The Hateful Faithful & Narrow Arguments That Blind

[Lysistrata]

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

What "religion"? Some trash thing like phillips?

Doesn't matter. There lies your problem Listerine.

Constitutional right is going to trump the ghey

So you side with the trash. I got that. Other people has Constitutional rights the same as this pig.

 

[koshergrl]

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

You can't require people to participate in rituals that they think will condemn them.

The baker was not preventing the queers from getting married. He wasn't preventing them from having a special cake made. He just opted not to create it himself.

Get over it.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

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

What "religion"? Some trash thing like phillips?

Doesn't matter. There lies your problem Listerine.

Constitutional right is going to trump the ghey

So you side with the trash. I got that. Other people has Constitutional rights the same as this pig.

Lol sore loser, eh? Gfy

 

[koshergrl]

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

What "religion"? Some trash thing like phillips?

Doesn't matter. There lies your problem Listerine.

Constitutional right is going to trump the ghey

Listeria...blech.

Listeria (Listeriosis) | Listeria | CDC

 

[SassyIrishLass]

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

What "religion"? Some trash thing like phillips?

Doesn't matter. There lies your problem Listerine.

Constitutional right is going to trump the ghey

Listeria...blech.

Listeria (Listeriosis) | Listeria | CDC

Not the brighest bulb on the strand

 

[Leo123]

When political and ideological arguments get narrowed down to the level of talking points, and being able to make it onto bumper stickers, they take on a life of their own. Many people may come upon the arguments only after they've become imbued with a life of their own. For them and the argument makers, who are usually purveyors of propaganda and bullshit, the arguments become a part of a doctrine of an ideological faith.

Take the discrimination/legal cases of Colorado Bakeries and Wedding cakes. But before we get into teh cases mentioned in the Supreme Court opinion on:
MASTERPIECE CAKESHOP, LTD., ET AL. v.
COLORADO CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION ET AL.

Let me ask a simple enough question: "Did the SCOTUS Rule Against Gays and For the Baker's Free Speech Rights?"

The basis for the SCOTUS ruling is the highly subjective "deeply held views" test.

In doing so they, themselves, demonstrated that it is government that is the most discriminatory of all. After all, who gets to decide which views are "deeply-held"?

While so-called conservatives are cheering the ruling, the SCOTUS completely missed the central point. Property rights.

Aside form that, I'd still like for someone to show us Judicial review in Article III. History shows us that it was the SCOTUS who gave themselves the power of Judicial review in 1803 Marbury v. Madison, but were restrained for some years after Jefferson raised hell about it, but then after he died, they assumed the authority again.

I wonder if 'deeply held views' can constitute a religion? This could get scary. Hey I'm an conservative and I am NOT cheering this decision. SCOTUS basically kicked the can down the road.

 

[eagle1462010]

When political and ideological arguments get narrowed down to the level of talking points, and being able to make it onto bumper stickers, they take on a life of their own. Many people may come upon the arguments only after they've become imbued with a life of their own. For them and the argument makers, who are usually purveyors of propaganda and bullshit, the arguments become a part of a doctrine of an ideological faith.

Take the discrimination/legal cases of Colorado Bakeries and Wedding cakes. But before we get into teh cases mentioned in the Supreme Court opinion on:
MASTERPIECE CAKESHOP, LTD., ET AL. v.
COLORADO CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION ET AL.

Let me ask a simple enough question: "Did the SCOTUS Rule Against Gays and For the Baker's Free Speech Rights?"

The basis for the SCOTUS ruling is the highly subjective "deeply held views" test.

In doing so they, themselves, demonstrated that it is government that is the most discriminatory of all. After all, who gets to decide which views are "deeply-held"?

While so-called conservatives are cheering the ruling, the SCOTUS completely missed the central point. Property rights.

Aside form that, I'd still like for someone to show us Judicial review in Article III. History shows us that it was the SCOTUS who gave themselves the power of Judicial review in 1803 Marbury v. Madison, but were restrained for some years after Jefferson raised hell about it, but then after he died, they assumed the authority again.

I wonder if 'deeply held views' can constitute a religion? This could get scary. Hey I'm an conservative and I am NOT cheering this decision. SCOTUS basically kicked the can down the road.

They did..............side stepped it a bit here...............but as the hints are going here..........could be a problem in our future on another issue.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I wonder if 'deeply held views' can constitute a religion? This could get scary. Hey I'm an conservative and I am NOT cheering this decision. SCOTUS basically kicked the can down the road.

Well. That takes us all the way back to the very founding of our compound Republic. Our form of government is religious in nature. There's no debating that. The fundamental basis for it is that all men are created equal and that all Individual rights are God-given and that the Individual's moral dutyto protect and defend those rights is to God, the giver of those Individual rights..And that Man is of Divine origin and that the spiritual is odf supreme value compared to material things. No other nation in all of history have made that the basis for their form of government.

Of course, America is a haven for all religions. I'm kind of adlibbing here from different books I've read and just in studying history.

 

[WillowTree]

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?

Hello troll. The bakers won because the court found that the Colorado commission showed extreme bias and prejudice against the baker’s Christian religion. You got that now?

 

[Lysistrata]

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

What "religion"? Some trash thing like phillips?

Doesn't matter. There lies your problem Listerine.

Constitutional right is going to trump the ghey

Listeria...blech.

Listeria (Listeriosis) | Listeria | CDC

Not the brighest bulb on the strand

So you can't think, then? This pig go his way today, but his kind will not win. The rest of us have rights, too. You disgrace the Irish.

 

[Aba Incieni]

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

What "religion"? Some trash thing like phillips?

Doesn't matter. There lies your problem Listerine.

Constitutional right is going to trump the ghey

Listeria...blech.

Listeria (Listeriosis) | Listeria | CDC

Not the brighest bulb on the strand

So you can't think, then? This pig go his way today, but his kind will not win. The rest of us have rights, too. You disgrace the Irish.

You would be part of the crowd that demanded Lot send out the angels so they could be raped.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

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

What "religion"? Some trash thing like phillips?

Doesn't matter. There lies your problem Listerine.

Constitutional right is going to trump the ghey

Listeria...blech.

Listeria (Listeriosis) | Listeria | CDC

Not the brighest bulb on the strand

So you can't think, then? This pig go his way today, but his kind will not win. The rest of us have rights, too. You disgrace the Irish.

Tsk tsk tsk the Irish laugh at you

 

[EverCurious]

I think if the SCOTUS is ever forced on the issue they have little choice but to run afoul of freedom of association, freedom of religion, and freedom of religion, or all of the above. I imagine all of the judges were happy there was such an easy out in this case, because I doubt they want to be forced to make those decisions for the nation - yes, it's technically their job, but so is respecting everyone's views/beliefs and in today's climate it seems impossible for most to see all sides of the issue.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So I'm free to go to a Muslim food establishment and order bacon, egg and cheese, right, and fully expect the ACLU to compel them to make it for me, even with extra bacon, right?

 

[JBvM]

Yep. Funny though that the "Colorado Civil Rights Commission' was basically found to have violated the bakers' civil rights. Apparently 'Civil Rights' are only for 'special' people.

Civil rights? I thought the man was upset over his religious freedom? And why would you draw on that pathetic snarky comment of yours on this one instance?

Isn't religion a civil right? One would think that a 'Civil Rights Commission' would include ALL Americans that's all. I meant no 'snark' with the word 'special'....It seems that only CERTAIN people have civil rights according to this commission. That's why SCOTUS shot them down.

Why would you keep attempting to mislead with disingenuous diatribes?

