Court hears case over gay wedding cake

[Suzanimal]

I'm with Bob Murphy on the cake issue.

 

[shakey1]

 

[H_H]

I'm with Bob Murphy on the cake issue.

Too try-hard to be neutral. Uggh. Such a problem. Some libertarians try so, so hard to be equally opposed to both left and right. That way I guess they can feel more aloof from it all. Superior.

Guys, pick a side. Leave the platonic world of isoceles triangles. Stick your neck out. Get your hands dirty.

If one cares about actually getting a free society, one should obviously take Roseanne's side against the Lying, Stinking Media. Strongly. In fact, having your country's entire media become subsumed into a united propaganda operation, owned and controlled by a tiny group of evil men, all of one small ethnic group, using advanced cognitive manipulation tricks with no qualms nor limits, is such a distressing and disastrous situation that it is imperative to bend every effort to opposing the Propo-masters and bringing down this enslavement-promotion system. Else liberty cannot long survive. Obviously. I shouldn't even have to be writing this stuff, it's so obvious.

Enslavement Promotion Matrix = Bad. You don't defend anything they do. You don't talk about how they've got free speech or other rights. You don't, in fact, paint them as decent fellow humans in any way. They sure don't paint you and me as humans. Think about that. In this communication war to destroy their system or to destroy liberty, if they're smart, and we're stupid, they win. Come on! They already have every advantage:

they control 1 trillion dollars worth of assets,
we have basically zip;
they own and control every television station, newspaper, movie studio, university, and other opinion-making nexus in the country, as well as Google and Facebook,
we have, umm.... umm.... Liberty Magazine?

Ya don't fight fire with kazoos and pom-poms.

Statement in favor of the Heroic Baker Hero ought to be a lot stronger, too. This guy stood up for God and Family, Faith and Country, he took on the Globohomo hegemon without fear, never flinching. And like for instance Ron Paul, he is a good, upstanding man of fine character, who took the time to raise good children, who has quietly led exemplary life.

http://masterpiececakes.com/






​

He is someone we can look up to and hold up as an example of how to live. He is doing his part to save civilization.

 

[Ender]

He is going too far, he was either a deep sleeper or he sold out.

NO.

The Judge is saying that the premise of the ruling is not correct and is in fact against real liberty.

Ron Paul said the same thing:

Government Should Leave Bakers Alone
By Ron Paul
Ron Paul Institute
December 12, 2017

Instead of considering whether Colorado has violated the bakery’s rights of property and contract, the Supreme Court is considering whether Colorado’s actions violate the bakery’s religious liberty. The argument for a religious liberty violation is based on the fact that the bakery owner’s refusal to bake the cake was rooted in his religious objection to same-sex marriage. Looking just at this argument means that a victory for the bakery would implicitly accept the legitimacy of laws dictating to whom private businesses must provide services, as long as an exemption is made for those with religious objections. This reduces property and contract rights to special privileges held by business owners with “sincere religious convictions.” It also allows judges, bureaucrats, and politicians to determine who is really acting on sincere religious convictions.

Just as business owners have the right to decide who to do business with, individuals have the right to form any arrangement they wish as long as they do not engage in force or fraud. This includes entering into what many consider unconventional or even immoral marriage contracts. What no individual has the right to do is use government to force others to accept his definition of marriage.

Even if the bakery wins in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, its victory will only protect those businesses acting on a “sincere religious conviction.” Those who oppose forcing bakers to bake cakes and who support private business owners’ right to decide who to accept as customers should work to restore respect for everyone’s rights.

 

[H_H]

The Judge is saying that the premise of the ruling is not correct and is in fact against real liberty.

Maybe he is saying that. If so, it is somewhere, quietly, to himself. He is certainly not saying that in public. But he may be saying it somewhere. I'm not saying you're wrong.

 

[timosman]

The Judge is saying that the premise of the ruling is not correct and is in fact against real liberty.

What about the original ruling?

 

[Swordsmyth]

NO.

The Judge is saying that the premise of the ruling is not correct and is in fact against real liberty.

Ron Paul said the same thing:

What universe are you living in?
Judge Swamp said it was a dangerous ruling because it might lead to business owners getting to decide who they wanted to do business with.

Before the election when he thought Hitlery would win he said she would be master and commander of the DOJ and could pardon herself, now DJTvsg is in office he has gone full Russiagate and claims Trump obstructed justice by firing Comey.

He was either a deep sleeper agent all along or he sold out.

 

[Ender]

What universe are you living in?
Judge Swamp said it was a dangerous ruling because it might lead to business owners getting to decide who they wanted to do business with.

What universe are YOU living in?

The Judge said it was a dangerous ruling because it might lead to business owners getting to decide who they wanted to do business with BASED ON RELIGIOUS BELIEFS and not freedom of action.

