State Takes Legal Action to Seize $135K From Bakers Who Refused to Make Cake for Lesbian Couple

[bodecea]

I am a Leftie and have never murdered a baby in my life. Nor do I know any Lefties that have done so. And I do not ignore the Constitution....in fact, I seem to know what's in it more than many RWrs here. And I have yet to even have the opportunity to vote for Hillary let alone choose to vote for her.

And if you have a cake baking BUSINESS, best know the business laws in your state. It's prudent.

I don't give a damn who you know. The truth is the left supports abortion and corruption, yet has no problem using government in a tyrannical manner on citizens who refuse to bow to your queer agenda.

What is that queer agenda you speak of? Equal rights under the law? Guilty as charged in that regard, Your Honor.

The queer agenda is changing the definition of marriage. Piss on your corrupt judges and laws.

And this affects you and your marriage......how?

The definition of marriage has been changed. Period. The process was corrupt. Period.

So...you don't like change. Ok....but many of us don't go into hissy fits or drop into a fetal position over change......

 

[paddymurphy]

We have nine of them. They just have different views on what the constitution requires. And the five who understand that the constitution protects the fights of all Americans understand the constitution better.

Nope. You have five activists who twisted and tortured the 14th amendment, which deals exclusively with ex slaves and their children.

So you say. (as does anyone who doesn't like a Supreme Court ruling....SSDD)

I don't like my constitution being twisted and tortured by activists

Your constitution? It actually is our constitution and "our" includes the millions of gay Americans you would demand be treated as somehow lesser than you and not entitled to the same legal rights as you. And they did not twisting; they simply applied the plain language of the 14th Amendment which, contrary to your silly claim, was not only intended to address former slaves and their children.

"Amplified". LOL. I love how you corrupt trash write your own dictionary and constitution. Yes, the 14th amendment deals exclusively with ex slaves and their children. It's been twisted and tortured by activists. Go ahead and make your case with historical fact. Give us the words of the author of the amendment and the original purpose of the amendment. Go ahead. You wont.

Let us start with the very language of the 14th, shall we?

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Now where in that paragraph, my fake little con law professor, is there a single reference to slavery; to black people; to any limiting of the protections to such folks? It protects "citizens". All citizens. And what does it protect them from? From abridgment of their "privileges or immunities of citizens. What else does it do, by its very terms? Prohibits states from denying to any persons (not "former slave" persons or "black" persons....ALL PERSONS) equal protection of the law for from denying any persons life, LIBERTY, or property without due process of law. Not a single word in that first section that supports your asinine suggestion that it only applied to former slaves. Among the matters debated was what effect the Amendment would have on Chinese living in California. Senator Cnness from that state discussed that during the debates over the Fourteenth Amendment. He declared his support for the idea “that the children of all parentage whatever, born in California, should be regarded and treated as citizens of the United States, entitled to equal civil rights with other citizens of the United States.”37 He urged his Senate colleagues to take “no further trouble on account of the Chinese in California or on the Pacific coast.”38 He asserted that California would be “able to take care of them and to provide against any evils that may flow from their presence among us.”39 He also said that Californians were “entirely ready to accept the provision proposed in this constitutional amendment, that the children born here of Mongolian parents shall be declared by the Constitution of the United States to be entitled to civil rights and to equal protection before the law with others.”40.
Once again, professor, explain how the amendment could be construed to apply only to former slaves when those who debated and passed it talked about its effect on chinese immigrants?

 

[Sally Vater]

Correct trash.

Correct? Meaning you will hold your breath? Great.

All we need is ONE constitutionalist. Anything else?

We have nine of them. They just have different views on what the constitution requires. And the five who understand that the constitution protects the fights of all Americans understand the constitution better.

Nope. You have five activists who twisted and tortured the 14th amendment, which deals exclusively with ex slaves and their children.

You seem to think this is the only "non-ex slave " case using the 14th amendment.

Show us in this part of the 14th amendment it only applies to ex-slaves and their children:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The amendment was passed to deal with citizenship for ex slaves and their children. Period. If you don't believe that then tell me why it was passed.

 

[bodecea]

So, you marriage has changed? How?

What did I say?

You, in a very eloquent explanation of the legal underpinnings of your disagreement with the rulings of a couple dozen federal judges, "Piss on your corrupt judges".

Yes. Piss on your queer agenda and your corrupt judges. Anything else?

So...that's kinky.

Ran out of talking points, huh. Now you're trolling.

