Are these fags going to succeed in destroying the first amendment?
Are these fags going to succeed in destroying the first amendment?
No, they are just going to have it decided that cakes aren't speech.
The one to destroy the first amendment will be Roy Moore.
If they win, will I be able to force gay bakers to bake Nazi cakes?
No, because the argument isn't about forcing specific speech, it's about circumstance. The baker is saying his free speech is being violated by forcing him to "participate" in a gay wedding.
So you could force a gay baker to bake a cake for a nazi wedding, but you couldn't force specific nazi imagery.
Didn't they want a fucking rainbow on it with two little groom toppers?
No, he refused before even discussing designs.
Even if the cake had two men fucking in a pile of aids syringes, the design has nothing to do with the legal argument and has no bearing on the case.
Why shouldn't he be allowed to refuse. He doesn't want to bake a cake for a gay wedding. So what?
It's illegal according to the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act. Feel free to whine all you want that it shouldn't be illegal, but it is. Your whining will not change the law.
I think the bakers lawyers fucked up making this about speech. It's about personal freedom. The baker can choose who he does business with and he chose not to do buisiness for the homos. The faggots pretty much put a gun to this guys head and told him to bake a cake, just using the government as a middleman. What if I'm a baker that doesn't like carrot cakes? Do I have to bake carrot cakes for anybody who wants one? Do gun stores have to sell guns to sketchy methheads? Where does it end?
I bet the SCOTUS rules in favor of the baker without making a really meaningful ruling. Like citing that fag marriage wasn't legal in Colorado at the time.
There is no "Personal Freedom" amendment in the constitution. A "I should have the freedom to refuse" argument would have no legal basis.
Actually, there is a law against compulsory speech.
So you can force blacks to make cakes for know KKK members?
cakes are pagan. rings are pagan. legal tender. you should be able to deny but not ever say why. if you can build a case your denial was based on stupid shit you cant control like your dick or religion. then you pay a fine or go to jail. simple. according to citizens united. fiat money. is free speech. but men are not? police have no obligation to protect you. welcome to common law. science proved the gay gene yesterday. either live in a half decent society like that. or be a eugenicist who creates israel and moves the embassy
I don't think you understand how this works. It's his whining that made Colorado's Faggot Supremacy Act an issue for the Supreme Court.
That seems to be the case, until they pass a "The rule doesn't count for me" law.
It's not about compulsory speech. It's about participation.
buttoning the top button
Fags can't even into fashion
Jesus christ you can see the AIDS
you moron. on single breasted jackets you dont do up only the last bottom one or all bottom ones. or leave it open. what youre crying about is literally sole way to wear those properly
What will change this vile Colorado law is a favorable Supreme Court ruling. No whining required.
PARTICIPATE IN MY WEDDING OR I WILL RUIN YOU!
it all died with truvada and moved into your truvada an hero pussy. enjoy the vagina cancer
kill all masonic vagina worshippers
But the supreme court is going to rule it's not participation.
and youre going to defile yourself because you didnt use a turkey baster. fucking jew bag. throw you down a vagina well. become a female. bye. why are males baking fucking cakes? you bitch. you mofo
But it clearly is.
How is it possible to view this weirdo prancing around in the street and not recognize that he is mentally ill?
He didn't refuse to make a cake for them though, only to make one specifically for a gay wedding, if you read the actual argument the baker was willing to make them a rainbow cake or any other pre-established design in the store, just not one with writing or imagery or whatever specifically celebrating a union that religiously he cannot accept.
freud is a bitch. why not reply to all replies in one post. spiritual problems. only for jews. no male nor female in Christ. no vaginas or marriages in spiritual bodies. wed Christ. or is that gay?
No, retard you button the bottom. I'm imaging how retarded you must look in a suit
Well at least it's clear that isn't about justice anymore
but rainbows are fine. he doesnt know what he's talking about. he could have made a fucking david ejaculating with jonathan cake or a ruth and naomi cake. but he's a whore. he also lisps... i dont. anderson lisps too. peterson was a tranny. anderson throws up devil horns with his hands
What if you are a non masonic vagina worshiper? Do we get a pass?
no. i mean im joking because this is all evil vindictive and worldly stuff. you created all deaths and all sins so it's a temporary fix for its own corruption. but i can marry. and then my husband is not wed to me when we die. just like you. but you dont act that way. i do
Actually, he refused to make a custom cake of any sort, with any design. He said they were free to buy a pre-made cake, but he refused to make one specially for them.
