User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Liberals won a battle today on religious liberty, but it might cost them the war

  1. #11
    Points: 122,776, Level: 84
    Level completed: 98%, Points required for next Level: 74
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsTagger Second ClassVeteran
    Safety's Avatar Nationalist
    Karma
    2616415
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    GA/FL
    Posts
    50,789
    Points
    122,776
    Level
    84
    Thanks Given
    25,014
    Thanked 22,901x in 15,599 Posts
    Mentioned
    1237 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by alexa View Post
    In Masterpiece the court held that the Colorado commission acted with anti-religious bias and told Washington to review based on that criterion.

    Presumably they did and found no such bias.

    Personally, I find the notion that providing floral arrangements is celebrating or participating in a wedding risible on its face.

    Add to that that the florist had no problem taking this person's money for ten years prior to this.

    I think the court will rightly punt on this.
    Also considering that the entire premise of Masterpiece’s argument was the religious aspect that the sanctity of marriage was between a man and a woman. But they had zero qualms in baking a cake for a doggy wedding...it’s good to see their convictions are only as shallow as conservatives’ gene pool.
    “Conscientiously believing that the proper condition of the negro is slavery, or a complete subjection to the white man, and entertaining the belief that the day is not distant when the old Union will be restored with slavery nationally declared to be the proper condition of all of African descent, and in view of the future harmony and progress of all the States of America, I have been induced to issue this address, so that there may be no misunderstanding in the future”

    - Jefferson Davis

  2. #12
    Points: 17,291, Level: 31
    Level completed: 85%, Points required for next Level: 159
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    VeteranTagger Second Class10000 Experience Points
    Sergeant Gleed's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    2046
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Right Now? The Planet Gand
    Posts
    4,872
    Points
    17,291
    Level
    31
    Thanks Given
    492
    Thanked 2,038x in 1,586 Posts
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by nathanbforrest45 View Post
    Can anyone tell me how this one bakery created a hardship for the same sex couple. They were certainly not the only bakery in Lakewood CO

    https://www.google.com/search?q=bake...E,lf:1,lf_ui:9

    Better yet, what hardship was found by the "couple" in Washington?

    Are they trying to seriously claim they couldn't find a gay florist in SEATTLE?
    Freedom Requires Obstinance.

    We the People DID NOT vote in a majority Rodent Congress, they stole it via election fraud.

  3. #13
    Points: 17,291, Level: 31
    Level completed: 85%, Points required for next Level: 159
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    VeteranTagger Second Class10000 Experience Points
    Sergeant Gleed's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    2046
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Right Now? The Planet Gand
    Posts
    4,872
    Points
    17,291
    Level
    31
    Thanks Given
    492
    Thanked 2,038x in 1,586 Posts
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    The court also needs to properly deal with stare decisis.
    Yes.

    The proper way to deal with precedent when precedent is wrong is to state the precedents are wrong and explain how, then present the correct ruling based on the correct interpretation of the Constitution.

    Stare decisis, in the medical world, would be to continue using mercury to treat syphilis because that's precedent and never mind thst the pecedent is proven false by those pesky anti-biotics.
    .You can keep drinking the mercury if you want. Eventually the lead will be flying because that's the only other constitutionally approved way to overturn false precedent.

    You do know the Constitution itself makes no requirement thst false precedents be followed, don't you?

    It took one war to overturn Fred Acot, and one ruling to evert urn all the case law resting on plessy.
    Freedom Requires Obstinance.

    We the People DID NOT vote in a majority Rodent Congress, they stole it via election fraud.

  4. #14
    Points: 665,213, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433307
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,542
    Points
    665,213
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,981
    Thanked 80,896x in 54,714 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sergeant Gleed View Post
    Yes.

    The proper way to deal with precedent when precedent is wrong is to state the precedents are wrong and explain how, then present the correct ruling based on the correct interpretation of the Constitution.

    Stare decisis, in the medical world, would be to continue using mercury to treat syphilis because that's precedent and never mind thst the pecedent is proven false by those pesky anti-biotics.
    .You can keep drinking the mercury if you want. Eventually the lead will be flying because that's the only other constitutionally approved way to overturn false precedent.

    You do know the Constitution itself makes no requirement thst false precedents be followed, don't you?

    It took one war to overturn Fred Acot, and one ruling to evert urn all the case law resting on plessy.


    I understand stare decisis. I'm just not a radical like you.
    Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts