Christian bakers who refused to make cake for homosexual "wedding" break gag order

[JimBowie1958]

Perversion like many of Jimmie's 'words' meaning anything having to do with sex he doesn't approve of.

Now you pretend to not understand the word 'perversion'?

roflmao

Here is an illustration for you.

 

[Syriusly]

Why do you idiots keep saying that? Of course they aren't a race.

Then you need to ejumakate your fellow butt humping fag buddies so we dont have to correct them all the god damned time.

No- we just keep pointing out the bull shit your bigots pull our of your ass.

Sexual orientation is not race- no more than religion is race- no one tries to make that connection except for the usual collection of idiot bigots.

 

[JimBowie1958]

That hasn't been true for 50 years.

LOL, so you edit out the part where I said things have changed then post that things ahve changed?

Can you libtards win an argument without building the straw men first?

Notice the homophobic bigots only seem to have noticed this issue when States decide to pass laws to make the law apply to sexual orientation too.

Lol, yeah, because being a fag is an abomination, but being black is the way God made some of us.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Why do you idiots keep saying that? Of course they aren't a race.

Then you need to ejumakate your fellow butt humping fag buddies so we dont have to correct them all the god damned time.

No- we just keep pointing out the bull shit your bigots pull our of your ass.

Sexual orientation is not race- no more than religion is race- no one tries to make that connection except for the usual collection of idiot bigots.

Nope, fags compare themselves to black people all the time, as if their is an equivalence.

 

[Syriusly]

Perversion like many of Jimmie's 'words' meaning anything having to do with sex he doesn't approve of.

Now you pretend to not understand the word 'perversion'?

roflmao

Here is an illustration for you.

Here is an illustration of perversion

 

[JimBowie1958]

Nonsense. We support the right of gay men to marry. The opposite sex.

I think they should have the right to have civil unions witht heir own sex if that is what they want.

But redefining marriage is an assault on our civilization and needs to be corrected ASAP from the evil it has been made into.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Here is an illustration of perversion

Ah, man, if you hate him this much already, you are going to have a very difficult 8 years ahead of you.

 

[boedicca]

Burn Them! Burn The Haters!

I mean, refusing to bake a gay wedding cake is certainly far worse than compromising national security by having more than 1,800 classified (including some Top Secret) emails on an unsecured server in a loft bathroom of some obscure ISP.

 

[Syriusly]

That hasn't been true for 50 years.

LOL, so you edit out the part where I said things have changed then post that things ahve changed?

Can you libtards win an argument without building the straw men first?

Notice the homophobic bigots only seem to have noticed this issue when States decide to pass laws to make the law apply to sexual orientation too.

Lol, yeah, because being a fag is an abomination, but being black is the way God made some of us.

See- like I pointed out- only you idiot bigots equate race and sexual orientation.

I used your own words- where you said business's have always been able to discriminate- and of course business's haven't been able to do that for 50 years now.

You bigots only noticed when you found out you can't waive a crusevix around and claim you can fire gays regardless of state law.

 

[JimBowie1958]

And same sex marriage is protected by the 14 th amendment

Why weren't gays married since the beginning of our Republic? The Founders never intend ended for it, so using the 14th as an excuse will be overturned by a rational Court.

And the founders never consider corporations to be people either.

And they are not people. Just another example of the stupidity of the SCOTUS that will get fixed.

 

[Syriusly]

Here is an illustration of perversion

Ah, man, if you hate him this much already, you are going to have a very difficult 8 years ahead of you.

LOL- I think he is comical- a perversion- but comical.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I used your own words- where you said business's have always been able to discriminate- and of course business's haven't been able to do that for 50 years now.

You heavily edited what I said to mean something different than I said.

A typical Marxist piece of bullshit.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Here is an illustration of perversion

Ah, man, if you hate him this much already, you are going to have a very difficult 8 years ahead of you.

LOL- I think he is comical- a perversion- but comical.

You wont be laughing next January, I'm sure of that.

 

[Syriusly]

Why do you idiots keep saying that? Of course they aren't a race.

Then you need to ejumakate your fellow butt humping fag buddies so we dont have to correct them all the god damned time.

No- we just keep pointing out the bull shit your bigots pull our of your ass.

Sexual orientation is not race- no more than religion is race- no one tries to make that connection except for the usual collection of idiot bigots.

Nope, fags compare themselves to black people all the time, as if their is an equivalence.

No- just stupid idiots like you do, in order to attack 'f*gs'- and pretend you have nothing against what you call "n*ggers"

 

[mdk]

You wont be laughing next January, I'm sure of that.

