For a lot of Christians, religious liberty means being able to use their religion as a cudgel to discriminate against others. They are also the first people who would go to out of their minds if any business began refusing to deal with Christians.
While the shenanigans of the Legislative and Executive branches have been numerous and egregious, the Judicial branch has been the worst. Top to bottom. I can understand when a nitwit gets elected to represent a district and then acts the fool, wasting time and fouling the process. But these people, these "Justices" are supposed to be deeply professional, widely experienced, deadly serious. And they too are just nitwits. Yeah, Thomas and Alito are in the news, but it's that Roberts....ooooo makes me angry, the kind of anger that would make the Pope kick a hole in a stained glass window of the Sistine, would make a shy, bald Buddhist reflect and plan a mass murder.
My questions here are simple: 1) Does the Supreme Court have ALL the facts, including those mentioned in this post and 2) DO THEY CARE???
That second is problematic as all hell. I mean, if they can rule in favor of the jerk kneeling in prayer at the 50-yard line (when that hardly tells the whole story), what are they going to do with THIS?
Considering what they just did with Affirmative Action, I think the answer is rather obvious.
Having just gotten finished last semester with a beginning class on web design, I can say that a quality website is a royal pain in the tushie to build. Building one for a wedding seems a bit over the top, the only reason I can think to do so is to have one place to direct gift-givers for whatever registries you're on. After the wedding, it's little more than an exercise in vanity. It seems to me that this is precisely the sort of thing one should just do a Facebook page for instead, and then shut it down six months after the ceremony. Building a professional website isn't cheap, and unless the couple are the sort that for whatever reason feels the 'need' to just throw money away there's no reason to have a professional page built.
That said, I can't say I'm surprised that this case has a number of dubious 'facts' associated with it. I am wondering just how much of the Ms. Smith's motivation is actually religious sentiment and how much is a desperate hope to get more business from the gullible Christian crowd, though. It'd be nice if SCOTUS would have had the good sense to send this back to lower courts, but it's clearly too late now; I fully expect them to make a bad decision based on bad information at this point.
The worst part here is this sort of decision may well undermine far more than just this SCOTUS's legitimacy in the long run. This is exactly the sort of BS that will undermine the US as a borrower in the future, and we will be paying for this decision for years to come. Good luck to the young people growing up today, it's going to be a rough ride and I'm sorry I couldn't do more about that for you.
I find this completely bewildering. Mind-boggling, in fact. If there really is no gay couple "Stewart and Mike," why did no one uncover it before now? This case will have been heard by the state, a district court and the 10th circuit before reaching SCOTUS, and nobody ever bothered to check?! WTF is that?!
Eric R. Olson, Solicitor General, Denver, Colo, is representing the state in this case, with Brian H. Fletcher, Deputy Solicitor General, DOJ, Washington, D. C. for the United States as amicus curiae. How is it possible that neither of those attorneys (nor anyone in their offices) bothered to check the most basic, rudimentary facts in the case? That would appear to be the bare minimum of due diligence that should be expected of them. This would, on the face of it, seem to be the most appalling instance of professional incompetence on record, and as a result, by this time tomorrow every nondiscrimination law in the country will have been rendered moot. My sincerely held beliefs tell me so.
Let's remember that many states (like mine) use a "retain" measure to vote on state Supremes, and they are becoming a bulwark against the far right, as we've seen with the anti-trans legislation.
First, this says to me that the SCOTUS is more corrupt than we think. Second, it is woefully inept when it comes to gathering facts before their rulings. The thing about all orthodox religions is they do not care what rights people want, they want us all to be like their followers, bow to their god, just believe, have faith and be their good children and do as they say with questioning. Here in the USA the Christians are pining for *their* brand of a theocracy.
Signing off for now. Laptop battery already half gone. Don't feel like chatting from the laundry. Although come to think of it I could recharge the damn thing there couldn't I. Anyway – going to get my new glasses, hopefully the idiot that fucked up my power will be told to get his arse into gear and restore it.
For a lot of Christians, religious liberty means being able to use their religion as a cudgel to discriminate against others. They are also the first people who would go to out of their minds if any business began refusing to deal with Christians.
A wedding website? When I got married we didn't have a wedding website! We didn't have any websites at all! And that's the way we liked it!
1. Thou shalt not bear false witness. (don't lie)
2. The ends justify the means.
So, which is it? I am confused... do these people even have a moral compass?
