Cakes, Fakes & Counter-Quakes; Do The Kleins Have A Countersuit Against The Lesbians?

[SassyIrishLass]

No it actually depends on whether the person studying the data has enough training, education and background to understand the data in the first place.

If I were to present you with a four cylinder Honda engine that puts out a thousand horsepower, versus a Chevy V8 that only puts out 600, and show you more and more 1000 HP Hondas, you would eventually assume that Honda four bangers are just more powerful than American V8 engines.

And I can explain to you why that is bullshit, but you would have to have some background in physics to understand why it's bullshit.

Faking data is faking data and they got caught...more than once.

Well by that standard we can't believe anything from Conservatives- because they have been caught faking data.

So anything ever stated by a Conservative must be false- because a few Conservatives have faked data.

Oh shut up. You're trying to deflect from your bullshit global warming scam to some other crap.

You're a waste of time

LOL- faux Conservatives- typical- "Science bad because I saw something Hannity said about Scientists faking data"- but when I point out that Conservatives have faked data then its "shut up!"

LOL

No dipshit, it's on many sources, get off MSNBC and get informed.

Freaking dunce....waste of time. Like all left loons

 

[emilynghiem]

The lesbians KNEW that Sweet Cakes was a Christian-run business. They were informed of that and CHOSE ON PURPOSE to continue to try to force the Christian couple to do what their faith forbade them to do under peril of eternal damnation: abet the spread of homosexuality in a culture "as normal" (See Jude 1 of the New Testament).

These lesbians were out to sabotage the Kleins' 1st Amendment rights, using inferior local PA laws. It was a direct act of suppressing someone else's constitutional rights. If the Kleins can demonstrate that the lesbians knew the Kleins had constitutionally-protected objections (since "gay" is behavioral and NOT protected as such in the Constitution) ie: their 1st Amendment rights,, AND if the Kleins could demonstrate the lesbians had alternatives (they did and knew they did) a countersuit could show the lesbians were out to suppress constitutional rights of another person or persons. Turn this bitch on its heel and chase the other way?

They went to the appeals court this March 2017.
Argument for the Kleins: Bakers Accused of Hate Get Emotional Day in Court

“The government should never force someone to violate their conscience or their beliefs,” Kelly Shackelford, president and CEO of First Liberty Institute, a religious freedom group that represents the Kleins, said in a press statement, adding:

“In a diverse and pluralistic society, people of good will should be able to peacefully coexist with different beliefs. We hope the court will uphold the Kleins’ rights to free speech and religious liberty.”

Argument against the Kleins:

But Charlie Burr, a spokesman for the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, whose lawyers represent the Bowman-Cryers, said:

“The facts of this case clearly demonstrate that the Kleins unlawfully discriminated against a same-sex couple when they refused service based on sexual orientation.”

But Mr. Burr, don't you know that there is NO LANGUAGE AT ALL in the US Constitution either directly or via insinuation or allusion to sexual behaviors and habits? But there is PLENTY of language in the US Constitution about religious freedoms and protections. And, nobody is allowed to suppress or deny the Constitutional rights of another. And Mr. Burr, do you know that the Judicial branch of government cannot use its power to legislate brand spanking new pivotal language into the US Constitution? Might want brush up on that old political science course you had to take in high school in order to pass. Though I realize that in Oregon, "education" is a loose term...

Anyone want to bet on this horse race?

I'm betting it can be resolved by recognizing beliefs on both sides as equally faith based , where neither side should be discriminated against by their CREED. Because creeds and beliefs are equally individual choice, and govt is supposed to remain neutral neither establishing nor prohibiting one faith based belief or another, both groups should agree to separate and not impose on each other in public.

Hindus and Muslims are not allowed to pass laws or sue each other for not complying with each other's beliefs that remain separate and equal free choice to practice or to avoid. If govt cannot take sides and punish Americans for not complying with Muslim Shariah, or with Christian healing prayer, or with Buddhist beliefs in not killing or eating animals, then the same should apply to LGBT beliefs that remain a private faith based choice that is protected for individuals to exercise and express but can't be mandated regulated or penalized by govt!

 

[SassyIrishLass]

If our Founding Fathers wanted to protect the baking of cakes, they would have included it in the Constitution

They left it out for a reason!

If two men came to the Founding Fathers and told them they wanted to marry the Fathers would have looked at them like they had worms coming out of their ears.

That's a fact. Jack

If a black man came to the Founding Fathers and told them he wanted to run for President, the Founding fathers would have looked at him and told him to get back on the plantation/

That's a fact. Jack.

Probably but race isn't chosen...being a pee wee puffer? Still debatable

Bottom line, religious rights are Constitutional...baking cakes for queers not so much. In fact not at all

 

[Silhouette]

I'm betting it can be resolved by recognizing beliefs on both sides as equally faith based , where neither side should be discriminated against by their CREED. Because creeds and beliefs are equally individual choice, and govt is supposed to remain neutral neither establishing nor prohibiting one faith based belief or another, both groups should agree to separate and not impose on each other in public.

Hindus and Muslims are not allowed to pass laws or sue each other for not complying with each other's beliefs that remain separate and equal free choice to practice or to avoid. If govt cannot take sides and punish Americans for not complying with Muslim Shariah, or with Christian healing prayer, or with Buddhist beliefs in not killing or eating animals, then the same should apply to LGBT beliefs that remain a private faith based choice that is protected for individuals to exercise and express but can't be mandated regulated or penalized by govt!