Is that the 'use by' date for gay marriage? lol

 

[JimBowie1958]

Agreed. The Judicial can't add things to the Constitution.

They're not supposed to redefine the English language either, but there they go anyway.

 

[JimBowie1958]

No- just stupid idiots like you do, in order to attack 'f*gs'- and pretend you have nothing against what you call "n*ggers"

Lol, you libtards really like using that N Word, doncha?

IS it really that hard to suppress your KKK roots?

 

[JoeMoma]

Behaviors aren't protected in the Constitution outside religion. Has the cult of LGBT gotten tax exempt status, declaring themselves as a religion? No? Then there is no protection. Even if there was, no religion can force others to practice it. A Christian couldn't force a member of the Church of LGBT to print giant highway billboards that read "Homosexuality is an abomination before God", for instance... A Muslim can't force a jew to advertise for "Pork, the other white meat". A Mormon can't force a Muslim to print a picture of a cartoon of Muhammed.

Bullroar. Speech is a behavior.

One that is explicitly affirmed and protected under the First Amendment, along with religion.

And inherent in the right to express what one believes and supports, is equally a right not to be compelled to express that which one does not believe or support.

Yep. They're gonna lose this one. This time, the law is clear and concise. The Constitution would have be fundamentally rewritten in two of the Amendments for the church of LGBT to get a victory on this one...

Except of course, they didn't. The Supreme Court already allowed the lower court rulings to stand and denied Cert. Exactly as they did for Kim Davis.

See, Sil....it doesn't matter what you and Bob tell each other about what the constitution means. It matters what the law and courts recognize the constitution to mean. And your pseudo-legal gibberish ignores the law and the courts and replaces both with your imagination.

Alas, your imagination is functionally irrelevant to actual legal outcomes. Which might explain why your every legal prediction, without exception, is wrong.

As much as I and many others may hate it, you are right for practical purposes, the constitution says what the courts and ultimately the supreme court interpret it to say. I will not be surprised if the next ruling says that the constitution means "pineapple".

This isn't a 'liberal/Conservative' thing. THe justice I'm quoting that explicitly contradicts the 'religion trumps civil law' meme is Justice Scalia. Arguably the most conservative justice on the court until his passing. This is well established in our system of law. And frankly, should be.

As 'free excercise' doesn't mean immunity to any law you disagree with. If it did, we'd be 'courting anarchy', as Scalia put it. As religion is so diverse and the standard of 'religious belief' so utterly subjective that virtually all law would be voluntary. Its essentially a religiously based 'Sovereign Citizen' argument.

Worse, faux 'religious liberty' Christians don't think this through. If religious belief alone allows Christians to be exempted from any law they disagree with......the same is true of any religious person. Sharia law is suddenly elevated as supreme over all US civil law. With any Muslim being the sole arbiter of whether or not any US law applies to them.

Oh, and I love your handle. Its hilarious!

In the past, I have been on the side of the Christian baker. I don't think they should be compelled to make or decorate a specific cake that would somehow violate their religion. What I would like to know is how the wedding cake for the gay couple would be any different than the cakes made for heterosexual couples. Did the lesbians want two brides on top of the cake? I believe the baker should have the final artistic control the cakes she decorates and thus be able to deny to make cakes decorated in a manner she finds offensive.

On the other hand, if the wedding cake for the lesbian couple was not different than a wedding cake for a straight couple, then the baker should have made the cake. Suposely, they had no problem selling off the shelf baked goods to the couple for a while. Its just a cake damnit!

Did they refuse to sell apple pies to teenage boys (ref. The movie American Pie)

 

[JimBowie1958]

[
Why do you think anyone should be obligated to care about, let alone adhere to or believe in the writings of your or someone else's religious book or beliefs? If a business person will not follow court interpretations of the Constitution they should get into another business. What makes you so sure the mark is on those you disagree with. Maybe that mark is on you and folks like the bakers. I just can't imagine the figure of Jesus would side with the bakers. He would probably turn that 10 lb. bag of flour into enough cakes to feed everyone who showed up no matter what kind of people they were. He wouldn't care if some of them wanted to use his cakes as wedding cakes. Those bakers, whether by mistake of by malicious intent, are fake Christians.

Because the law of the land is not the highest law we are obligated to obey.

God's Law is, you degenerate.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Since you are the one that decides what is defined as immoral or perverted, are there any other things we should know about?

The fresh air will be very much enjoyable to you once you pull your head out of your ass.