is too extreme. This case will be used in future precedence. If forcing someone to make anything you want is the precedent, then Jewish bake shops must make Nazi cakes and black bake shops must make KKK cakes. Custom services are probably going to be the primary underlying issue. And with that I dont think the Supreme Court will force society to make whatever anyone demands a cake shop to. --- {}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{} {}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;> <cite>Nomadic View posted [p:891599555] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Mr Hangman posted...</cite> <quote>This case is absurd. Why would you ever eat a cake that someone was forced against their will to bake for you? That can't end well.</quote> I doubt they knew he was a bigot when they went into his store. Besides, the case isnt really about cake at all. It is about whether or not being religious gives you a free pass to do literally anything you want.</quote> Supreme Court cases are rarely that broad in their rulings. I think as far as selling the cake the Court will hold that someone cannot deny the simple sale, but as far as forcing someone to create a cake that is contrary to religious beliefs, the Court will hold that is too extreme. This case will be used in future precedence. If forcing someone to make anything you want is the precedent, then Jewish bake shops must make Nazi cakes and black bake shops must make KKK cakes. Custom services are probably going to be the primary underlying issue. And with that I dont think the Supreme Court will force society to make whatever anyone demands a cake shop to.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CiIantro 12/04/17 8:37:02 PM #40:	@DifferentialEquation posted... I think it's stupid for business owners refuse service like this, but they should be able to do so if they want. Plus, considering that the tax bill passed and that the travel been can now taken effect, we could have a glorious trifecta of liberal tears if the court decides in favor of the bakery. The problem is that if you can use religion as a free license to discriminate, civil rights laws basically go out the window. Can a mormon teacher refuse to teach black students because their religion teaches that blacks are cursed? Can a jehovas witness doctor refuse to operate on someone who has had a blood transfusion because their religion teaches that they are unclean? Saying they should be able to do whatever they want sounds nice on paper, but it is terrible in practice. <cite>CiIantro posted [p:891599596] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>@DifferentialEquation posted...</cite> <quote>I think it's stupid for business owners refuse service like this, but they should be able to do so if they want. Plus, considering that the tax bill passed and that the travel been can now taken effect, we could have a glorious trifecta of liberal tears if the court decides in favor of the bakery.</quote> The problem is that if you can use religion as a free license to discriminate, civil rights laws basically go out the window. Can a mormon teacher refuse to teach black students because their religion teaches that blacks are cursed? Can a jehovas witness doctor refuse to operate on someone who has had a blood transfusion because their religion teaches that they are unclean? Saying they should be able to do whatever they want sounds nice on paper, but it is terrible in practice.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 12/04/17 8:38:03 PM #41:	Nomadic View posted... I think as far as selling the cake the Court will hold that someone cannot deny the simple sale, but as far as forcing someone to create a cake that is contrary to religious beliefs, the Court will hold that is too extreme. Got any precedent handy to suggest that? <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:891599663] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Nomadic View posted...</cite> <quote>I think as far as selling the cake the Court will hold that someone cannot deny the simple sale, but as far as forcing someone to create a cake that is contrary to religious beliefs, the Court will hold that is too extreme.</quote> Got any precedent handy to suggest that?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Darmik 12/04/17 8:38:52 PM #42:	Callixtus posted... He offered them plain cakes in lieu of making a wedding cake. https://www.npr.org/2017/12/04/566070515/a-supreme-court-clash-between-artistry-and-the-rights-of-gay-couples were referred by their wedding planner to the Masterpiece Cakeshop, known in particular for its wedding cakes. Not good enough. --- Kind Regards, Darmik <cite>Darmik posted [p:891599708] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Callixtus posted...</cite> <quote>He offered them plain cakes in lieu of making a wedding cake. https://www.npr.org/2017/12/04/566070515/a-supreme-court-clash-between-artistry-and-the-rights-of-gay-couples</quote> <quote>were referred by their wedding planner to the Masterpiece Cakeshop, known in particular for its wedding cakes.</quote> Not good enough.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChromaticAngel 12/04/17 8:38:59 PM #43:	Nomadic View posted... This case will be used in future precedence. If forcing someone to make anything you want, then Jewish bake shops must make Nazi cakes and black bake shops must make KKK cakes. See: ChromaticAngel posted... CiIantro posted... The reason is that the Constitution guarantees a right to equal dignity, and turning people away from public accommodations or slicing up the public by granting individuals a license to opt out of the public weal denies people that dignity. No constitutional right is entirely unrestricted, but in deciding the balance between First Amendment and equal protection claims, the courts have already distinguished between the right to hold or espouse a belief considered absolute and the right to act on it with impunity. The free exercise of ones belief, the courts have said, is subject to regulation when religious acts require accommodation to a society. This times a million. It's why people try to do shit like "My religion believes in snorting coke and highway speed limits are literally Satan!" get shut down. If they reverse this shit here, they set an extremely dangerous precedent. --- https://puu.sh/tcLsT/24f4611235.png <cite>ChromaticAngel posted [p:891599717] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Nomadic View posted...</cite> <quote>This case will be used in future precedence. If forcing someone to make anything you want, then Jewish bake shops must make Nazi cakes and black bake shops must make KKK cakes.</quote> See: <cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>CiIantro posted...</cite> <quote>The reason is that the Constitution guarantees a right to equal dignity, and turning people away from public accommodations or slicing up the public by granting individuals a license to opt out of the public weal denies people that dignity. No constitutional right is entirely unrestricted, but in deciding the balance between First Amendment and equal protection claims, the courts have already distinguished between the right to hold or espouse a belief considered absolute and the right to act on it with impunity. The free exercise of ones belief, the courts have said, is subject to regulation when religious acts require accommodation to a society.</quote> This times a million. It's why people try to do shit like "My religion believes in snorting coke and highway speed limits are literally Satan!" get shut down. If they reverse this shit here, they set an extremely dangerous precedent.</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Darmik 12/04/17 8:39:48 PM #44:	Nomadic View posted... If forcing someone to make anything you want, then Jewish bake shops must make Nazi cakes and black bake shops must make KKK cakes. Unless that Jewish shop offers Nazi cakes then no they do not. --- Kind Regards, Darmik <cite>Darmik posted [p:891599777] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Nomadic View posted...</cite> <quote>If forcing someone to make anything you want, then Jewish bake shops must make Nazi cakes and black bake shops must make KKK cakes.</quote> Unless that Jewish shop offers Nazi cakes then no they do not.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CiIantro 12/04/17 8:40:27 PM #45:	Nomadic View posted... Supreme Court cases are rarely that broad in their rulings. I think as far as selling the cake the Court will hold that someone cannot deny the simple sale, but as far as forcing someone to create a cake that is contrary to religious beliefs, the Court will hold that is too extreme. This case will be used in future precedence. If forcing someone to make anything you want, then Jewish bake shops must make Nazi cakes and black bake shops must make KKK cakes. Custom services are probably going to be the primary underlying issue. And with that I dont think the Supreme Court will force society to make whatever anyone demands them to. Your example is non-parallel. Being a Nazi or a KKK member is a conscious affiliation. This is about discriminating against people based on biology (ie. ethnicity, skin color, sexual orientation, etc.) <cite>CiIantro posted [p:891599816] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Nomadic View posted...</cite> <quote>Supreme Court cases are rarely that broad in their rulings. I think as far as selling the cake the Court will hold that someone cannot deny the simple sale, but as far as forcing someone to create a cake that is contrary to religious beliefs, the Court will hold that is too extreme. This case will be used in future precedence. If forcing someone to make anything you want, then Jewish bake shops must make Nazi cakes and black bake shops must make KKK cakes. Custom services are probably going to be the primary underlying issue. And with that I dont think the Supreme Court will force society to make whatever anyone demands them to.</quote> Your example is non-parallel. Being a Nazi or a KKK member is a conscious affiliation. This is about discriminating against people based on biology (ie. ethnicity, skin color, sexual orientation, etc.)</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Callixtus 12/04/17 8:41:51 PM #46:	Darmik posted... Callixtus posted... He offered them plain cakes in lieu of making a wedding cake. https://www.npr.org/2017/12/04/566070515/a-supreme-court-clash-between-artistry-and-the-rights-of-gay-couples were referred by their wedding planner to the Masterpiece Cakeshop, known in particular for its wedding cakes. Not good enough. Being known for something, is not the same as only producing something. Also, I'm not going to take it for face value that 7 words saying its known for wedding cakes makes it so, not that its relevant anyway. --- It will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. \| I did not come to bring peace to the earth, but the sword. -Jesus <cite>Callixtus posted [p:891599899] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Darmik posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Callixtus posted...</cite> <quote>He offered them plain cakes in lieu of making a wedding cake. https://www.npr.org/2017/12/04/566070515/a-supreme-court-clash-between-artistry-and-the-rights-of-gay-couples</quote> <quote>were referred by their wedding planner to the Masterpiece Cakeshop, known in particular for its wedding cakes.</quote> Not good enough.</quote> Being known for something, is not the same as only producing something. Also, I'm not going to take it for face value that 7 words saying its known for wedding cakes makes it so, not that its relevant anyway.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nomadic View 12/04/17 8:43:05 PM #47:	Questionmarktarius posted... Nomadic View posted... I think as far as selling the cake the Court will hold that someone cannot deny the simple sale, but as far as forcing someone to create a cake that is contrary to religious beliefs, the Court will hold that is too extreme. Got any precedent handy to suggest that? Of course not. Its why I started the sentence off with I think. This case will be the case to set that precedent. --- {}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{} {}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;> <cite>Nomadic View posted [p:891599985] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Questionmarktarius posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Nomadic View posted...</cite> <quote>I think as far as selling the cake the Court will hold that someone cannot deny the simple sale, but as far as forcing someone to create a cake that is contrary to religious beliefs, the Court will hold that is too extreme.