JoeB131
Diamond Member
No. You didn't. Read it again.
I'm sorry your learning disability makes it impossible for you to get the point. SCOTUS can't rule in favor of the Baker because then EVERY law could be challenged on religious grounds.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No. You didn't. Read it again.
That's what I thought. You didn't even read, much less understand, what you were responding to. Can't really go anywhere from there. I was saying nothing about religious anything. Maybe you mixed my post up with another.I'm sorry your learning disability makes it impossible for you to get the point. SCOTUS can't rule in favor of the Baker because then EVERY law could be challenged on religious grounds.
But that's what's being argued in this case.That's what I thought. You didn't even read, much less understand, what you were responding to. Can't really go anywhere from there. I was saying nothing about religious anything. Maybe you mixed my post up with another.
Or maybe you're ignorant fucking troll.
You shot your mouth off without even reading my post. And you don't want to admit it because you have no integrity. Your trolling grows tiresome more quickly these days.But that's what's being argued in this case.
You shot your mouth off without even reading my post. And you don't want to admit it because you have no integrity. Your trolling grows tiresome more quickly these days.
Get fucked troll.I pointed out why the Justices can't do what you want them to do... because - CHAOS.
I was somewhat surprised....it was a pleasant one.Now they can have their cake and eat it too!
Queers will still cause problems for those who won't accept them as normal.I was somewhat surprised....it was a pleasant one.
I agree with it but I'm a pessimist at heart.
So now nationwide we don't have to act in defiance of our morality that stems from our religious views.
We don't force Muslims or Jews to eat pork products like a ham sandwich....so we don't force Christians, Muslims, or Jews to endorse LGBTQ agenda items.
What would be better would be a constitutional right regarding freedom of commerce so neither any state nor the federal government can make a law demanding anyone give custom when they don’t want to.
They would never dare enter a Muslim bakery and try that.So.
Would you force a Muslim baker to make a big penis cake for a Gay wedding?
/——/ Because in your fascist mind employees and customers never cheat businesses.Awesome, because that way, there's no way that businesses will cheat their customers!
I mean, those pesky health code laws? Why, let the Market Forces sort out the E. Coli.
Well...I guess he won't be baking it.![]()
Colorado baker loses appeal over refusing cake to transgender customer
Baker says he refused trans customer because of his Christian faithwww.independent.co.uk
His defence is the ridiculous religous freedom one that he used to deny a gay couple a cake a few yesrs ago. What does the bible say about trannys ?
It seems that a common link in these bigot cases is well funded extremist laawyers. These bigots never refuse cakes for adulterers or criminals or people who eat shellfish.
They make me sick to my stomach.
I think every store that wants to discriminate, should have to post a sign to let people know who they will and won't serve. That way customers can choose where to spend their money and businesses can choose who their customers are, a win/win.What would be better would be a constitutional right regarding freedom of commerce so neither any state nor the federal government can make a law demanding anyone give custom when they don’t want to.
Hopefully.Queers will still cause problems for those who won't accept them as normal.
/——/ You mean like this?I think every store that wants to discriminate, should have to post a sign to let people know who they will and won't serve. That way customers can choose where to spend their money and businesses can choose who their customers are, a win/win.