Supreme Court sides with web designer who refuses to do gay wedding sites...

If you want to turn down business who are we to stop you?

 

The plaintiff in this case was never even asked to design a “gay wedding website”. It’s comical the court even took this one up. The purpose of the case seems to be purely ideological vice signaling for those who want the “freedom” to discriminate.

What is the point of this? Like… ok guys, never mind that whole civil rights thing or public accommodation laws. If your “feelz” are strong enough, the law doesn’t apply to you. In effect, this is what the court is saying. Bring back “separate but equal” and colored water fountains (or in these gay-rights cases, I guess it would be gay water fountains).

 

SCOTUS literally legalizing bigotry based on a fake case

 

It maybe doesn’t matter in more urban areas or where people have the wherewithal to “take their business elsewhere”. But in backwoods hell holes parts of America, there will be people victimized if the law doesn’t protect them. But even in cases where people can take their business elsewhere, should ever they have to face overt discrimination? This is settled law on everything except “gay rights”, and frankly in popular society it’s mostly settled there too (in Colorado, the state would argue their law settled it by simply including that class “above and beyond” the federal standard of civil rights).

 

I mean normally the law when it comes to protected classes, but I guess there are exceptions to that now

 

An apt comparison, as the two plaintiffs are equally sincere and candid.

 

Remember when “Just bake the damn cake!” used to work ?

 

That’s the goal, to try to set up zones of ostracism and second class status. They also want to deny medical care

 

Yay for bigotry masquerading as religion.

We are a shithole country teeming with hateful shitheads

 

Why is "open to the public," so difficult to understand?

 

Why do the heathen rage ? What, they want two months now ?

 

So...I am not an attorney, so take this for what this is worth, but they had attorneys discussing this on the radio and I was listening on the way to my office.

The key to the ruling seems to be based in the fact that the web design is considered "speech", where as a business such as baking a cake is not "speech". Not allowing a black person to shop in your store is not "protected speech". That seems to be the line of delineation, at least that is what the attorneys on the radio tried explaining for dummies like me.

However, they all agreed that the ruling as written opens the doors for future challenges beyond protected speech.

 

Why would you want to force someone like that to create a website or cake for you? If they are that strongly opposed to your lifestyle it's not likely they're going to do top notch work for you.

 

In before shithole country...damn it!

 

The Mysterious Case of the Fake Gay Marriage Website, the Real Straight Man, and the Supreme Court

 

Well the thing is no one did, this was a made up case with no facts and no injury, purely hypothetical to engineer this result

 

You can bet this guy’s spitting nails …

 

I think “web design” obviously has a bit more merit as free speech than a cake (which has almost none, unless it’s super a custom cake).

So why not wait for a real case and decide on its merits what form this “speech” takes? This is basically a person saying “I’m a bigot and the law shouldn’t apply to me”, and the “conservatives” on the court saying “OK, good enough for us”. It’s ridiculous on its face. Borderline banana republic type disregard for the law.