</quote> Got any precedent handy to suggest that?</quote> Of course not. Its why I started the sentence off with I think. This case will be the case to set that precedent.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DifferentialEquation 12/04/17 8:44:32 PM #48:	Darmik posted... Nomadic View posted... If forcing someone to make anything you want, then Jewish bake shops must make Nazi cakes and black bake shops must make KKK cakes. Unless that Jewish shop offers Nazi cakes then no they do not. What if they do their own screen printing on cakes and they advertise that you can bring in any picture you want they'll print it onto a cake for you? Should they be able to pick and choose who they turn away based on their personal beliefs? Or, what if the baker sold the cake to the couple, but refused to write the couple's names on the cake and told them they would have to get that done somewhere else? Would you accept that? --- There's no business to be taxed. <cite>DifferentialEquation posted [p:891600087] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Darmik posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Nomadic View posted...</cite> <quote>If forcing someone to make anything you want, then Jewish bake shops must make Nazi cakes and black bake shops must make KKK cakes.</quote> Unless that Jewish shop offers Nazi cakes then no they do not.</quote> What if they do their own screen printing on cakes and they advertise that you can bring in any picture you want they'll print it onto a cake for you? Should they be able to pick and choose who they turn away based on their personal beliefs? Or, what if the baker sold the cake to the couple, but refused to write the couple's names on the cake and told them they would have to get that done somewhere else? Would you accept that?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CiIantro 12/04/17 8:44:37 PM #49:	Callixtus posted... Darmik posted... Callixtus posted... He offered them plain cakes in lieu of making a wedding cake. https://www.npr.org/2017/12/04/566070515/a-supreme-court-clash-between-artistry-and-the-rights-of-gay-couples were referred by their wedding planner to the Masterpiece Cakeshop, known in particular for its wedding cakes. Not good enough. Being known for something, is not the same as only producing something. Also, I'm not going to take it for face value that 7 words saying its known for wedding cakes makes it so, not that its relevant anyway. Should mormon bakers be allowed to refuse to make wedding cakes for interracial couples? Brigham Young was a vehement opponent of mixed-race relationships. You may think they should be able to, but I (and most of america) do not want to live in a society where people can use their religion as an excuse to deliberately make other people's lives hard. <cite>CiIantro posted [p:891600092] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Callixtus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Darmik posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Callixtus posted...</cite> <quote>He offered them plain cakes in lieu of making a wedding cake. https://www.npr.org/2017/12/04/566070515/a-supreme-court-clash-between-artistry-and-the-rights-of-gay-couples</quote> <quote>were referred by their wedding planner to the Masterpiece Cakeshop, known in particular for its wedding cakes.</quote> Not good enough.</quote> Being known for something, is not the same as only producing something. Also, I'm not going to take it for face value that 7 words saying its known for wedding cakes makes it so, not that its relevant anyway.</quote> Should mormon bakers be allowed to refuse to make wedding cakes for interracial couples? Brigham Young was a vehement opponent of mixed-race relationships. You may think they should be able to, but I (and most of america) do not want to live in a society where people can use their religion as an excuse to deliberately make other people's lives hard.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Darmik 12/04/17 8:47:25 PM #50:	Callixtus posted... Being known for something, is not the same as only producing something. Also, I'm not going to take it for face value that 7 words saying its known for wedding cakes makes it so, not that its relevant anyway. They had a referral with a wedding planner. It's an advertised service. DifferentialEquation posted... What if they do their own screen printing on cakes and they advertise that you can bring in any picture you want they'll print it onto a cake for you? Add a condition that some pictures may be excluded due to adult/offensive content. DifferentialEquation posted... Should they be able to pick and choose who they turn away based on their personal beliefs? No. DifferentialEquation posted... Or, what if the baker sold the cake to the couple, but refused to write the couple's names on the cake and told them they would have to get that done somewhere else? Would you accept that? As long as it was a wedding cake yes. --- Kind Regards, Darmik <cite>Darmik posted [p:891600267] in Supreme Co... [t:76062554]...</cite> <quote><cite>Callixtus posted...</cite> <quote>Being known for something, is not the same as only producing something. Also, I'm not going to take it for face value that 7 words saying its known for wedding cakes makes it so, not that its relevant anyway.</quote> They had a referral with a wedding planner. It's an advertised service. <cite>DifferentialEquation posted...</cite> <quote>What if they do their own screen printing on cakes and they advertise that you can bring in any picture you want they'll print it onto a cake for you? </quote> Add a condition that some pictures may be excluded due to adult/offensive content. <cite>DifferentialEquation posted...</cite> <quote>Should they be able to pick and choose who they turn away based on their personal beliefs?</quote> No. <cite>DifferentialEquation posted...</cite> <quote>Or, what if the baker sold the cake to the couple, but refused to write the couple's names on the cake and told them they would have to get that done somewhere else? Would you accept that?</quote> As long as it was a wedding cake yes.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2

Current Events > Supreme Court to hear "religious liberty" wedding cake case tomorrow. (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > Supreme Court to hear "religious liberty" wedding cake case tomorrow.