- Thread starter
- #61
What part of "he wasnt refusing them, just their events" do you not understand? Never mind the ACLU is hardly an unbiased source.dang, even as recently as today one the RWnuts was telling us that gays aren't being refused service anywhere.
They wasn't in this case, the printer offered to sub the work to another printer at the same price, that wasn't good enough for the faghadist. Yet they got their shirts from another vendor at a better price, they still filed the complaint, tell me that's not politically motivated.And that is still the case. Please show where gays were refused service.dang, even as recently as today one the RWnuts was telling us that gays aren't being refused service anywhere.
You keep asking that question, I'll keep posting this example.
Court Rules Bakery Illegally Discriminated Against Gay Couple - ACLU - Colorado
"Phillips admitted he had turned away other same-sex couples as a matter of policy. The CCRD’s decision noted evidence in the record that Phillips had expressed willingness to take a cake order for the “marriage” of two dogs, but not for the commitment ceremony of two women, and that he would not make a cake for a same-sex couple’s wedding celebration “just as he would not be willing to make a pedophile cake.”
Still batting zero. He didnt refuse service to gays. He refused service for that particular event. Doubtless the distinction is unclear to you.
You're still an asshole.
What part of
"Phillips admitted he had turned away other same-sex couples as a matter of policy."
does not translate into him refusing service to gays?
lol anyone else reading this? Classic Rabbism.