I'm sorry...but I WAS responding to your post about pissing on people. That is, in fact, kinky.

 

[Sally Vater]

I don't give a damn who you know. The truth is the left supports abortion and corruption, yet has no problem using government in a tyrannical manner on citizens who refuse to bow to your queer agenda.

What is that queer agenda you speak of? Equal rights under the law? Guilty as charged in that regard, Your Honor.

The queer agenda is changing the definition of marriage. Piss on your corrupt judges and laws.

And this affects you and your marriage......how?

The definition of marriage has been changed. Period. The process was corrupt. Period.

So...you don't like change. Ok....but many of us don't go into hissy fits or drop into a fetal position over change......

False rhetoric, false premise, and deflection. Let me know when you post the words of the author of the amendment and the original intent.

 

[bodecea]

Correct? Meaning you will hold your breath? Great.

All we need is ONE constitutionalist. Anything else?

We have nine of them. They just have different views on what the constitution requires. And the five who understand that the constitution protects the fights of all Americans understand the constitution better.

Nope. You have five activists who twisted and tortured the 14th amendment, which deals exclusively with ex slaves and their children.

So you say. (as does anyone who doesn't like a Supreme Court ruling....SSDD)

I don't like my constitution being twisted and tortured by activists

Your constitution? You seem to think it is just yours? It is all of ours and...in case you weren't paying attention, the legal process used in making the Obergefell decision is exactly how our Founders intended the Judicial Branch to work....checks & balances, separation of powers...all that jazz. Bravo for the system working!

 

[Sally Vater]

What did I say?

You, in a very eloquent explanation of the legal underpinnings of your disagreement with the rulings of a couple dozen federal judges, "Piss on your corrupt judges".

Yes. Piss on your queer agenda and your corrupt judges. Anything else?

So...that's kinky.

Ran out of talking points, huh. Now you're trolling.

I'm sorry...but I WAS responding to your post about pissing on people. That is, in fact, kinky.

Of course it's kinky. Leftist trash think anything that weakens the moral fabric and weakens the constitution is a good thing.

 

[bodecea]

We have nine of them. They just have different views on what the constitution requires. And the five who understand that the constitution protects the fights of all Americans understand the constitution better.

Nope. You have five activists who twisted and tortured the 14th amendment, which deals exclusively with ex slaves and their children.

So you say. (as does anyone who doesn't like a Supreme Court ruling....SSDD)

I don't like my constitution being twisted and tortured by activists

Your constitution? It actually is our constitution and "our" includes the millions of gay Americans you would demand be treated as somehow lesser than you and not entitled to the same legal rights as you. And they did not twisting; they simply applied the plain language of the 14th Amendment which, contrary to your silly claim, was not only intended to address former slaves and their children.

"Amplified". LOL. I love how you corrupt trash write your own dictionary and constitution. Yes, the 14th amendment deals exclusively with ex slaves and their children. It's been twisted and tortured by activists. Go ahead and make your case with historical fact. Give us the words of the author of the amendment and the original purpose of the amendment. Go ahead. You wont.

No it does not. If you had actually read it and/or taken a course on the Amendments to the Constitution, you would be aware of that.

 

[paddymurphy]

We have nine of them. They just have different views on what the constitution requires. And the five who understand that the constitution protects the fights of all Americans understand the constitution better.

Nope. You have five activists who twisted and tortured the 14th amendment, which deals exclusively with ex slaves and their children.

So you say. (as does anyone who doesn't like a Supreme Court ruling....SSDD)

I don't like my constitution being twisted and tortured by activists

Your constitution? It actually is our constitution and "our" includes the millions of gay Americans you would demand be treated as somehow lesser than you and not entitled to the same legal rights as you. And they did not twisting; they simply applied the plain language of the 14th Amendment which, contrary to your silly claim, was not only intended to address former slaves and their children.

"Amplified". LOL. I love how you corrupt trash write your own dictionary and constitution. Yes, the 14th amendment deals exclusively with ex slaves and their children. It's been twisted and tortured by activists. Go ahead and make your case with historical fact. Give us the words of the author of the amendment and the original purpose of the amendment. Go ahead. You wont.

