The Hateful Faithful & Narrow Arguments That Blind

[ABikerSailor]

It was a huge boost for religious freedom....no matter how the left tries to spin it.

How is it a huge boost when the SC said that their ruling applies to only this case and no others? The ruling cannot be applied to any other cases as per SCOTUS.

You cant possibly be this daft

You continually question my intelligence on a regular basis, so why do you have problems with me asking how this is a boost? Explain how this is a boost to religious freedom, when the SCOTUS said that their ruling applies only to this case and no others? If the ruling can't apply to any other cases, it's not really a boost. Matter of fact, it's really not anything one way or the other.

The Christian won you befuddled story teller

Hell even NBC said it's a huge boost for religious freedom

The individual won, not religion. And, because the SCOTUS said that their ruling would only apply to this case and no others, that means this ruling can't be used to help out other religious cases.

The individual won, not religion.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

For the record? I said months ago the baker would win

On what grounds? Narrow hateful ones, or something insightful on the legality and constitutionality?

Religious freedom

 

[SassyIrishLass]

It was a huge boost for religious freedom....no matter how the left tries to spin it.

How is it a huge boost when the SC said that their ruling applies to only this case and no others? The ruling cannot be applied to any other cases as per SCOTUS.

You cant possibly be this daft

You continually question my intelligence on a regular basis, so why do you have problems with me asking how this is a boost? Explain how this is a boost to religious freedom, when the SCOTUS said that their ruling applies only to this case and no others? If the ruling can't apply to any other cases, it's not really a boost. Matter of fact, it's really not anything one way or the other.

The Christian won you befuddled story teller

Hell even NBC said it's a huge boost for religious freedom

The individual won, not religion. And, because the SCOTUS said that their ruling would only apply to this case and no others, that means this ruling can't be used to help out other religious cases.

The individual won, not religion.

Go sell it elsewhere

 

[irosie91]

My father had a solution to ALL WEDDING PROBLEMS---
he said --------"I will buy the ladder-----your boyfriend pulls you
out of the window------and you escape to a "justice of the peace" "

 

[ABikerSailor]

Hell even NBC said it's a huge boost for religious freedom

#fakenews

First paragraph....now pull your shit on someone else

In narrow ruling, Supreme Court gives victory to baker who refused to make cake for gay wedding

But, the second paragraph contradicts it being a huge boost for religious freedom. And, NBC didn't say it was "a huge boost", just a boost. Here, let me post the first 2 paragraphs of your link..................

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court gave a boost to advocates of religious freedom on Monday, ruling that a Colorado baker cannot be forced to make a cake for a same-sex wedding, in a case that involved marriage equality and protection from discrimination.

But the opinion was a narrow one, applying to the specific facts of this case only. It gave no hint as to how the court might decide future cases involving florists, bakers, photographers and other business owners who have cited religious and free-speech objections when refusing to serve gay and lesbian customers in the wake of the Supreme Court's 2015 same-sex marriage decision.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

My father had a solution to ALL WEDDING PROBLEMS---
he said --------"I will buy the ladder-----your boyfriend pulls you
out of the window------and you escape to a "justice of the peace" "

The gays target these bakers, etc.

This one blew up in their face

 

[JBvM]

For the record? I said months ago the baker would win

On what grounds? Narrow hateful ones, or something insightful on the legality and constitutionality?

Religious freedom

Who was interfering with the man's religious freedom, and more to the point - how? I mean in the argument(s) you supposedly made

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Hell even NBC said it's a huge boost for religious freedom

#fakenews

First paragraph....now pull your shit on someone else

In narrow ruling, Supreme Court gives victory to baker who refused to make cake for gay wedding

But, the second paragraph contradicts it being a huge boost for religious freedom. And, NBC didn't say it was "a huge boost", just a boost. Here, let me post the first 2 paragraphs of your link..................

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court gave a boost to advocates of religious freedom on Monday, ruling that a Colorado baker cannot be forced to make a cake for a same-sex wedding, in a case that involved marriage equality and protection from discrimination.

But the opinion was a narrow one, applying to the specific facts of this case only. It gave no hint as to how the court might decide future cases involving florists, bakers, photographers and other business owners who have cited religious and free-speech objections when refusing to serve gay and lesbian customers in the wake of the Supreme Court's 2015 same-sex marriage decision.

Did they say it or or not? Yrs or no....nothing else

You got stuffed

 

[SassyIrishLass]

For the record? I said months ago the baker would win

On what grounds? Narrow hateful ones, or something insightful on the legality and constitutionality?

Religious freedom

Who was interfering with the man's religious freedom, and more to the point - how?

Queers...the point how is obvious

 

[irosie91]

For the record? I said months ago the baker would win

On what grounds? Narrow hateful ones, or something insightful on the legality and constitutionality?

Religious freedom

Who was interfering with the man's religious freedom, and more to the point - how?

he did not want to make a cake with ---two plastic male figures standing
together in front of a cross--------over "LOVERS FOREVER" in royal icing
surrounded by little blue sugar flowers

 

[ABikerSailor]

Hell even NBC said it's a huge boost for religious freedom

#fakenews

First paragraph....now pull your shit on someone else

In narrow ruling, Supreme Court gives victory to baker who refused to make cake for gay wedding

But, the second paragraph contradicts it being a huge boost for religious freedom. And, NBC didn't say it was "a huge boost", just a boost. Here, let me post the first 2 paragraphs of your link..................

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court gave a boost to advocates of religious freedom on Monday, ruling that a Colorado baker cannot be forced to make a cake for a same-sex wedding, in a case that involved marriage equality and protection from discrimination.