So you're saying LGBT is a cult. I agree. But do they have federal recognition for their dogmatic behaviors and tax exempt status? I've long said that the only way LGBTs might have Constitutional protection at the widest stretch of interpretation is via religious protections. They DO NOT qualify on protections for static classes such as race, gender or country of origin. No way. Their gig is about choices, as you said, and lifestyles, and behaviors. Their gig is not about some static inborn trait. Otherwise you'd not see such rampant and evident signs of suppressed heterosexuality in their members: dykes seeking out phallus (dildos), gay men seeking out an artificial vagina at the lower end of their partner. It's mental, behavioral and everyone knows it. Glad you finally came on board with it.

 

[Rambunctious]

These signs were from a time when America was free...

 

[JakeStarkey]

So you're saying LGBT is a cult.

Emily said nothing of the sort.

 

[JakeStarkey]

These signs were from a time when America was free...

America was not free. Except for white men and women.

 

[Rambunctious]

America was not free. Except for white men and women

And now none of us are free...nice work libs...

 

[JakeStarkey]

We are all free.

You may not be free to hurt others, but I don't care.

 

[Syriusly]

No it actually depends on whether the person studying the data has enough training, education and background to understand the data in the first place.

If I were to present you with a four cylinder Honda engine that puts out a thousand horsepower, versus a Chevy V8 that only puts out 600, and show you more and more 1000 HP Hondas, you would eventually assume that Honda four bangers are just more powerful than American V8 engines.

And I can explain to you why that is bullshit, but you would have to have some background in physics to understand why it's bullshit.

Faking data is faking data and they got caught...more than once.

Well by that standard we can't believe anything from Conservatives- because they have been caught faking data.

So anything ever stated by a Conservative must be false- because a few Conservatives have faked data.

Oh shut up. You're trying to deflect from your bullshit global warming scam to some other crap.

You're a waste of time

LOL- faux Conservatives- typical- "Science bad because I saw something Hannity said about Scientists faking data"- but when I point out that Conservatives have faked data then its "shut up!"

LOL

No dipshit, it's on many sources, get off MSNBC and get informed.

Yes dipshit- its on many sources that some Conservatives have faked the data- so we can never believe what any Conservatives say ever.

I mean by your 'standards'

LOL

 

[Syriusly]

America was not free. Except for white men and women

And now none of us are free...nice work libs...

Poor little snowfake.

And that is no typo.

 

[Syriusly]

These signs were from a time when America was free...

More signs from a time when America was 'free'

 

[Rambunctious]

These signs were from a time when America was free...

More signs from a time when America was 'free'
View attachment 164412

And now none of us are free...nice work libs/progtards

 

[mdk]

Otherwise you'd not see such rampant and evident signs of suppressed heterosexuality in their members: dykes seeking out phallus (dildos), gay men seeking out an artificial vagina at the lower end of their partner. It's mental, behavioral and everyone knows it. Glad you finally came on board with it.

Lord knows nothing screams "suppressed heterosexuality" like gay sex.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

America was not free. Except for white men and women

And now none of us are free...nice work libs...

More like nice work progtards, these morons are not true liberals.

 

[Syriusly]

If our Founding Fathers wanted to protect the baking of cakes, they would have included it in the Constitution

They left it out for a reason!

If two men came to the Founding Fathers and told them they wanted to marry the Fathers would have looked at them like they had worms coming out of their ears.

That's a fact. Jack

If a black man came to the Founding Fathers and told them he wanted to run for President, the Founding fathers would have looked at him and told him to get back on the plantation/

That's a fact. Jack.

Probably but race isn't chosen...being a pee wee puffer? Still debatablel

Oh I thought you were trying to make a point about something by claiming the wisdom of the Founding Fathers.

Yes- the Founding Fathers would not have accepted gay marriage- just as they would not have accepted the equality of whites and blacks.

And?

 

[Silhouette]

Lord knows nothing screams "suppressed heterosexuality" like gay sex.

Correct. Men seeking a hole at the lower end of another. Women craving dildos inserted by their "female' partners. It's mental illness. It's time we just call it what it is. The signs of repressed heterosexuality are all there...

 

[rightwinger]

Lord knows nothing screams "suppressed heterosexuality" like gay sex.

Correct. Men seeking a hole at the lower end of another. Women craving dildos inserted by their "female' partners. It's mental illness. It's time we just call it what it is. The signs of repressed heterosexuality are all there...

Why are you so obsessed about the mechanics of homosexual sex?

 

[Silhouette]

Why are you so obsessed about the mechanics of homosexual sex?

Simple: To demonstrate that it's a mental illness and not an inborn trait. The signs of repressed heterosexuality are all there. So, it's mental illness. Remember, the debate is "is the premise of homosexuality = to race correct or incorrect"? The mechanics of homosexual sex suggest it is a mental illness, like a displacement disorder... and therefore an acquired behavior.

 

[JoeB131]

Oh...it talks specifically about race & gender & country of origin & religion. But when you have judicial-legislation ripping away the majority's power to regulate deviant minority behaviors, you set up discrimination against other deviant minority behaviors & lifestylists if you don't give them all the same privileges.

Ah, yes, the slippery slope argument. People are going to be marrying their dogs, whatever...

So, hey, guy, instead of telling us how we are going to have Nazis on Dinosaurs, let's actually define why gay marriage is bad.

Invalid answers are -
"I think it's icky"
"God says it's bad"
and
"Think of the Children".

None of those are valid. Otherwise, please proceed.