Please pity the persecuted Conservative victims

[TJustice]

Why the hell is anyone listening to the lefties on this thread?
They don't live in America and they don't know what the hell they are thinking.


Here4money lives in Canada and got the law wrong.
Anti discrimination laws don't automatically overrule constitutionally guaranteed freedoms. When rights intersect the Supreme Ct has to adjudicate the issues.
My freedom to choose when I use my talents is the core idea of liberty. You don't just say get to say I am a minority I command you to do this.

Why the hell should the law make an artist do what the artist does not wish to do?
We don't live in the USSR or China. We don't live where exGoper is from. We don't force slavery on others.

A guy does not wish to customize your cake? Find another baker don't waste our Court's time. Its absolutely ridiculous in this age of information.

 

[Poindexter]

Which technically doesn't matter, even if someone "chose" a lifestyle (for instance, religion), anti-descrimination is protected by law and that protection supersedes religious freedoms/their 1st.

NO law "supersedes" the Constitution you utter moron. ALL law must be pursuant to the Constitution (or it's unconstitutional), despite what you Constitution-hating shitlibs and your hacktivist "judges" try to push with your sick agendas.

 

[vanzandt]

It's like in the old days when the white friend of a black guy buying something off the 'whites only' counter, that was very American too according to Cons. If only they could keep their mouths shut, none of this would be a problem.

Thats not a good analogy. Compare apples to apples if you're gonna try to make a point.

The bitch went in there looking for trouble. I bet the guy would refuse to make a cake with a Swastika on it. Would you call him out on that too? Certainly people have a right to be Nazi's.... just like trannys can be trannys.... but if he refused to bake a Hitler cake.... would you be whining about that?

How many times do I need to close this case? You are like arguing with a street-sign.

 

[Wallet]

They ruled on expression grounds not religious, so nice try.

It's a shaky defense, and we'll see what happens when corporations refuse to service religious folk on grounds that their service/craft is an expression of their "art".

Before you shoot down such notion, realize citizens United ruled spending money is protected on similar grounds

Here, educate yourself.

Held: The Commission’s actions in this case violated the Free Exercise Clause. Pp. 9–18.

(a) The laws and the Constitution can, and in some instances must, protect gay persons and gay couples in the exercise of their civil rights, but religious and philosophical objections to gay marriage are protected views and in some instances protected forms of expression.
See Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U. S. ___, ___. While it is unexceptional
that Colorado law can protect gay persons in acquiring products and services on the same terms and conditions as are offered to other members of the public, the law must be applied in a manner that is neutral toward religion. To Phillips, his claim that using his artistic skills to make an expressive statement, a wedding endorsement in his own voice and of his own creation, has a significant First Amendment speech component and implicates his deep and sincere religious beliefs.


https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-111_j4el.pdf

 

[Cuddles]

Here, educate yourself.

Held: The Commission’s actions in this case violated the Free Exercise Clause. Pp. 9–18.

(a) The laws and the Constitution can, and in some instances must, protect gay persons and gay couples in the exercise of their civil rights, but religious and philosophical objections to gay marriage are protected views and in some instances protected forms of expression.
See Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U. S. ___, ___. To Phillips, his claim that using his artistic skills to make an expressive statement, a wedding endorsement in his own voice and of his own creation, has a significant First Amendment speech component and implicates his deep and sincere religious beliefs.


https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-111_j4el.pdf

Like I said, freedom of expression, not religion.

 

[vanzandt]

If that Muslim butcher was in the business of cutting up pigs then he has no right to refuse YOU a Christian conservative for whatever reasons. Anything else is bigotry and against civil rights, so either he takes his business off the public square into a private club or gets shut down.

Ok.... lets say I'm a Jewish baker and some skin-head looking fuck comes in and wants me to make a cake with a Swastika on top.... or even better... he just tells me me he wants a black and red cake to 'celebrate the 80th anniversary of the Third Reich'.... I guess that Jewish baker is required by law to make it(?). Lets see how long that stands.

 

[Cuddles]

Ok.... lets say I'm a Jewish baker and some skin-head looking fuck comes in and wants me to make a cake with a Swastika on top.... or even better... he just tells me me he wants a black and red cake to 'celebrate the 80th anniversary of the Third Reich'.... I guess that Jewish baker is required by law to make it(?). Lets see how long that stands.

That may be a non-sequitur brother. Political affiliation/beliefs are not protected classes.....that's assuming transgenders are a protected class in Colorado, which very well may not be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Colorado

 

[TJustice]

Also, the British Courts just protected a person's freedom to say no to fascism posing as gay rights.

So were the Brits protecting conservatives too. No, this is protecting your freedom from slavery. Freedom of conscience. Freedom of thought and freedom of religion and particularly freedom from fascists in govt.

https://www.breitbart.com/london/20...-supreme-court-rules-favour-christian-bakers/

The UK’s Supreme Court ruled in favour of Northern Irish Christian bakers who declined to bake and decorate a cake with a pro-gay marriage message, with owners heralding the decision as a victory for free speech.