Guest Posted July 1, 2023 Report Posted July 1, 2023 12 minutes ago, CdnFox said: She said she wouldn't build a 'gay website'. I know what she meant, but can be interpreted so vaguely. I otherwise agree with your post. Quote
CdnFox Posted July 1, 2023 Report Posted July 1, 2023 2 minutes ago, Perspektiv said: I know what she meant, but can be interpreted so vaguely. I otherwise agree with your post. Well really she should't have to build anything that goes against her morals, be it gay or democrat or spiderman remakes. But i think we're on the same page basically. Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
Rebound Posted July 2, 2023 Report Posted July 2, 2023 4 hours ago, Perspektiv said: How is it discrimination? She doesn't believe in gay marriage. She shouldn't be forced to promote it. I see it no different than a vegan who is against slaughterhouses refusing to promote such a business. This straddles the line, but I fail to see how that it crosses it, should the same above, be fine with promoting a grocery store, just not the butchering of meat. This artist is fine with promoting LGBTQ client, but in no shape or form, is she forced to promote their marriage that goes against several religions. It doesn't mean she is against them marrying, which she clarifies. Then any kind of discrimination against anybody becomes legal. All you have to do is say it’s against your religion. Oh, and this “religious” woman who sued to “defend her faith”? She’s a complete liar. The man who she claimed wanted a cake for a gay wedding has been married to a woman for 15 years. Quote @reason10: “Hitler had very little to do with the Holocaust.”
Nationalist Posted July 2, 2023 Report Posted July 2, 2023 (edited) On 6/30/2023 at 1:43 PM, Rebound said: In the 1940’s and 1950’s, black people could not get hotel rooms. There were not alternatives. It’s wrong that the SCOTUS wants to reimpose segregation in universities and reimpose discrimination by businesses, because that is what this is. It’s not about religion and freedom of speech, it’s discrimination. This court is not normal. Oh grow up. The SCOTUS did no such thing. All they did was give choice to business owners. The same opportunity as gay people. Edited July 2, 2023 by Nationalist 1 Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
Nationalist Posted July 2, 2023 Report Posted July 2, 2023 19 minutes ago, Rebound said: Then any kind of discrimination against anybody becomes legal. All you have to do is say it’s against your religion. Oh, and this “religious” woman who sued to “defend her faith”? She’s a complete liar. The man who she claimed wanted a cake for a gay wedding has been married to a woman for 15 years. You do not know the woman, nor do you know her motivation. You can sound-byte away all you like but, it's all just hot air and horseshit. BTW...That the person who supposedly ordered the cake is married, is completely irrelevant. 1 Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
Guest Posted July 2, 2023 Report Posted July 2, 2023 55 minutes ago, Rebound said: All you have to do is say it’s against your religion. BS is against my religion. Quote
CdnFox Posted July 2, 2023 Report Posted July 2, 2023 1 hour ago, Rebound said: Then any kind of discrimination against anybody becomes legal. All you have to do is say it’s against your religion. Remember when I told you that if you have to lie to make a point it's probably not a very good point? Yeah. 1 Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
Rebound Posted July 2, 2023 Report Posted July 2, 2023 5 hours ago, Nationalist said: You do not know the woman, nor do you know her motivation. You can sound-byte away all you like but, it's all just hot air and horseshit. BTW...That the person who supposedly ordered the cake is married, is completely irrelevant. Of course it’s irrelevant that a loving, God-fearing True Christian would deliberately lie in a Federal Court filing. Because if you truly love Jesus, you can hate and lie all you want. 1 Quote @reason10: “Hitler had very little to do with the Holocaust.”
CdnFox Posted July 2, 2023 Report Posted July 2, 2023 3 hours ago, Rebound said: Of course it’s irrelevant that a loving, God-fearing True Christian would deliberately lie in a Federal Court filing. Of course it is. Or it would be. If she was actually lying. It's AMAZING how the defense counsel missed that fact entirely and yet somehow YOU were so smart that you could prove it in moments CSI Rebound!! Sounds more like bullshit on your part you get so desperate when you're wrong you tend to imagine all kinds of things that aren't there. 1 Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
Nationalist Posted July 2, 2023 Report Posted July 2, 2023 5 hours ago, Rebound said: Of course it’s irrelevant that a loving, God-fearing True Christian would deliberately lie in a Federal Court filing. Because if you truly love Jesus, you can hate and lie all you want. Pfft...doubling down on stupid again, eh? 1 Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
Rebound Posted July 2, 2023 Report Posted July 2, 2023 4 hours ago, Nationalist said: Pfft...doubling down on stupid again, eh? Did a homosexual man ask this web developer to create a website for his same-sex wedding? NO. So explain to me how this “poor innocent God-fearing and Christian” is innocent or God-fearing, if she lies right before the US Supreme Court? Quote @reason10: “Hitler had very little to do with the Holocaust.”