The stupid Commission for all it's faults and bigotry, did not say religion is not protected. They attacked this man's honesty. They went overboard over the rights of gays and others to expect to be treated with dignity and respect in public places and services. Do not misconstrue things. You become your own worse enemy for a cause you attempt to defend when you do

 

[JBvM]

Opinion analysis: Court rules (narrowly) for baker in same-sex-wedding-cake case [Updated] - SCOTUSblog

But the critical question of when and how Phillips’ right to exercise his religion can be limited had to be determined, Kennedy emphasized, in a proceeding that was not tainted by hostility to religion. Here, Kennedy observed, the “neutral and respectful consideration to which Phillips was entitled was compromised” by comments by members of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. At one hearing, Kennedy stressed, commissioners repeatedly “endorsed the view that religious beliefs cannot legitimately be carried into the public sphere or commercial domain, implying that religious beliefs and persons are less than fully welcome in Colorado’s business community.” And at a later meeting, Kennedy pointed out, one commissioner “even went so far as to compare Phillips’ invocation of his sincerely held religious beliefs to defenses of slavery and the Holocaust.” “This sentiment,” Kennedy admonished, “is inappropriate for a Commission charged with the solemn responsibility of fair and neutral enforcement of Colorado’s anti-discrimination law—a law that protects discrimination on the basis of religion as well as sexual orientation.” Moreover, Kennedy added, the commission’s treatment of Phillips’ religious objections was at odds with its rulings in the cases of bakers who refused to create cakes “with images that conveyed disapproval of same-sex marriage.”

Here, Kennedy wrote, Phillips “was entitled to a neutral decisionmaker who would give full and fair consideration to his religious objection as he sought to assert it in all of the circumstances in which this case was presented, considered, and decided.” Because he did not have such a proceeding, the court concluded, the commission’s order – which, among other things, required Phillips to sell same-sex couples wedding cakes or anything else that he would sell to opposite-sex couples and mandated remedial training and compliance reports – “must be set aside.”

Wow! A crazy poster. Cool. I hope 'crazy' is not a protected class here at USMB

 

[JBvM]

I beg to differ that Religion wasn't a motivating factor in the decision. Picking Kennedy's position by the OP doesn't give the opinion of the rest............Kennedy being a swing vote.

If you'd notice........that just as the Gay couple had a right to protection..........so does the Religious beliefs of Phillips.

If wasn't just to Bake a Cake...........it was to participate in the wedding............Which is a Religious conflict of interest to the Bakers...............

Not as cut and dry as the OP would have us believe.

No one said it was about participating in the wedding. This is what I was talking about with the thread title.

 

[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?

Hello troll. The bakers won because the court found that the Colorado commission showed extreme bias and prejudice against the baker’s Christian religion. You got that now?

yet most on his side keep saying differently. as a matter of fact, being such a Troll magnet yourself, you should read what I wrote, rather than knee jerk go all out troll. Like that other hormonal poster Sil, you have misrepresented and lied about what I said. WillowTree's are such sad looking thangs

 

[Leo123]

Yep. Funny though that the "Colorado Civil Rights Commission' was basically found to have violated the bakers' civil rights. Apparently 'Civil Rights' are only for 'special' people.

Civil rights? I thought the man was upset over his religious freedom? And why would you draw on that pathetic snarky comment of yours on this one instance?

Isn't religion a civil right? One would think that a 'Civil Rights Commission' would include ALL Americans that's all. I meant no 'snark' with the word 'special'....It seems that only CERTAIN people have civil rights according to this commission. That's why SCOTUS shot them down.

Why would you keep attempting to mislead with disingenuous diatribes?

The stupid Commission for all it's faults and bigotry, did not say religion is not protected. They attacked this man's honesty. They went overboard over the rights of gays and others to expect to be treated with dignity and respect in public places and services. Do not misconstrue things. You become your own worse enemy for a cause you attempt to defend when you do

Attacking a man with regard to his religious honesty is a violation of civil rights. I never said the commission said religion is not protected. Where do you get that shit from? Your ass?

 

[WillowTree]

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?

Hello troll. The bakers won because the court found that the Colorado commission showed extreme bias and prejudice against the baker’s Christian religion. You got that now?

yet most on his side keep saying differently. as a matter of fact, being such a Troll magnet yourself, you should read what I wrote, rather than knee jerk go all out troll. Like that other hormonal poster Sil, you have misrepresented and lied about what I said. WillowTree's are such sad looking thangs

Poor misunderstood ewe!