| |
Discussion: Anti-Gay Florist Gets 100k on GoFundMe
Banned
Member Since: 4/27/2012
Posts: 33,811
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Eric.
!!! The gays need to get that marriage/wedding is a ceremony. The religious people are refusing to participate or cater specifically to the ceremony itself when a same-sex couple is involved. They don't care if a gay person goes to buy anything else any other day, it's that particular case they have an issue with.
|
Like  There's a difference between refusing gay people service in general, and not wanting to partake in a gay ceremony due to your religious beliefs.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 14,321
|
She broke the law, refused a plea deal and now she gets money honey. Going martyr then appearing at conservative events. If she can't offer full service at a bakery inside a state that has anti-discrimination laws she shouldn't set up shop. People can make gofundmes but at the end of the day, in the near future, both the courts and the government will outlaw refusal of eateries or whatever to not give every client the works.
Want a real sad story on religious persecution: people being shot after answering what creed they are a part of. The right is having a field day with these eatery stories, putting them on the same level as events like Kenya 
|
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 8/31/2012
Posts: 12,510
|
People underestimating the power of "complaining". 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 3,336
|
at this point we need to stop making big deal if people reject gay business, clearly it’s only empowering them...
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/14/2007
Posts: 25,912
|
Sick. And I'm glad she got fined for breaking the law.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 3,336
|
Quote:
Originally posted by .:Allen:.
Sick. And I'm glad she got fined for breaking the law.
|
she was only fined 1000, and GAINED 100k... so who’s REALLY losing
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/12/2007
Posts: 15,237
|
100 Gay couples should go in, so she can deny each one.
100 x $1000.00 - $1000,000 in fines.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/16/2012
Posts: 13,657
|
Quote:
Originally posted by LuLuDrops
Hobby Lobby? Kennedy agreed with 4 others in that, but he's a swing vote on divisive issues except homosexuality - he always rules for gays. He may even give lgbt heightened scrutiny if the Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage - that would put gays on par with other minorities in the eyes of the court which means eventually these religious freedom bills passed lately would die if there's a trial. It wouldn't be the same as an anti-discrimination law because it requires a lawsuit, but the days of being denied service for any reason are numbered. I predict first heightened scrutiny in court then in the near future a federal anti-discrimination law where no one can deny any type of service to anything gay-related. Just the way it is going to be some years down the line.
|
Also, Hobby Lobby is not a Catholic corporation.  I have my reservations regarding that case, mostly because the "presumption that shareholders can be seen as distinct from the company for purposes of, say, limited liability, but identified with the company for purposes of religious freedom changes the nature of the government benefit itself."
I wonder if "heightened scrutiny" for sexual orientation would even be possible at this point, even if this basically the last chance to establish it. I'm sure that would cause even more division within the court because the conservative judges don't like to be remembered these laws are a result of animus towards homosexuals, just like the laws demolished on Lawrence, Windsor and Perry. I remember Kennedy dismissed the idea when Kagan presented it during Windsor hearings and Roberts really disliked she did so.
Also, I'd like to think the argument of LGBT attaining more political and public power could have some weigh to it (even if "religion" will still be used as an excuse to discriminate, hate crimes and abuse continue to happen and ENDA remains stagnant in Congress), which may have many in the court consider that LGBT could attain these protections through the legislature rather than the courts.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 14,321
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Eric.
Also, Hobby Lobby is not a Catholic corporation. I have my reservations regarding that case, mostly because the "presumption that shareholders can be seen as distinct from the company for purposes of, say, limited liability, but identified with the company for purposes of religious freedom changes the nature of the government benefit itself."
I wonder if "heightened scrutiny" for sexual orientation would even be possible at this point, even if this basically the last chance to establish it. I'm sure that would cause even more division within the court because the conservative judges don't like to be remembered these laws are a result of animus towards homosexuals, just like the laws demolished on Lawrence, Windsor and Perry. I remember Kennedy dismissed the idea when Kagan presented it during Windsor hearings and Roberts really disliked she did so.
