Supreme Court Ruling, 7 to 2 decision for the Colorado Baker.

Got69ed said:
Let them. We can weed out whom we want to give our business to as well.
Click to expand...

By conducting harassment campaigns? Like the Nazis did to Jewish shopkeepers in the 1930s?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_boycott_of_Jewish_businesses

Like that?
 
guno said:
The justices did not issue a definitive ruling on the circumstances under which people can seek exemptions from anti-discrimination laws based on their religious views. The decision also did not address important claims raised in the case including whether baking a cake is a kind of expressive act protected by the Constitution's free speech guarantee.

they ruled in the one case, it didn't change case law


Kennedy also stressed the importance of gay rights while noting that litigation on similar issues is likely to continue in lower courts.

"Our society has come to the recognition that gay persons and gay couples cannot be treated as social outcasts or as inferior in dignity and worth," Kennedy wrote.

"The outcome of cases like this in other circumstances must await further elaboration in the courts, all in the context of recognizing that these disputes must be resolved with tolerance, without undue disrespect to sincere religious beliefs, and without subjecting gay persons to indignities when they seek goods and services in an open market," Kennedy added.
Click to expand...

Mealy mouthed apology for punting. The issue is simple. If you are doing business you can't exclude paying customers for irrational or arbitrary reasons.
Superstitious religions are irrational, excluding gay people as customers is irrational. Should have been so easy to be clear and correct. Practice your moral
degradations privately in your churches or in your homes.

I think any business like this bigot cake mofo should be required to have a "we do no serve gays" sign in neon on his door. He can shame himself.
 
"No need to harass anyone." G6 #46
Click to expand...
Correct.
None the less this ruling allows the baker to harass the betrothed couple.
"Just shop somewhere else." G6 #46
Click to expand...
In high population concentrations like New York City, that's often an option.

BUT !!

Now that this precedent is set, empowering bigoted bakers to discriminate, what other bases will similar / parallel rulings allow shopkeepers to discriminate on?
- race
- religion
- ethnicity
- political affiliation
? ? ? ?

In addition, while there's more than one bakery in the boroughs, in rural Montana, that may not be a practical solution.

This legal precedent sets civil rights law back a generation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top