The 1st Amendment says that Congress shall make NO LAW concerning religion- this ruling opens a flood gate of danger as the court is now meddling in an area that it has absolutely no jurisdiction. Soon they will be deciding what constitutes a religion and what does not.

Before the election when he thought Hitlery would win he said she would be master and commander of the DOJ and could pardon herself, now DJTvsg is in office he has gone full Russiagate and claims Trump obstructed justice by firing Comey.

He was either a deep sleeper agent all along or he sold out.

My only issue with the Judge was when he supported Trump and believed him. He is now much clearer on that issue.

 

[Swordsmyth]

What universe are YOU living in?

The Judge said it was a dangerous ruling because it might lead to business owners getting to decide who they wanted to do business with BASED ON RELIGIOUS BELIEFS and not freedom of action.

The 1st Amendment says that Congress shall make NO LAW concerning religion- this ruling opens a flood gate of danger as the court is now meddling in an area that it has absolutely no jurisdiction. Soon they will be deciding what constitutes a religion and what does not.

Italians are a religion?



Why is having freedom of religion worse than not having it?

My only issue with the Judge was when he supported Trump and believed him. He is now much clearer on that issue.

Thank you for clarifying that you are fine with Judge Swamp supporting Hitlery.

 

[Ender]

Italians are a religion?



Why is having freedom of religion worse than not having it?



Thank you for clarifying that you are fine with Judge Swamp supporting Hitlery.

Thank you for clarifying that you don't know a thing about freedom.

Again from Ron Paul:

Instead of considering whether Colorado has violated the bakery’s rights of property and contract, the Supreme Court is considering whether Colorado’s actions violate the bakery’s religious liberty. The argument for a religious liberty violation is based on the fact that the bakery owner’s refusal to bake the cake was rooted in his religious objection to same-sex marriage. Looking just at this argument means that a victory for the bakery would implicitly accept the legitimacy of laws dictating to whom private businesses must provide services, as long as an exemption is made for those with religious objections. This reduces property and contract rights to special privileges held by business owners with “sincere religious convictions.” It also allows judges, bureaucrats, and politicians to determine who is really acting on sincere religious convictions.

^^^THIS^^^ is very dangerous.

 

[timosman]

Has anyone seen Ender and Zippy together?

 

[Swordsmyth]

Thank you for clarifying that you don't know a thing about freedom.

Again from Ron Paul:



^^^THIS^^^ is very dangerous.

You apparently know nothing about freedom, if I can't act on my religion at all I am less free than if I can whether the government decides to not recognize some religions or not, this is not perfect but it is a step in the right direction, if they had ruled the other way they would have said that nobody is ever allowed to act on their religion ever.

 

[H_H]

What universe are you living in?

What universe are YOU living in?

Thank you for clarifying that you don't know a thing about freedom.

You apparently know nothing about freedom,

"Ahem. Umm, I'd like to ask..."

In conclusion: Nope!

 

[Ender]

You apparently know nothing about freedom, if I can't act on my religion at all I am less free than if I can whether the government decides to not recognize some religions or not, this is not perfect but it is a step in the right direction, if they had ruled the other way they would have said that nobody is ever allowed to act on their religion ever.

Here is Ron Paul on this- maybe you should listen to him.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Here is Ron Paul on this- maybe you should listen to him.

Ron is saying the ruling didn't go far enough and he is right, Judge Swamp is saying it went too far.

 

[Ender]

Ron is saying the ruling didn't go far enough and he is right, Judge Swamp is saying it went too far.

Maybe you should actually watch it.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Maybe you should actually watch it.

Maybe you should actually watch Judge Swamp.

Again from Ron Paul:

Instead of considering whether Colorado has violated the bakery’s rights of property and contract, the Supreme Court is considering whether Colorado’s actions violate the bakery’s religious liberty. The argument for a religious liberty violation is based on the fact that the bakery owner’s refusal to bake the cake was rooted in his religious objection to same-sex marriage. Looking just at this argument means that a victory for the bakery would implicitly accept the legitimacy of laws dictating to whom private businesses must provide services, as long as an exemption is made for those with religious objections. This reduces property and contract rights to special privileges held by business owners with “sincere religious convictions.” It also allows judges, bureaucrats, and politicians to determine who is really acting on sincere religious convictions.

Ron is saying the ruling didn't go far enough.



Judge Swamp says it went too far, people might actually use it to decline service to people they don't want to serve, OH HORRORS! that's DANGEROUS!

 

[Anti Globalist]

Good thing Hillary didn't win. Otherwise the result would of been different.

 

[timosman]

 

[H_H]

Whee! I wanna Ride that Slide!

I think we all do here, though some may be more reserved about it.