Also, I'd like to think the argument of LGBT attaining more political and public power could have some weigh to it (even if "religion" will still be used as an excuse to discriminate, hate crimes and abuse continue to happen and ENDA remains stagnant in Congress), which may have many in the court consider that LGBT could attain these protections through the legislature rather than the courts. |
They're saying that since Roberts voted in favor of DOMA, BUT didn't put his name on the ruling he might join the 5 Justices who knocked down DOMA and make the gay marriage ruling 6-3. The downside to that might be that as Chief Justice he may want to look good in the history books, but not quell some of the anger from the conservatives by not adding heightened scrutiny if he writes the opinion. We'll just have to wait and see at the end of June 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/2/2014
Posts: 15,009
|
get that money, i guess
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/18/2013
Posts: 12,457
|
Quote:
Originally posted by ozlovezashlee
100 Gay couples should go in, so she can deny each one.
100 x $1000.00 - $1000,000 in fines.
|
nnn at this being the only practical solutions, come on sistrens its time to pair up
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 10,195
|
Im so sick of people funding ****ing bigots when there are people DYING all over the world who would want anything to have $10 yet this bigot is gonna be swimming in riches with nearly 150k now ugh  i hate the world so much
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/13/2012
Posts: 32,832
|
the sad ass music and the editing of that video 
Giselle sis you know I luv ya but lemme explain this quick: in theory she is entitled of her own decisions and that person could have found hundreds of other florists... but in practice, this is a form of discrimination, that, if left unchecked, then can spread to doctors, nurses, policemen, etc.
There cannot be ground for discrimination and racism in society because the moment you let them slip, they will spread like wildfire.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 14,321
|
Quote:
Originally posted by MaRy
the sad ass music and the editing of that video
Giselle sis you know I luv ya but lemme explain this quick: in theory she is entitled of her own decisions and that person could have found hundreds of other florists... but in practice, this is a form of discrimination, that, if left unchecked, then can spread to doctors, nurses, policemen, etc.
There cannot be ground for discrimination and racism in society because the moment you let them slip, they will spread like wildfire.
|
Si signore  Good luck on the unioni civili vote in May by the way 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/13/2012
Posts: 32,832
|
Quote:
Originally posted by LuLuDrops
Si signore Good luck on the unioni civili vote in May by the way |
is it in May? I hope they won't screw it up as usual 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 14,321
|
Quote:
Originally posted by MaRy
is it in May? I hope they won't screw it up as usual |
The first committee passed it two weeks ago, the next vote is to see what parts of the bill stay  I hope you won't have a watered-down final version I think it could pass the final Senate vote, the biggest question is whether it will have stepchild adoption or not.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/16/2012
Posts: 13,657
|
Quote:
Originally posted by LuLuDrops
They're saying that since Roberts voted in favor of DOMA, BUT didn't put his name on the ruling he might join the 5 Justices who knocked down DOMA and make the gay marriage ruling 6-3. The downside to that might be that as Chief Justice he may want to look good in the history books, but not quell some of the anger from the conservatives by not adding heightened scrutiny if he writes the opinion. We'll just have to wait and see at the end of June |
Poor Roberts is probably scared the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is gonna call for his excommunication if he joins the majority opinion that affirms the right of same-sex couples to marry.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 14,321
|
The Indiana pizzeria opens tomorrow and will donate part of their fortune to the Washington florist 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/5/2014
Posts: 495
|
Quote:
Originally posted by keepitundercover
Let's not fight bigotry with bigotry
|
Exactly. So much attention for something that shouldn't have any at all. Btw, the gays that sued are the ones responsible for helping this bigot granny gather all that money and media attention.
They should've gone someplace else instead of suing her. Wether we like or not, we can't change Christian's values no matter how much you sue them or lecture them.
Some of them may see the light whilst some of them not. Meanwhile shoving a different lifestyle to their faces is not the best way of getting acceptance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
