Finally! Supreme Court rules in favor of First Amendment rights for Christians etc.

[2aguy]

Not according to the SCOTUS.

Where in that ruling does it say private companies have to do that?

 

[Synthaholic]

Why....? Cause it was a rude and stupid thing for them to do....but they have the Right to do it....you dumb ass.....

And they have the Right to not serve Sarah Sanders....and everyone else has the Right to bitch about it and not go to that restaruant...that is how Rights and Freedom work.....you shit brains want to force people to serve people...except for republicans...then you support them not serving them..you are the asshat without principles...you dumb twit.

Read that thread. You wingnuts weren't crying about rudeness.

You're all so full of shit.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The statistics are what they are. And they haven't changed.

They are changing. The only reason the statistics are what they are is because there was only "traditional marriage" till a decade ago.

 

[Synthaholic]

No. Not really. Your thoughts are generally ignorant and retarded and, worse, they come from you who disdains honesty.


Irony. You’ve never had a core value in your entire life.

Get some new material, Shitty Lawyer.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Where in that ruling does it say private companies have to do that?

This ruling is not limited to only the Govt, it is all employers.

Supreme Court solidifies protections for workers who ask for religious accommodations

The court made clear that businesses must cite more than minor costs to reject requests for religious accommodations at work.

www.politico.com

 

[Rogue AI]

Before this decision, a business could say…….I have to serve gays by law

Now, a business that chooses to provide services to gays is subject to boycott

The Bud Light disaster was prior to this decision. WTF are you whining about?

 

[2aguy]

This ruling is not limited to only the Govt, it is all employers.

Supreme Court solidifies protections for workers who ask for religious accommodations

The court made clear that businesses must cite more than minor costs to reject requests for religious accommodations at work.

www.politico.com

They will have to go to court to clarify this......

 

[Harpy Eagle]

They will have to go to court to clarify this......

The Supreme Court will have to go to court?

That makes no sense at all

 

[Rogue AI]

Was. Past tense. Show us current Democrats for the KKK.

You folks use new letters now, BLM, LGB-Z, ANTIFA, and so on. Same terror, same hate, same intolerance, with new packaging.

 

[BackAgain]

Get some new material,

Zzz. Speaking of which, apply your tediously boring advice to yourself, Simplyassholic.

 

[Concerned American]

The left simply does not want to accept the real limitations of this ruling. This is a freedom of expression ruling. Not an accommodation ruling. No one can be compelled to express an opinion or belief with which they fundamentally disagree. The web designer cannot be forced to express support for same sex marriage. A Christian band cannot be forced to sing Lola. The new hire at the coffee shop cannot be compelled to wear a MAGA hat,

The left wants to frame the issue as an LGBTQ rights case--nothing is farther from the truth. It is a right to the freedom of speech and religious rights case. The fucking morons couldn't tell the truth if it bit them in the ass. As for reps calling out the SCOTUS, they should be impeached. Until the last decade or so, representatives respected the rulings of the courts. Democrat is just another name for fascist.

 

[Rogue AI]

Comparing a same sex couple to the KKK is reprehensible

Yeah, in the good old days Democrats covered up in robes and hoods, today's Democrats wave their junk at children in public. You've come a long way!

 

[Concerned American]

The statistics are what they are. And they haven't changed.

Gigi is another democrat liar who will most often not be bothered with posting facts to back up his fantasies.

 

[2aguy]

The Supreme Court will have to go to court?

That makes no sense at all

No,,,,,private businesses will need to take this through the court system.....

 

[2aguy]

Yeah, in the good old days Democrats covered up in robes and hoods, today's Democrats wave their junk at children in public. You've come a long way!

They also put on ski masks as blm and antifa street thugs...

 

[hadit]

Such as?

Such as doing away with the filibuster on judges because they were annoyed at Republicans, then being aghast when it's removed for SC Justices.

 

[Rogue AI]

As I said, same sex marriage will be next

As it should be. States amended their Constitutions to reflect the will of the people. As the licensing authority it is their right to define marriage, the federal government has not skin in that game.

 

[skews13]

And why shouldn't Christians be allowed to provide services for those they agree with?

Ever seen a "We reserve the right to refuse service" sign?

This isn't about denial of service, this is about forcing Christians or other to deny their beliefs

A completely made up case, about a fictional gay couple that does not exist.

This exposes the illegitimacy that f this court. And why you will lose it the second there are 52 votes in the Senate.

 

[Soupnazi630]

That is absolutely incorrect. That web designer was offering wedding website design but if he finds out your gay, he doesn't have to do business with you. It has turned LGBTQ+ into second class citizens.

The web designer did not state in his offering that it was only available to heterosexual couples.

What if I am deeply offended at the idea of offering my widgets to women. Can I refuse to sell them to women? What if I find it immoral for French people to eat my doughnuts? Can I refuse to serve them? What if I conclude it is completely improper for people with red hair to use my tongue scrapers. Can I refuse to sell it to them? The whole idea of licensure of businesses is that obtaining a license means that you agree to sell to all members of the public - that you are not allowed to discriminate against any of the protected classes. Unfortunately, SCOTUS just decided that sexual preference no longer delineates a protected class. They have once again eliminated a preexisting civil right.

Wrong,.

It has no effect on the alphabet people of any kind.

Protected classes are by definition elevating people above others and conferring special rights.

Correcting that mistake merely makes people equal in the eyes of the law

 

[Concerned American]

What if I find it immoral for French people to eat my doughnuts?

Don't be ridiculous--you sound like Sotomayor--fucking stupid. If someone told you that they wanted you to post a website that said you ate shit--would you have the right to refuse? Fucking moron.