reason10 Posted July 2, 2023 Author Report Posted July 2, 2023 On 7/1/2023 at 5:15 PM, herbie said: Until the latest SC(R)OTUS is finished bringing back 1953. COMING SOON: I refuse to build websites for Republicans. RSVP'd: Will not enter a church that refuses to display Pride flag, but will go to your kids reception. No service for Trump supporters in this store. If the store is stupid enough to refuse service to Trump supporters (in other words, PEOPLE WITH JOBS) so be it. 2 Quote
Nationalist Posted July 2, 2023 Report Posted July 2, 2023 1 hour ago, Rebound said: Did a homosexual man ask this web developer to create a website for his same-sex wedding? NO. So explain to me how this “poor innocent God-fearing and Christian” is innocent or God-fearing, if she lies right before the US Supreme Court? As I understand it, he asked for someone else. So what's that got to do with it? Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
West Posted July 2, 2023 Report Posted July 2, 2023 2 hours ago, Nationalist said: As I understand it, he asked for someone else. So what's that got to do with it? Lefties are for choice unless you choose something they don't like 2 Quote
Rebound Posted July 3, 2023 Report Posted July 3, 2023 (edited) 4 hours ago, Nationalist said: As I understand it, he asked for someone else. So what's that got to do with it? More of your fake news BS. If you actually cared about the truth, you could look up the court documents at the .gov website where they were filed. But you know that would destroy your Holy Christian Honest Woman narrative, wouldn’t it? So you stick with the lies that make you happy. The truth is there and it is immutable. You just refuse to accept it. Edited July 3, 2023 by Rebound Quote @reason10: “Hitler had very little to do with the Holocaust.”
Nationalist Posted July 3, 2023 Report Posted July 3, 2023 26 minutes ago, Rebound said: More of your fake news BS. If you actually cared about the truth, you could look up the court documents at the .gov website where they were filed. But you know that would destroy your Holy Christian Honest Woman narrative, wouldn’t it? So you stick with the lies that make you happy. The truth is there and it is immutable. You just refuse to accept it. So go ahead. What truth do you have to show? 1 Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
reason10 Posted July 3, 2023 Author Report Posted July 3, 2023 2 hours ago, Rebound said: More of your fake news BS. If you actually cared about the truth, you could look up the court documents at the .gov website where they were filed. But you know that would destroy your Holy Christian Honest Woman narrative, wouldn’t it? So you stick with the lies that make you happy. The truth is there and it is immutable. You just refuse to accept it. You have yet to provide even a fake news link, much less a reliable one. Any idi0t can claim court documents exist. Get off your fat ass and produce the documents, if they exist at all. Be sure the Shepardize them, to make sure they weren't overturned by an appellate court. Or just admit you're a LIAR and shut the fck up Quote
CdnFox Posted July 3, 2023 Report Posted July 3, 2023 10 hours ago, reason10 said: You have yet to provide even a fake news link, much less a reliable one. Any idi0t can claim court documents exist. Get off your fat ass and produce the documents, if they exist at all. Be sure the Shepardize them, to make sure they weren't overturned by an appellate court. Or just admit you're a LIAR and shut the fck up But you have read the transcripts - you obivously have them so post the relevant parts that prove what he said is wrong LOL - could it be that YOU were the one making it up? And did everyone notice that when everyone pointed out this is not discriminating against people but rather about being forced to do something against your conscience he suddenly switched to "Christians are bad '? 1 Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
reason10 Posted July 3, 2023 Author Report Posted July 3, 2023 8 minutes ago, CdnFox said: But you have read the transcripts - you obivously have them so post the relevant parts that prove what he said is wrong LOL - could it be that YOU were the one making it up? And did everyone notice that when everyone pointed out this is not discriminating against people but rather about being forced to do something against your conscience he suddenly switched to "Christians are bad '? It's like I'm dealing with teenage crack babies here. Do you goose steppers have any brains whatsoever? Over the past few years, I have attempted to show the Downs Syndrome children here how to do the EASIEST legal research online, with a medium that DIDN'T EXIST when I was in college taking the law classes. Back then if you wanted the cases, you had to know how to find them in a law library in this quaint commodity we call BOOKS. You had to use a Digest just to find the location, subject, Court and time of a decision. There was the Southern Reporter (regular appellate cases) and the Supreme Court Reporter. There were digests, Sheppards, and of course books of the state statutes. Not exactly the easiest things to read, I might add. Yes, there was an online service back then (late 90s) called Westlaw. (Got the name from the law book company WEST) It was extremely expensive to use and law offices frowned on excessive use of it when one merely had to look up the cases in hard cover. Today, you can find ANY case online as well as the statutes. Whenever I wanted to shut an ignorant goose stepper up on a subject of the law, I'd cite the U.S. CODE and challenge that ret@rd to find the law. I was then greeting by the sound of crickets afterward. So I responded to the dumbest crack head here to produce ACTUAL COURT CASES, and so far have been greeted with silence. (There's a reason why I no longer take special education sub assignments. I get enough of that mentality here from the goose stepping liberals.) Quote
