AP considers 7-2 a narrow decision

[Abraham]

Never anger someone who is going to serve you something to eat.

Most especially if the anger is made up by you acting haughty, demanding and petty...

(pppssssst, those aren't poppy seeds decorating the cake, they're, gag, mouse droppings...)

Now, the next time you insist on offending someone's religious views and food is part of the equation, take your haughtiness and go where your type of cook/baker etc. truly appreciates your life style and what it's all about.

You'll all be much happier...

Militant gays, cross dressers, trans whatever, by all means throw your presumed legal weight around and then closely examine what you've wrought...because when it comes to having what you 'demand' may just backfire on you...kryptonite comes in many guises....

Go ahead, act militant, insistent, presumptuous, petulant, because now you're absolutely certain you've gotten the upper hand.

Ah no, you don't...

There's a lot more hetero-normals than not. (by a large margin)

If you feel victorious in your quest to quash hetero-normal institutions, ruin what they value, better think again...

Hetero-normals have been relatively even keeled (the real meaning of tolerant) and given in to some of your demands. The supply of that is rapidly diminishing. A huge percentage of people allowing themselves to be bullied by a very small minority is at it's lowest ebb and won't last much longer...

You've mocked institutions h-normals find value in and keep working at it. You bleat on an on regarding tolerance, but not at all meaning it. It just sloganeering on your part... One day soon, h-normals will say: enough!

Minorities "DON'T rule...

When majorities have had enough mistreatment, they will rise up - so wise up and act like human beings or reap the whirlwind...

[mojo84]

[mojo84]

A little lighter perspective.

https://babylonbee.com/news/supreme-cou ... eir-faith/

Supreme Court Drags Nation Into Dystopian Nightmare In Which Business Owners Can Openly Practice Their Faith

[rtschl]

It is a win for the baker and his religious freedom - no question. But I'm disappointed that the court didn't clearly affirm the 1st Amendment for all Americans. There is a movement to redefine the freedom of religion and limit it to the freedom of worship. This is an important distinction that the left has been working hard at for a very long time. If successful, we will be free to worship at a particular place (i.e. church, synagogue, mosque, etc.) but not to allow our religious beliefs to guide us elsewhere. That is not what our founders intended. But a lot of our Constitutional Rights seem to be slipping away one ruling at a time.

[mojo84]

[G26ster]

IMHO it's a temporary win. I'd pretty much bet another gay couple will ask the baker to make them a cake for their wedding. He will, of course, refuse, and they will file a complaint with the same commission that ruled against him this time. The lower courts will agree when the same commission, without the biased remarks, rules against him. If the case again makes it to SCOTUS the results will not be 7-2, but a likely 5-4 in either direction because this time no statements of bias will be exhibited by the commission.

IMHO this ruling was based on the bias of the commission against the baker, and not on his right of religious freedom. Yes, it was a win for the baker, but it does not settle the right of a business owner to refuse service based on their religious beliefs. As tough as the decision will be trying to balance religious freedom vs. discrimination, the court needs to put it's big boy pants on next time and not kick the can down the road. Obviously, YMMV.

[strogg]

When it all boils down to it, everyone has different beliefs, and they need to respect each other when their reasonable beliefs (both of which may be protected under 1A) conflict with each other. The two parties should have just moved on amicably. The baker lost a customer, and the client lost a vendor. Whoopdeedoo. Life goes on. Both customers and bakers are plentiful. It's not like either hold a monopoly or a very powerful clout.

I'm curious, though. Why not counter the gay couple with a discrimination suit? They did technically target the business due to the proprietor's religious beliefs after all.

[dlh]

I have a different spin on all of this. Sadly, the court would rather write on issues surrounding the first amendment than issues surrounding the second amendment. Recall their failure to grant cert. on several firearms cases the last couple of years. Priorities....priorities....priorities...

[Misfit Child]

What does this decision mean for groups of people that have strongly held beliefs that other groups of people are unclean? For example, the Dalit communities.