Lying for Jesus is A-OK.
While the shenanigans of the Legislative and Executive branches have been numerous and egregious, the Judicial branch has been the worst. Top to bottom. I can understand when a nitwit gets elected to represent a district and then acts the fool, wasting time and fouling the process. But these people, these "Justices" are supposed to be deeply professional, widely experienced, deadly serious. And they too are just nitwits. Yeah, Thomas and Alito are in the news, but it's that Roberts....ooooo makes me angry, the kind of anger that would make the Pope kick a hole in a stained glass window of the Sistine, would make a shy, bald Buddhist reflect and plan a mass murder.
Is anyone else wondering where she got that private information from? I highly doubt it was done legally.
My questions here are simple: 1) Does the Supreme Court have ALL the facts, including those mentioned in this post and 2) DO THEY CARE???
That second is problematic as all hell. I mean, if they can rule in favor of the jerk kneeling in prayer at the 50-yard line (when that hardly tells the whole story), what are they going to do with THIS?
Considering what they just did with Affirmative Action, I think the answer is rather obvious.
Shouldn’t this be thrown out immediately? I mean lying to the courts is still a crime.
"Because reality doesn’t overlap with the <s>Christian Persecution Complex.</s> christianity"
FIFY..
Umm.. edit tags not work? Well, Im sure everybody knows what I mean.
Having just gotten finished last semester with a beginning class on web design, I can say that a quality website is a royal pain in the tushie to build. Building one for a wedding seems a bit over the top, the only reason I can think to do so is to have one place to direct gift-givers for whatever registries you're on. After the wedding, it's little more than an exercise in vanity. It seems to me that this is precisely the sort of thing one should just do a Facebook page for instead, and then shut it down six months after the ceremony. Building a professional website isn't cheap, and unless the couple are the sort that for whatever reason feels the 'need' to just throw money away there's no reason to have a professional page built.
That said, I can't say I'm surprised that this case has a number of dubious 'facts' associated with it. I am wondering just how much of the Ms. Smith's motivation is actually religious sentiment and how much is a desperate hope to get more business from the gullible Christian crowd, though. It'd be nice if SCOTUS would have had the good sense to send this back to lower courts, but it's clearly too late now; I fully expect them to make a bad decision based on bad information at this point.
The worst part here is this sort of decision may well undermine far more than just this SCOTUS's legitimacy in the long run. This is exactly the sort of BS that will undermine the US as a borrower in the future, and we will be paying for this decision for years to come. Good luck to the young people growing up today, it's going to be a rough ride and I'm sorry I couldn't do more about that for you.
Nothing says boundless faith and confidence more than lying to the legal system you think your god is weak enough to require the protection of.
I find this completely bewildering. Mind-boggling, in fact. If there really is no gay couple "Stewart and Mike," why did no one uncover it before now? This case will have been heard by the state, a district court and the 10th circuit before reaching SCOTUS, and nobody ever bothered to check?! WTF is that?!
Eric R. Olson, Solicitor General, Denver, Colo, is representing the state in this case, with Brian H. Fletcher, Deputy Solicitor General, DOJ, Washington, D. C. for the United States as amicus curiae. How is it possible that neither of those attorneys (nor anyone in their offices) bothered to check the most basic, rudimentary facts in the case? That would appear to be the bare minimum of due diligence that should be expected of them. This would, on the face of it, seem to be the most appalling instance of professional incompetence on record, and as a result, by this time tomorrow every nondiscrimination law in the country will have been rendered moot. My sincerely held beliefs tell me so.
Let's remember that many states (like mine) use a "retain" measure to vote on state Supremes, and they are becoming a bulwark against the far right, as we've seen with the anti-trans legislation.
Pay attention to the courts!
First, this says to me that the SCOTUS is more corrupt than we think. Second, it is woefully inept when it comes to gathering facts before their rulings. The thing about all orthodox religions is they do not care what rights people want, they want us all to be like their followers, bow to their god, just believe, have faith and be their good children and do as they say with questioning. Here in the USA the Christians are pining for *their* brand of a theocracy.
OT: no more affirmative action
https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-affirmative-action-college-race-f83d6318017ec9b9029b12ee2256e744
Signing off for now. Laptop battery already half gone. Don't feel like chatting from the laundry. Although come to think of it I could recharge the damn thing there couldn't I. Anyway – going to get my new glasses, hopefully the idiot that fucked up my power will be told to get his arse into gear and restore it.