The Supreme Court Of The United States Is Guilty Of Subornation Of Perjury

I think you're a fool if you assume that what your hearing is absolute truth.

Oh, sure, the plaintiff was lying when she said that she hasn't yet gone into business offering wedding websites. In fact, she's been doing it for 10 years now, she just didn't want the court to know that because......I don't know. Because you're a fucking idiot.
 
I do not get your point.
If there was no gay customer who wanted a website, that she turned down, then she just lied.
Prior restraint is about speech only, and obviously you can not have caused harm until after you say something libelous.
So prior restraint is wrong, but this is not prior restraint.
This is about whether or not she can illegally harm others by discriminating against minorities for no valid reason.
The statute against discrimination not only does apply but must.
The SCOTUS is so wrong on this one, that everyone is going to start ignoring the SCOTUS at this point.
She didn't lie. No one was named in the original complaint.
 
Horseshit as always. If I am running a Christian bookstore, I have every right to hire/fire someone who does not adhere to my code of conduct. And since that will upset the alphabet soup crowd, then I am doing right by G-d.

Wrong.
We are discussing customers, not employees.
With employees, it depends on how big you are.
If you have fewer than 3 employees, then you are allowed to discriminate over employees.
Nor would G-d want you to go around deliberately upsetting people who are just trying to be nice to everyone.
Do you really think you should not be nice to someone before you even get to know them?
That seems pretty evil to me?
 
A right wing extremist, Lorie Smith, was thinking about creating websites. Lorie Smith also wanted her 15 minutes of fame, so she created a company called 303 Creative and then filed a lawsuit claiming that a gay couple known as Stewart and Mike had demanded she create a web site for them. This lawsuit ended up at the Supreme Court, and it overturned years of legal precedent which made discrimination illegal. There was just one problem with Lorie Smith’s lawsuit — The so-called email demanding that she create a web site for the gay couple was sent ONE DAY AFTER HER LAWSUIT WAS FILED. In addition, Lorie Smith and her company had never created ANY web site for ANY individual or company. So why was the company formed in the first place? We all know why. Eventually, Stewart was reached, and he not only said he never sent that email, but that he was a heterosexual who has been happily married to a woman for the last 15 years. By submitting false information to the courts, Lorie Smith committed perjury. And, as a result, Lorie Smith had no standing at all to file this lawsuit.

And, because the justices at the Supreme Court knew of the perjury before they began deliberations, they suborned the perjury. In addition, several justices committed perjury during their Senate confirmations by stating that they would abide by precedent, known as Stare Decisis, and then did the opposite. This week, The Supreme Court of the United States officially became a corrupt criminal enterprise



The most corrupt, and illegitimate court in the nations history.
After the fraud every court at every level is guilty of the same thing.
 
That was precisely the asian students' argument in the AA case. The left went ballistic when the court rule such discrimination was unconstitutional

I assume you mean that affirmative action to help those with low scores was then harmful to Asians with high scores?
And I do not believe affirmative action is harmful at all.
First of all, very few people are ever benefited from it, so then it can't harm anyone.
Those who may get bumped by the few affirmative action cases, have tons of other opportunities to choose from.
Second is that those who do practice and get tutored so they get good scores, do not necessarily do well in real life at all.
They tend to be score oriented and not realistic or imaginative.
Those who do not get much schooling, but have to survive poverty, tend to be much more realistic.
 
Wrong.
We are discussing customers, not employees.
With employees, it depends on how big you are.
If you have fewer than 3 employees, then you are allowed to discriminate over employees.
Nor would G-d want you to go around deliberately upsetting people who are just trying to be nice to everyone.
Do you really think you should not be nice to someone before you even get to know them?
That seems pretty evil to me?
Pointing out sin is not meant to be nice. It is meant to be honest.
 
You mean, if you invented a fake serial killer, and a fake demand from a fake serial killer, then filed a fake, lying lawsuit in a corrupt court and changed the rules of America.

Let's stay focused.
We are focused....all laws have reasonable limits.
My response was specific to the post not the OP.

In this case the standing was in the legislation that preemptively violated religious freedom. The harm was pre-attached as a condition of doing business. As for false identities or what not....if that's true then I'm sure she will be legally culpable.... Don't know.... Don't care. Your use of the corrupt is tainted to your own predilections. If the case was flawed how did the huge collective staffs of three dissenting judges not see it? You really think they don't know every detail? I'm sure they knew it all.

Jo
 

Forum List

Back
Top