You refer to Senator Bingham of Ohio? He was the principle author, not THE author. And while hsi views are instructive, they are certainly not binding. Moreover, he clearly did not think, as you do, that the Amendment would only apply to freed slaves:

The first draft of the proposed Fourteenth Amendment was debated in the House for three days, beginning on February 27, 1866. Bingham, its author, argued on its behalf that previously "this immortal bill of rights embodied in the Constitution, rested for its execution and enforcement hitherto upon the fidelity of the States." Representative Robert Hale of New York saw no need for the amendment, because he interpreted the existing Bill of Rights to bind not just Congress but also the States: "Now, what are these amendments to the Constitution, numbered from one to ten, one of which is the fifth article in question? . . . They constitute the bill of rights, a bill of rights for the protection of the citizen, and defining and limiting the power of Federal and State legislation."[29]
Bingham responded that the proposed amendment would "arm the Congress ... with the power to enforce this bill of rights as it stands in the Constitution today."[30] Representative Frederick E. Woodbridge of Vermont characterized the sweep of the proposed Fourteenth Amendment as empowering Congress to protect "the natural rights which necessarily pertain to citizenship."[31]

Clearly, Bingham wanted to 14th Amendment to protect the rights of all citizens, black, white or whatever, from state intrusion.

 

[Sally Vater]

All we need is ONE constitutionalist. Anything else?

We have nine of them. They just have different views on what the constitution requires. And the five who understand that the constitution protects the fights of all Americans understand the constitution better.

Nope. You have five activists who twisted and tortured the 14th amendment, which deals exclusively with ex slaves and their children.

So you say. (as does anyone who doesn't like a Supreme Court ruling....SSDD)

I don't like my constitution being twisted and tortured by activists

Your constitution? You seem to think it is just yours? It is all of ours and...in case you weren't paying attention, the legal process used in making the Obergefell decision is exactly how our Founders intended the Judicial Branch to work....checks & balances, separation of powers...all that jazz. Bravo for the system working!

Chief Justice Roberts and three other justices agree with me and disagree with you. Your self-righteous rhetoric is meaningless.

 

[Sally Vater]

Nope. You have five activists who twisted and tortured the 14th amendment, which deals exclusively with ex slaves and their children.

So you say. (as does anyone who doesn't like a Supreme Court ruling....SSDD)

I don't like my constitution being twisted and tortured by activists

Your constitution? It actually is our constitution and "our" includes the millions of gay Americans you would demand be treated as somehow lesser than you and not entitled to the same legal rights as you. And they did not twisting; they simply applied the plain language of the 14th Amendment which, contrary to your silly claim, was not only intended to address former slaves and their children.

"Amplified". LOL. I love how you corrupt trash write your own dictionary and constitution. Yes, the 14th amendment deals exclusively with ex slaves and their children. It's been twisted and tortured by activists. Go ahead and make your case with historical fact. Give us the words of the author of the amendment and the original purpose of the amendment. Go ahead. You wont.

No it does not. If you had actually read it and/or taken a course on the Amendments to the Constitution, you would be aware of that.

Go ahead and prove your claim. Post the words of the authors of the amendment. Go ahead.

 

[bodecea]

Correct? Meaning you will hold your breath? Great.

All we need is ONE constitutionalist. Anything else?

We have nine of them. They just have different views on what the constitution requires. And the five who understand that the constitution protects the fights of all Americans understand the constitution better.

Nope. You have five activists who twisted and tortured the 14th amendment, which deals exclusively with ex slaves and their children.

You seem to think this is the only "non-ex slave " case using the 14th amendment.

Show us in this part of the 14th amendment it only applies to ex-slaves and their children:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The amendment was passed to deal with citizenship for ex slaves and their children. Period. If you don't believe that then tell me why it was passed.

Not just them...or else the language thru-out the entire amendment would refer only to them. It does not....and the following legal cases all use the 14th Amendment in the SCOTUS decisions....notice how few of them really are about ex-slaves and their children (who we can safely say are all dead now)

10 huge Supreme Court cases about the 14th Amendment

 

[paddymurphy]

What is that queer agenda you speak of? Equal rights under the law? Guilty as charged in that regard, Your Honor.

The queer agenda is changing the definition of marriage. Piss on your corrupt judges and laws.

And this affects you and your marriage......how?

The definition of marriage has been changed. Period. The process was corrupt. Period.

And your opinion does not matter. Period.

Neither does the Constitution.

Actually, sweetheart, it is all that matters when deciding constitutional issues.

 

[paddymurphy]

You, in a very eloquent explanation of the legal underpinnings of your disagreement with the rulings of a couple dozen federal judges, "Piss on your corrupt judges".

Yes. Piss on your queer agenda and your corrupt judges. Anything else?

So...that's kinky.

Ran out of talking points, huh. Now you're trolling.

