The dreaded gay-wedding-cake saga ends: bakers must pay 135 K

[Pop23]

Pop continued melt down over Americans being allowed to get married.

I think it has gone beyond a melt down at this point, and is now a complete break down.

Just seeking equality for similarly situated citizens.

Why do you continue justifying the bigoted rainbow Jim crow laws that would put one similarily situated individual in jail, while the other would be free?

Sounds like you are simply today's newest bigot.

Justice for all!

Straight lives matter!

If that's what you're truly seeking, then why do you flat out refuse to answer the question .... what is the compelling interest in separating blacks from whites in bathrooms??

I never said I wanted gender neutral restrooms/lockers/showers. That's a false premise.

The question is, what legal argument can there be to allow this segregation against similar situated citizens, regardless if I want it or not?

And I did answer the question.

Blacks were judged to be similarily situated as whites, so the segregation of restrooms were deemed discrimination.

I never said you wanted it. I challenged you for the compelling interest that would have permitted such bathrooms. You can't site any because there were none beyond discrimination, which was unlawful.

The same cannot be said about different genders using the same bathroom. That's the part which exposes you as a flaming imbecile.

There is ZERO acceptable discrimination between similar situated individuals.

What part of this are you failing to grasp.

It's obvious you want this segregation, but can't come up with a single sound legal reason that a married lesbian can access a locker room that a married male can't even though the two have been deemed similar situated by the courts.

Strange logic you exhibit.

 

[Pop23]

Pop continued melt down over Americans being allowed to get married.

I think it has gone beyond a melt down at this point, and is now a complete break down.

Just seeking equality for similarly situated citizens.

Why do you continue justifying the bigoted rainbow Jim crow laws that would put one similarily situated individual in jail, while the other would be free?

Sounds like you are simply today's newest bigot.

Justice for all!

Straight lives matter!

If that's what you're truly seeking, then why do you flat out refuse to answer the question .... what is the compelling interest in separating blacks from whites in bathrooms??

I never said I wanted gender neutral restrooms/lockers/showers. That's a false premise.

The question is, what legal argument can there be to allow this segregation against similar situated citizens, regardless if I want it or not?

And I did answer the question.

Blacks were judged to be similarily situated as whites, so the segregation of restrooms were deemed discrimination.

I never said you wanted it. I challenged you for the compelling interest that would have permitted such bathrooms. You can't site any because there were none beyond discrimination, which was unlawful.

The same cannot be said about different genders using the same bathroom. That's the part which exposes you as a flaming imbecile.

You obviously do not understand the legal concept of "compelling state interest".

The state has to prove a "compelling interest" In denying similarly situated individuals their rights.

I thought I was debating with someone who knew what they were talking about?

Guess not

What is the compelling state interest in denying the Married Male the same right to access the locker room with his wife while allowing the similar situated lesbian spouse access?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

If so, then you must think the Supreme Court overstepped its authority when it overturned the states authority to define marriage.

Nope. Legal discrimination versus illegal discrimination. Learn the difference.

Name one legal discrimination of similar situated individuals.

Military combat forces, currently. Professional sports. The Olympics. College sports. Nearly all sports for kids. Shall I continue?

 

[AugmentedDog]

If so, then you must think the Supreme Court overstepped its authority when it overturned the states authority to define marriage.

Nope. Legal discrimination versus illegal discrimination. Learn the difference.

Name one legal discrimination of similar situated individuals.

You're right. There is no legal discrimination comparable to discrimination again gay people. That is because discrimination against gay people in any situation is only comparable to that type of discrimination that has consistently and historically been ruled as illegal.

 

[Pop23]

If so, then you must think the Supreme Court overstepped its authority when it overturned the states authority to define marriage.

Nope. Legal discrimination versus illegal discrimination. Learn the difference.

Name one legal discrimination of similar situated individuals.

Military combat forces, currently. Professional sports. The Olympics. College sports. Nearly all sports for kids. Shall I continue?

Sure, go on, none of which apply to public access.

 

[Pop23]

If so, then you must think the Supreme Court overstepped its authority when it overturned the states authority to define marriage.

Nope. Legal discrimination versus illegal discrimination. Learn the difference.

Name one legal discrimination of similar situated individuals.

You're right. There is no legal discrimination comparable to discrimination again gay people. That is because discrimination against gay people in any situation is only comparable to that type of discrimination that has consistently and historically been ruled as illegal.