[LTUME1978]

I am very happy for the ruling today. There is more to this than just the ruling though. The baker in question offered to bake them a generic cake but would not put the topping (gay couple) on that cake that the gay couple wanted. It was all or nothing for the gay couple as they had a different agenda. As many have said, they could have gone somewhere else for their cake (or the topping). They were not after a cake, they were after a fight for their rights (LGBT) vs. Christian rights. The LGBT/left crowd has huge financial backing (Hollywood, etc.) where as the Christians are not in the same place financially but the LGBT crowd forgets who is backing the Christians. The LGBT crowd will continue this fight trying to wear down/defund the Christians. Alliance Defending Freedom took this case and is funded donations by many on the constitutional side of the fence (many who happen to be Christian). I would encourage everyone that sits on this side of the fence to consider supporting ADF however you can. They do some very good work protecting us from the left with a lot of volunteer hours that go beyond what donations they get.

[Abraham]

Not to be a downer, but what next will the LGB... - etc. crowd 'demand' next?

Your first born?

O.K., I'm being facetious, but what's next?

Demand garment makers make dresses/ball gowns to accommodate the male physique?

Ditto for lingerie.

When in public, as an example, when a cashier is helping a customer check out, be forced by law to use the pro-noun 'she' be used (or go straight to jail if not) when addressing obvious males who decide to wear lipstick and mascara, but male clothing.

Or....O.K. you get my point.

Where does it end?

When will the tyranny/bullying of the minority of the majority end?

When?

When the courage of the majority says O.K. we've had enough of this nonsense - the answer to your next demand is NO!

The knuckling under of the majority is at an end.

[Soccerdad1995]

Not to be a downer, but what next will the LGB... - etc. crowd 'demand' next?

Your first born?

O.K., I'm being facetious, but what's next?

Demand garment makers make dresses/ball gowns to accommodate the male physique?

Ditto for lingerie.

When in public, as an example, when a cashier is helping a customer check out, be forced by law to use the pro-noun 'she' be used (or go straight to jail if not) when addressing obvious males who decide to wear lipstick and mascara, but male clothing.

Or....O.K. you get my point.

Where does it end?

When will the tyranny/bullying of the minority of the majority end?

When?

When the courage of the majority says O.K. we've had enough of this nonsense - the answer to your next demand is NO!

The knuckling under of the majority is at an end.

We need to stop criminalizing instances where people get their feelings hurt. If I walk into a store and the person working there makes me feel unwelcome, or flat out tells me that I am not welcome there, I leave. I don't need to call the cops. I don't need to file a lawsuit. I just go somewhere else.

I think we all would love to be accepted by everyone, whether we like to admit it or not. But being an adult means understanding that not everything is going to go our way all the time. Some people won't like us, for whatever reason. That's fine. Put your big boy / big girl pants on and deal with it. The problem is that we have an entire generation or two that was brought up believing that everyone is a winner, and that no one should ever make you feel unhappy. If they do, then they must be punished.

[thatguyoverthere]

I'm happy with the decision. For now.

But before we start celebrating too much, consider that there are other ways besides laws and commissions...

INDIANAPOLIS — An Indianapolis CrossFit facility that came under fire after canceling a special Indy Pride event is now out of business, and a top CrossFit official who supported the gym is out of a job.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/top-c ... =AAylAGp|1

[Abraham]

Then, do some of the same legal maneuvering to those who would try to bully the majority.

Of course, it's easy for me to say, but some pro-bono legal eagles who're tired of being in majority class being pushed around by minority bullies may find (if they look hard enough) what they can destroy just because they can...just like the minority like to do to control the majority.

[bblhd672]

The left never gives up as long as they have breath.

Christian Baker Again Under Fire for Refusing Transgender Cake Despite Supreme Court Win
https://pjmedia.com/faith/christian-bak ... court-win/

In June, the Supreme Court decided the case Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, issuing a powerful rebuke to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission for its "religious hostility" toward Christian baker Jack Phillips. Phillips had refused to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding, and the commission had compared his decision to religious arguments in favor of the Ku Klux Klan and Nazism.

Now, the commission is again going after Phillips for declining to create a custom cake — this time a cake celebrating transgenderism. On Tuesday night, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the Christian law firm that represented Phillips before the Supreme Court and helped him gain an important 7-2 victory, filed a federal lawsuit against the commission to forestall action against Phillips.