Does anybody actually agree with this?

im kinda both ways on this. Freedom of speech etc etc but on the other hand business needs to be business and not personal bullshit.

Im just tired of how the minority can now lock ppl up for their beliefs because they refuse to acknowledge their beliefs. Its fucking hypocrite shit ever now.
 
im kinda both ways on this. Freedom of speech etc etc but on the other hand business needs to be business and not personal bullshit.

Im just tired of how the minority can now lock ppl up for their beliefs because they refuse to acknowledge their beliefs. Its fucking hypocrite shit ever now.

Except it's actually against the law to discriminate, regardless. Until the law changes, that's just how it is.
 
The cake is a lie, bros. gg

2AMRv.jpg
 
Wait...

So now it's just the amount of money they had to shell out? :lol:

for me, the money was always part of the issue

i think it's bs either way, but it's extremely stupid to award $135k for imposing on someone's religious freedom

or is religion not protected in oregon? i don't live there so i'm not up on its state laws
 
the question was

"Does anybody actually agree with this?"

to which phaytal and cael say "IT IS THE LAW"

as if that answers the question of why they agree with it suddenly

you want to know what else is the law?

Supreme Court Upholds Trump Travel Ban

so go suck a bag of dicks with whatever activist judges opinion is on Federal Immigration in States like Hawaii and Washington

pretty simple and straight forward i say.....States don't get to enforce Immigration Law if I remember Owebama correctly.

Justice Department sues Arizona over immigration law

so stop them tears baby birds

it will be ok

kthanx
 
Last edited:
for me, the money was always part of the issue

i think it's bs either way, but it's extremely stupid to award $135k for imposing on someone's religious freedom

or is religion not protected in oregon? i don't live there so i'm not up on its state laws

that is what will be decided in this case going to the SCOTUS

Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission - Wikipedia

and that legal precedent/decision will become the new standard for all States to follow regardless of wtf Oregon passed or thinks it wanted

sorry not sorry
 
look @ all these constitutional scholars

The law that applies to situations where state and federal laws disagree is called the supremacy clause, which is part of article VI of the Constitution. The supremacy clause contains what's known as the doctrine of pre-emption, which says that the federal government wins in the case of conflicting legislation.

lmagayo

oooooooooohhhhhhh shit

facts not feelz just got dropped in here

serveimage
 
for me, the money was always part of the issue

i think it's bs either way, but it's extremely stupid to award $135k for imposing on someone's religious freedom

or is religion not protected in oregon? i don't live there so i'm not up on its state laws

As far as I know, discrimination, regardless of the platform you hide it behind, is in fact illegal.

Now was $135k excessive? Of course. But maybe thsee zealots should have thought about that before they kicked off a social media doxxing resulting in a barrage of death threats to the couple and their kids.
 
Fetal really stuck on the supposed doxxing.... missing the forest bro

this doxxing that happened once the gay couple (lesbian jews)

serveimage


made a huge deal, alerting the media, and the BBB, and the Oregon Bureau of Labor Industries (among god knows how many other places online and elsewhere)

Sweet Cakes by Melissa v. Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries - Wikipedia

The cake shop gained widespread press attention in January 2013 when it turned away customers who wanted cakes for a same-sex wedding, who then made a complaint to the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, claiming their civil rights under the Oregon Equality Act had been infringed.[1][2][3]

it wasn't a secret nor was their televised and document declared hissy fits

it made national news after it was on local news for several straight months

but you know..........SHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh nobody must know who these people were

LMAO

why failtowel howling on this i will never understand.......probably because he can't help but be two parts dumb and dishonest whenever he has any opinion
 
Last edited:
I read that the dyke called the DOJ the same day they were refused a cake lmao talk about a sane reaction
 
it seems fairly clear, if you're not a moron desperate for some manufactured outrage ;o someone more familiar with the case can correct me if I'm wrong...

1) cake requested

2) cake denied bc gays

3) stink raised because denying cake bc gay is against the law in that state

4) social media outrage and doxxing

5) lawsuit for all of the above

??? I honestly don't know how people can fail to 'get' this, without either being really dumb (Flash) or just wanting to cook up some BS to be outraged about (Tele)

:lol:

Lets go through coombz analysis here:

1) Admits he doesn't know what really happened.

2) Proceeds to call people stupid for not agreeing with his version of events (recall #1)

Go back to cheating on the mother of your child.
 
Back
Top