But the opinion was a narrow one, applying to the specific facts of this case only. It gave no hint as to how the court might decide future cases involving florists, bakers, photographers and other business owners who have cited religious and free-speech objections when refusing to serve gay and lesbian customers in the wake of the Supreme Court's 2015 same-sex marriage decision.

Did they say it or or not? Yrs or no....nothing else

You got stuffed

No, they did not say it was a "huge boost" as you claimed. They said it was a boost, but then the second paragraph explains how it's not a ruling either way for any other cases, so no, it's not a boost.

But, keep tying yourself in knots. It's fun to watch you pretzel.

 

[Crepitus]

It was a huge boost for religious freedom....no matter how the left tries to spin it.

How would you feel if it was a Muslim baker refusing to bake a cake for a Christian couple?

 

[irosie91]

I support GENDER NEUTRAL cake. No pink flowers, no blue flowers----
just yellow flowers. No little plastic figures. No names no religious symbols

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Hell even NBC said it's a huge boost for religious freedom

#fakenews

First paragraph....now pull your shit on someone else

In narrow ruling, Supreme Court gives victory to baker who refused to make cake for gay wedding

But, the second paragraph contradicts it being a huge boost for religious freedom. And, NBC didn't say it was "a huge boost", just a boost. Here, let me post the first 2 paragraphs of your link..................

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court gave a boost to advocates of religious freedom on Monday, ruling that a Colorado baker cannot be forced to make a cake for a same-sex wedding, in a case that involved marriage equality and protection from discrimination.

But the opinion was a narrow one, applying to the specific facts of this case only. It gave no hint as to how the court might decide future cases involving florists, bakers, photographers and other business owners who have cited religious and free-speech objections when refusing to serve gay and lesbian customers in the wake of the Supreme Court's 2015 same-sex marriage decision.

Did they say it or or not? Yrs or no....nothing else

You got stuffed

No, they did not say it was a "huge boost" as you claimed. They said it was a boost, but then the second paragraph explains how it's not a ruling either way for any other cases, so no, it's not a boost.

But, keep tying yourself in knots. It's fun to watch you pretzel.

Gfy and tell some more BS tales.

Word salad is just word salad, paper pusher

 

[JBvM]

The gays target these bakers, etc.

This one blew up in their face

That is nonsense. The gay couple was and a Mom was involved.

[ Phillips met Charlie Craig and Dave Mullins when they entered his shop in the summer of 2012. Craig and Mullins were planning to marry. At that time, Colorado did not recognize same-sex marriages, so the couple planned to wed legally in Massachusetts and afterwards to host a reception for their family and friends in Denver. To prepare for their celebration, Craig and Mullins visited the shop and told Phillips that they were interested in ordering a cake for “our wedding.”

They did not mention the design of the cake they envisioned. Phillips informed the couple that he does not “create” wedding cakes for same-sex weddings.

He explained, “I’ll make your birthday cakes, shower cakes, sell you cookies and brownies, I just don’t make cakes for same sex weddings.”

The couple left the shop without further discussion. The following day, Craig’s mother, who had accompanied the couple to the cakeshop and been present for their interaction with Phillips, telephoned to ask Phillips why he had declined to serve her son. } from the opinion

 

[SassyIrishLass]

I support GENDER NEUTRAL cake. No pink flowers, no blue flowers----
just yellow flowers. No little plastic figures. No names no religious symbols

I support finding a baker that will accommodate individual needs and cease the PC BS

 

[irosie91]

It was a huge boost for religious freedom....no matter how the left tries to spin it.

How would you feel if it was a Muslim baker refusing to bake a cake for a Christian couple?

The real question is just how that would work out in a shariah compliant
society. No doubt----the muslim would NOT have to bake a "CHRISTIAN
CAKE"--------but it is not clear to me that a Christian could get out of baking
a muslim cake

 

[SassyIrishLass]

The gays target these bakers, etc.

This one blew up in their face

That is nonsense. The gay couple was and a Mom was involved.

[ Phillips met Charlie Craig and Dave Mullins when they entered his shop in the summer of 2012. Craig and Mullins were planning to marry. At that time, Colorado did not recognize same-sex marriages, so the couple planned to wed legally in Massachusetts and afterwards to host a reception for their family and friends in Denver. To prepare for their celebration, Craig and Mullins visited the shop and told Phillips that they were interested in ordering a cake for “our wedding.”

They did not mention the design of the cake they envisioned. Phillips informed the couple that he does not “create” wedding cakes for same-sex weddings.

He explained, “I’ll make your birthday cakes, shower cakes, sell you cookies and brownies, I just don’t make cakes for same sex weddings.”

The couple left the shop without further discussion. The following day, Craig’s mother, who had accompanied the couple to the cakeshop and been present for their interaction with Phillips, telephoned to ask Phillips why he had declined to serve her son. } from the opinion

Who won? What was the winner's argument?

I don't have time for your nonsense

 

[JBvM]

Who was interfering with the man's religious freedom, and more to the point - how?

Queers...the point how is obvious

Gays or 'Queers' as you want to call them (why not phags?) have the power to interfere with a man's religious freedom? How would they do that, and isn't the amendment appealed to, about the government not being allowed to do that?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Who was interfering with the man's religious freedom, and more to the point - how?

Queers...the point how is obvious

Gays or 'Queers' as you want to call them (why not phags?) have the power to interfere with a man's religious freedom? How would they do that, and isn't the amendment appealed to, about the government not being allowed to do that?

You need to study up and try again