Dear fag flag,
The AIDS is killing your brain. You are a glow in the dark insane AIDS faggot nigger, and should probably neck yourself. I realize you are too cowardly to do so, and therefore please find your way to the nearest nigger ridden city, and tell they you are an AIDS infested fag. See how long it takes them to douse you with gasoline, throw a tire around you, and set you on fire.
P.S. homosexuality is a mental disorder, and your kind should be killed off in the womb. Eventually we will be able to detect for such things, and your kind will no longer exist.
Good point. Fuck this gay earth. I'd move to a fortified compound in Idaho but the ATF would shoot my wife.
I'm in favor or eugenics, doesn't sound so bad. And they say homosexuality isn't a mental disorder.
No medical organization in the world recognizes it as a disorder.
I don't know....but I don't need democracy.
Supreme Court will strike down Colorado's (((law))) because you cannot force people to supply you with services.
BAKE THE FUCKNG CAKE
But this is a political and cultural conclusion. Look at him. He is clearly disturbed.
Bad laws can be changed.
Where did you learn to write? Honestly, you should have paid a little more attention in English class instead of sucking all those dicks, faggot.
Why political faggotry? What a cause to die for.
You mean bottom....
give us your weapons goooy
its for your own good, we love you goooy
fags are the fucking worst customers... they ruin everything
The 1A is more than speech, faggot. It's the man's religious right to not have to bake you a cake that you fag subhumans AREN'T entitled to.
RAA RAA FREEDOM OF SPEECH!
...unless gays, nonwhites, trannies, or women are involved :^)
That's not what the legal argument is about. Your post couldn't matter less.
Not an argument.
There is no "Personal Freedom" amendment in the constitution.
Yes there is. It's called the 9th Amendment, you nescient glob of putrescence
I bet that cake tastes like shit.
But that's objectively fucking wrong, though. First covers both freedom of antagonist association, so you're allowed to look a fag dead in the eye and tell him to piss off, and you don't need to explain anything further. That's freedom of expression, bitch.
Cakes are his art therefore it is considered speech. It violates his first amendment rights by forcing him to bake a gay wedding cake.
fags are a no win for brick and mortar, they complain about fucking everything. Even if this guy baked the cake, they would whine on the internet about it being the wrong fucking color or not tasting exactly right. This cake shop was fucking loosing either way.
Social pressure an consent it's a thing, gays went to far.
Nazi cake bakers have a right to exist.
a better question is.... should fags have a right to complain. They claim to be some other gender. Does the constitution only cover man and woman? Are new genders covered under the same laws, they shouldn't be.
Holding your thumb INSIDE you fingers like that is a sign of mental illness. You don't hold your thumb like that unless there is physical trauma or deformation inside of your brain. This faggot is also a retard, literally, just like all faggots I guess.
Why are some gays so based and some gays so insane, but they all throw their support into one big faggy pot called the LGBTQ+ community?
A bunch if weird motherfuckers are making voices of gays like you meaningless.
You don't see the ENTIRE straight community saying one small group of perverts speaks for us all. It's just all so sad.
On a two-button suit, the top button is always buttoned while standing.
No, because political views aren't defined as a "protected class" under civil rights legislation.
What if it was a Muslim bakery?
Would liberals heads explode?
Gay men are pretty low on the totem pole these days, liberals would probably get more virtue signalling brownie points from defending some shitskins than two white men.
What they're doing is subverting all expression at this point. They already subverted marriage--fine. It won't stop everyone else from getting married.
But can they make their own cakes? No. They MUST hinder a person from completing a task from which they derived personal meaning. Cakes aren't a necessary prerequisite for marriage, and they definitely aren't nutritionally necessary. They are nothing more than an edible form of expression.
This entire thing just goes to show how CORRECT we've always been. We were told that it was a slippery slope fallacy to suspect that the subversion of marriage would lead to the subversion of free expression (from which regular people without connections receive modest compensation).
Gays are attacking the fabric of society at this point; with great vindictiveness.
"The late Justice Antonin Scalia, a conservative icon, once wrote that regardless of an individual's "conscientious religious scruples," he must comply with an otherwise valid law that is neutrally applied to all. Thus, citizens who disagree must still obey laws that make polygamy illegal, or laws that compel the payment of taxes for programs that the individual may disagree with. To do otherwise, said Scalia, would be to make each individual a law unto himself."
Conservative judge Antonin Scalia was in favor of the couple because of the precedent it sets otherwise. I don't want to pay taxes because I don't support the programs they go to, they're against my religious beliefs. It's against my sincerely held religious beliefs to stand in line to get a license, but if I'm not allowed to drive that's discrimination.
You can make so many arguments against this guy it's not even funny.
it's literally against the law
claiming religious beliefs should exempt you from the law is ridiculous