CdnFox Posted July 3, 2023 Report Posted July 3, 2023 (edited) 27 minutes ago, reason10 said: It's like I'm dealing with teenage crack babies here. Do you goose steppers have any brains whatsoever? Over the past few years, I have attempted to show the Downs Syndrome children here how to do the EASIEST legal research online, with a medium that DIDN'T EXIST when I was in college taking the law classes. Back then if you wanted the cases, you had to know how to find them in a law library in this quaint commodity we call BOOKS. You had to use a Digest just to find the location, subject, Court and time of a decision. There was the Southern Reporter (regular appellate cases) and the Supreme Court Reporter. There were digests, Sheppards, and of course books of the state statutes. Not exactly the easiest things to read, I might add. Yes, there was an online service back then (late 90s) called Westlaw. (Got the name from the law book company WEST) It was extremely expensive to use and law offices frowned on excessive use of it when one merely had to look up the cases in hard cover. Today, you can find ANY case online as well as the statutes. Whenever I wanted to shut an ignorant goose stepper up on a subject of the law, I'd cite the U.S. CODE and challenge that ret@rd to find the law. I was then greeting by the sound of crickets afterward. So I responded to the dumbest crack head here to produce ACTUAL COURT CASES, and so far have been greeted with silence. (There's a reason why I no longer take special education sub assignments. I get enough of that mentality here from the goose stepping liberals.) You realize i was talking to rebound right? Edited July 3, 2023 by CdnFox Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
herbie Posted July 3, 2023 Report Posted July 3, 2023 22 hours ago, reason10 said: If the store is stupid enough to refuse service to Trump supporters (in other words, PEOPLE WITH JOBS) so be it. Duh, if they refuse service to gays they're just as stupid. You go into business to make money no push your ignorant beliefs. Leave that to TV Evangelists begging for donations Quote
Rebound Posted July 3, 2023 Report Posted July 3, 2023 22 hours ago, Nationalist said: So go ahead. What truth do you have to show? https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-476/226349/20220526141251289_21-476 Joint Appendix.pdf 20 hours ago, reason10 said: You have yet to provide even a fake news link, much less a reliable one. Any idi0t can claim court documents exist. Get off your fat ass and produce the documents, if they exist at all. Be sure the Shepardize them, to make sure they weren't overturned by an appellate court. Or just admit you're a LIAR and shut the fck up Fck you. Here. Not as if you can read it, but her, shut up. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-476/226349/20220526141251289_21-476 Joint Appendix.pdf Quote @reason10: “Hitler had very little to do with the Holocaust.”
CdnFox Posted July 3, 2023 Report Posted July 3, 2023 3 hours ago, herbie said: Duh, if they refuse service to gays they're just as stupid. You go into business to make money no push your ignorant beliefs. Leave that to TV Evangelists begging for donations Really. So if a guy wearing full nazi regailia walks into a jewish web programmer's office and demands a website be built on why hitler was right and the jews have been lying about the holocaust... the jew would be "Foolish" to turn the work away. I don't feel like you really thought that through. 1 Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
robosmith Posted July 3, 2023 Report Posted July 3, 2023 On 7/1/2023 at 12:33 PM, CdnFox said: Well if it's the "unjust" or 'Prejudicial' treatment of different catagories of people, then you're wrong. This is neither unjust nor is it prejudicial treatment against people. Saying you won't do work that goes against your faith is neither unjust or prejudicial. What is the justification for discriminating AGAINST gay people? Seems highly prejudiced to me when you know NOTHING else about that FAKE individual. Doing work for someone does NOT imply approval of their lifestyle. Duh. Quote
Nationalist Posted July 4, 2023 Report Posted July 4, 2023 37 minutes ago, Rebound said: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-476/226349/20220526141251289_21-476 Joint Appendix.pdf Fck you. Here. Not as if you can read it, but her, shut up. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-476/226349/20220526141251289_21-476 Joint Appendix.pdf That's 358 pages of legalese. Just highlight the part you think relevant. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.