And this has what to do with the question of.....

What possible legal reason is there to deny a similar situated individual access to a facility?

The married male has been deemed similarily situated (or same as) a lesbian married female). The female is granted access, the male could not only be denied, but jailed.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

If so, then you must think the Supreme Court overstepped its authority when it overturned the states authority to define marriage.

Nope. Legal discrimination versus illegal discrimination. Learn the difference.

Name one legal discrimination of similar situated individuals.

Military combat forces, currently. Professional sports. The Olympics. College sports. Nearly all sports for kids. Shall I continue?

Sure, go on, none of which apply to public access.

Kids sports certainly are, and so are most other all ____ things like a public girl's or boy's school, college, etc. Age discrimination, sex discrimination, perfectly legal all over the place.

 

[Pop23]

If so, then you must think the Supreme Court overstepped its authority when it overturned the states authority to define marriage.

Nope. Legal discrimination versus illegal discrimination. Learn the difference.

Name one legal discrimination of similar situated individuals.

Military combat forces, currently. Professional sports. The Olympics. College sports. Nearly all sports for kids. Shall I continue?

You realize that females have been allowed tryouts on MENS teams?

The military is always treated different. Public access laws don't apply.

Minors are also treated differently, but you are aware there are those looking to intergrate school restrooms, right?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

If so, then you must think the Supreme Court overstepped its authority when it overturned the states authority to define marriage.

Nope. Legal discrimination versus illegal discrimination. Learn the difference.

Name one legal discrimination of similar situated individuals.

You're right. There is no legal discrimination comparable to discrimination again gay people. That is because discrimination against gay people in any situation is only comparable to that type of discrimination that has consistently and historically been ruled as illegal.

And this has what to do with the question of.....

What possible legal reason is there to deny a similar situated individual access to a facility?

The married male has been deemed similarily situated (or same as) a lesbian married female). The female is granted access, the male could not only be denied, but jailed.

As a couple they have equal standing. As a male, he has separate but equal standing, which is perfectly legal in this case. Still don't get the tabs and slots thing yet eh?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

If so, then you must think the Supreme Court overstepped its authority when it overturned the states authority to define marriage.

Nope. Legal discrimination versus illegal discrimination. Learn the difference.

Name one legal discrimination of similar situated individuals.

Military combat forces, currently. Professional sports. The Olympics. College sports. Nearly all sports for kids. Shall I continue?

You realize that females have been allowed tryouts on MENS teams?

The military is always treated different. Public access laws don't apply.

Minors are also treated differently, but you are aware there are those looking to intergrate school restrooms, right?

No one is looking to integrate school restrooms at the high school and below level, and colleges have had unisex dorms and restroom / shower rooms for decades.

 

[Pop23]

If so, then you must think the Supreme Court overstepped its authority when it overturned the states authority to define marriage.

Nope. Legal discrimination versus illegal discrimination. Learn the difference.

Name one legal discrimination of similar situated individuals.

Military combat forces, currently. Professional sports. The Olympics. College sports. Nearly all sports for kids. Shall I continue?

Sure, go on, none of which apply to public access.

Kids sports certainly are, and so are most other all ____ things like a public girl's or boy's school, college, etc. Age discrimination, sex discrimination, perfectly legal all over the place.

Try to keep up.

Name the discrimination for similar situated adults that is legal.

You are grasping at straws, but I'll bite.

Name the specific legal discrimination

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Nope. Legal discrimination versus illegal discrimination. Learn the difference.

Name one legal discrimination of similar situated individuals.

Military combat forces, currently. Professional sports. The Olympics. College sports. Nearly all sports for kids. Shall I continue?

Sure, go on, none of which apply to public access.

Kids sports certainly are, and so are most other all ____ things like a public girl's or boy's school, college, etc. Age discrimination, sex discrimination, perfectly legal all over the place.

Try to keep up.

Name the discrimination for similar situated adults that is legal.

You are grasping at straws, but I'll bite.

Name the specific legal discrimination

I already have. If the requirement is a tab or a slot, it doesn't matter what other standing you have, take your own door. It's legal discrimination.

 

[Pop23]

If so, then you must think the Supreme Court overstepped its authority when it overturned the states authority to define marriage.

Nope. Legal discrimination versus illegal discrimination. Learn the difference.

Name one legal discrimination of similar situated individuals.