I'm sorry...but I WAS responding to your post about pissing on people. That is, in fact, kinky.

Of course it's kinky. Leftist trash think anything that weakens the moral fabric and weakens the constitution is a good thing.

So you say. (as does anyone who doesn't like a Supreme Court ruling....SSDD)

I don't like my constitution being twisted and tortured by activists

Your constitution? It actually is our constitution and "our" includes the millions of gay Americans you would demand be treated as somehow lesser than you and not entitled to the same legal rights as you. And they did not twisting; they simply applied the plain language of the 14th Amendment which, contrary to your silly claim, was not only intended to address former slaves and their children.

"Amplified". LOL. I love how you corrupt trash write your own dictionary and constitution. Yes, the 14th amendment deals exclusively with ex slaves and their children. It's been twisted and tortured by activists. Go ahead and make your case with historical fact. Give us the words of the author of the amendment and the original purpose of the amendment. Go ahead. You wont.

No it does not. If you had actually read it and/or taken a course on the Amendments to the Constitution, you would be aware of that.

Go ahead and prove your claim. Post the words of the authors of the amendment. Go ahead.

Already did that, honey

 

[bodecea]

What is that queer agenda you speak of? Equal rights under the law? Guilty as charged in that regard, Your Honor.

The queer agenda is changing the definition of marriage. Piss on your corrupt judges and laws.

And this affects you and your marriage......how?

The definition of marriage has been changed. Period. The process was corrupt. Period.

So...you don't like change. Ok....but many of us don't go into hissy fits or drop into a fetal position over change......

False rhetoric, false premise, and deflection. Let me know when you post the words of the author of the amendment and the original intent.

I posted the actual 14th amendment itself. Now...let me ask you....when the Courts are determining a case based on one of the Bill of Rights or other amendment, what do they use as a basis for their decisions.....the words of someone who helped sculpt the amendment? Or the actual amendment itself.

Would you like a hint?

 

[Sally Vater]

All we need is ONE constitutionalist. Anything else?

We have nine of them. They just have different views on what the constitution requires. And the five who understand that the constitution protects the fights of all Americans understand the constitution better.

Nope. You have five activists who twisted and tortured the 14th amendment, which deals exclusively with ex slaves and their children.

You seem to think this is the only "non-ex slave " case using the 14th amendment.

Show us in this part of the 14th amendment it only applies to ex-slaves and their children:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The amendment was passed to deal with citizenship for ex slaves and their children. Period. If you don't believe that then tell me why it was passed.

Not just them...or else the language thru-out the entire amendment would refer only to them. It does not....and the following legal cases all use the 14th Amendment in the SCOTUS decisions....notice how few of them really are about ex-slaves and their children (who we can safely say are all dead now)

10 huge Supreme Court cases about the 14th Amendment

That proves my point that the amendment has been twisted and tortured. Thanks.

 

[Sally Vater]

The queer agenda is changing the definition of marriage. Piss on your corrupt judges and laws.

And this affects you and your marriage......how?

The definition of marriage has been changed. Period. The process was corrupt. Period.

So...you don't like change. Ok....but many of us don't go into hissy fits or drop into a fetal position over change......

False rhetoric, false premise, and deflection. Let me know when you post the words of the author of the amendment and the original intent.

I posted the actual 14th amendment itself. Now...let me ask you....when the Courts are determining a case based on one of the Bill of Rights or other amendment, what do they use as a basis for their decisions.....the words of someone who helped sculpt the amendment? Or the actual amendment itself.

Would you like a hint?

We both know that there are originalist interpretations and activist interpretations. It just depends on how the justices see it.

 

[Sally Vater]

I've posted this before.

The 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - interpretations and misinterpretations - US Constitution

 

[bodecea]

You, in a very eloquent explanation of the legal underpinnings of your disagreement with the rulings of a couple dozen federal judges, "Piss on your corrupt judges".

Yes. Piss on your queer agenda and your corrupt judges. Anything else?

So...that's kinky.

Ran out of talking points, huh. Now you're trolling.

I'm sorry...but I WAS responding to your post about pissing on people. That is, in fact, kinky.

Of course it's kinky. Leftist trash think anything that weakens the moral fabric and weakens the constitution is a good thing.

"Of course it's kinky"...and it's something YOU brought to the table of discussion. Odd.

 

[bodecea]

I've posted this before.

The 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - interpretations and misinterpretations - US Constitution

That's nice. A blog. How much legal weight does that carry, do you think?