Military combat forces, currently. Professional sports. The Olympics. College sports. Nearly all sports for kids. Shall I continue?

You realize that females have been allowed tryouts on MENS teams?

The military is always treated different. Public access laws don't apply.

Minors are also treated differently, but you are aware there are those looking to intergrate school restrooms, right?

No one is looking to integrate school restrooms at the high school and below level, and colleges have had unisex dorms and restroom / shower rooms for decades.

No?

Transgender Teen Awarded 75 000 in School Restroom Lawsuit

 

[Pop23]

Name one legal discrimination of similar situated individuals.

Military combat forces, currently. Professional sports. The Olympics. College sports. Nearly all sports for kids. Shall I continue?

Sure, go on, none of which apply to public access.

Kids sports certainly are, and so are most other all ____ things like a public girl's or boy's school, college, etc. Age discrimination, sex discrimination, perfectly legal all over the place.

Try to keep up.

Name the discrimination for similar situated adults that is legal.

You are grasping at straws, but I'll bite.

Name the specific legal discrimination

I already have. If the requirement is a tab or a slot, it doesn't matter what other standing you have, take your own door. It's legal discrimination.

It was, true.

Now that a married male has been deemed similarily situated?

So what is the remarkable difference between a married straight male and a married lesbian?

That is what you need to answer in order to legally discriminate

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Nope. Legal discrimination versus illegal discrimination. Learn the difference.

Name one legal discrimination of similar situated individuals.

Military combat forces, currently. Professional sports. The Olympics. College sports. Nearly all sports for kids. Shall I continue?

You realize that females have been allowed tryouts on MENS teams?

The military is always treated different. Public access laws don't apply.

Minors are also treated differently, but you are aware there are those looking to intergrate school restrooms, right?

No one is looking to integrate school restrooms at the high school and below level, and colleges have had unisex dorms and restroom / shower rooms for decades.

No?

Transgender Teen Awarded 75 000 in School Restroom Lawsuit

Not unisex now is it? Nope.

 

[Pop23]

If so, then you must think the Supreme Court overstepped its authority when it overturned the states authority to define marriage.

Nope. Legal discrimination versus illegal discrimination. Learn the difference.

Name one legal discrimination of similar situated individuals.

You're right. There is no legal discrimination comparable to discrimination again gay people. That is because discrimination against gay people in any situation is only comparable to that type of discrimination that has consistently and historically been ruled as illegal.

And this has what to do with the question of.....

What possible legal reason is there to deny a similar situated individual access to a facility?

The married male has been deemed similarily situated (or same as) a lesbian married female). The female is granted access, the male could not only be denied, but jailed.

As a couple they have equal standing. As a male, he has separate but equal standing, which is perfectly legal in this case. Still don't get the tabs and slots thing yet eh?

It was, now they are not different as deemed by the Supreme Court. They are similarily situated.

You argument only is valid if the lesbian is also not allowed access. You realize a lesbian looks at females sexually exactly the same way as males, right?

Or maybe I'm assuming you knew that

 

[PaintMyHouse]

So what is the remarkable difference between a married straight male and a married lesbian?

In marriage, no difference. In porn, no difference. In peeing standing up, big difference. And that difference is legal to account for, meaning you can use it as the basis of discrimination.

 

[Pop23]

Name one legal discrimination of similar situated individuals.

Military combat forces, currently. Professional sports. The Olympics. College sports. Nearly all sports for kids. Shall I continue?

You realize that females have been allowed tryouts on MENS teams?

The military is always treated different. Public access laws don't apply.

Minors are also treated differently, but you are aware there are those looking to intergrate school restrooms, right?

No one is looking to integrate school restrooms at the high school and below level, and colleges have had unisex dorms and restroom / shower rooms for decades.

No?

Transgender Teen Awarded 75 000 in School Restroom Lawsuit

Not unisex now is it? Nope.

Sure it is, for that student.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

You realize a lesbian looks at females sexually exactly the same way as males, right?

Big deal. Gay men look at men the way straight women do. Your dog won't hunt, give it up.

 

[Pop23]

So what is the remarkable difference between a married straight male and a married lesbian?

In marriage, no difference. In porn, no difference. In peeing standing up, big difference. And that difference is legal to account for, meaning you can use it as the basis of discrimination.

You could, before the two were deamed to be the same, and as it applies to segregation, it no longer matters. The two were judged to be the same.

Don't blame me, it was Justice Kennedy