let them bake cake!

[lurk]

DENVER – The Colorado Supreme Court ruled Tuesday to dismiss a lawsuit brought by an attorney who’s been harassing cake artist Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, for more than 12 years.

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys have been defending Phillips since 2012, when he was first sued for declining to create a custom cake celebrating a same-sex wedding because it violated his religious beliefs. Around that same time, the attorney who filed the most recent lawsuit against Phillips first contacted him, calling him a hypocrite and bigot. For more than 12 years now, Phillips has been relentlessly pursued and mocked by government officials and activists who disagree with his views.

“Enough is enough. Jack has been dragged through courts for over a decade. It’s time to leave him alone,” said ADF Senior Counsel Jake Warner. “Free speech is for everyone. As the U.S. Supreme Court held in 303 Creative, the government cannot force artists to express messages they don’t believe. In this case, an attorney demanded that Jack create a custom cake that would celebrate and symbolize a transition from male to female. Because that cake admittedly expresses a message, and because Jack cannot express that message for anyone, the government cannot punish Jack for declining to express it. The First Amendment protects that decision.”

Phillips won his first case before the U.S. Supreme Court in 2018, when the court found that Colorado officials who punished Phillips acted with hostility toward his faith. That ruling did not address Phillips’s free-speech rights to decline to create custom cakes expressing messages that violate his faith. Now, the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling has ended the most recent lawsuit against Phillips, dismissing the case because the attorney who filed it did not follow the right process. Like the prior win, this ruling does not address Phillips’ free-speech rights.

Just last year, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in 303 Creative v. Elenis, which upheld free speech for creative professionals like Phillips. ADF attorneys asked the Colorado high court to apply that ruling and similarly affirm Phillips’ free-speech rights in this case. Though the Colorado Supreme Court did not decide that issue in this case, 303 Creative provides enduring free-speech protection for Phillips.

“We granted review to determine, among other issues, whether [the attorney] properly filed [this] case,” the Colorado Supreme Court wrote in its opinion in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Scardina. “We conclude that [the attorney] did not.”

On the same day the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would hear Phillips’ first case—in which he prevailed in 2018 after Colorado tried to force him to create a custom cake celebrating a same-sex wedding—an attorney called Masterpiece Cakeshop requesting that Phillips create a custom cake that would symbolize and celebrate a gender transition. The attorney then called again to request another custom cake, one depicting Satan smoking marijuana, to “correct the errors of [Phillips’] thinking.”

Phillips politely declined both requests because the cakes express messages that violate his core beliefs. The attorney then filed the most recent lawsuit, threatening to continue harassing Phillips until he is punished. Phillips serves people from all backgrounds. Like many artists, he decides to create custom cakes based on what they will express, not who requests them.

textbook example of lawfare.

 

[lolnotnx]

Yeah sounds nice until the courts say ED acts with hostility towards someone's faith

 

[Crassmeister]

 

[fleacollerindustry]

View attachment 22151

textbook example of lawfare.

What I never understood is, how does this NOT fall under the textbook right of business owners to refuse service to customers for any reason?

 

[Lovecraft]

What I never understood is, how does this NOT fall under the textbook right of business owners to refuse service to customers for any reason?

Because the business owner flat out stated that the homosexes were denied service due to being homosexes, which is legally defined as discrimination. Same would apply in the reverse scenario. They could have bypassed it by simply saying "no" to the request or just not provide a reason, but that would probably not satisfy their need to virtue signal.

 

[Call Me Tim]

Because the business owner flat out stated that the homosexes were denied service due to being homosexes, which is legally defined as discrimination. Same would apply in the reverse scenario. They could have bypassed it by simply saying "no" to the request or just not provide a reason, but that would probably not satisfy their need to virtue signal.

You clearly don't understand the 1st Amendment.

He can state for whatever reason why he doesn't want to make a cake. He's made cakes for faggots like you in the past. He just won't make a gay wedding/transition cake. That's his right. If a baker was a jew, would he/she/xir/demiboi be compelled to make a cake celebrating the Holohoax? No.
Would a black baker be compelled to make a cake celebrating the Klan and their 80 years of existence? no.
Would any rational baker be compelled to make a cake celebrating urine drinking, shit eating pajeets? Absolutely not.

 

[lolnotnx]

SHOULD a black baker be compelled to make a cake celebrating the Klan and their 80 years of existence? YEEEESSSSSSSSS!!!!

 

[Lovecraft]

You clearly don't understand the 1st Amendment.

He can state for whatever reason why he doesn't want to make a cake. He's made cakes for faggots like you in the past. He just won't make a gay wedding/transition cake. That's his right. If a baker was a jew, would he/she/xir/demiboi be compelled to make a cake celebrating the Holohoax? No.
Would a black baker be compelled to make a cake celebrating the Klan and their 80 years of existence? no.
Would any rational baker be compelled to make a cake celebrating urine drinking, shit eating pajeets? Absolutely not.

None of the groups you mentioned are protected classes though.
Ironically your example jew could go after the anyone who did what you suggested, and the same for your black baker or any other imagined edge-case scenario of harrassment based on direct race, religion or sexuality. They could just withhold the reason, but they didn't.
And pretending you understand the first amendment isn't going to fly, practically no yanks do and the more conservative or libertarian they are the more distorted is their understanding it seems.

 

[lurk]

None of the groups you mentioned are protected classes though.
Ironically your example jew could go after the anyone who did what you suggested, and the same for your black baker or any other imagined edge-case scenario of harrassment based on direct race, religion or sexuality. They could just withhold the reason, but they didn't.
And pretending you understand the first amendment isn't going to fly, practically no yanks do and the more conservative or libertarian they are the more distorted is their understanding it seems.

tim's right this time. the devil's in the details; he has made his position clear that he will not decorate a cake with messages and decorations that violate his christian faith. he doesnt care about making a cake for fags and trannies, he just refuses to write "eat my delicious chocolate ass" on it.

 

[lurk]

What I never understood is, how does this NOT fall under the textbook right of business owners to refuse service to customers for any reason?

it should, but this guy has been stuck in court fighting off legal attacks since 2012 because....

to “correct the errors of [Phillips’] thinking.”

 

[minty]

tim's right this time. the devil's in the details; he has made his position clear that he will not decorate a cake with messages and decorations that violate his christian faith. he doesnt care about making a cake for fags and trannies, he just refuses to write "eat my delicious chocolate ass" on it.

the devil is in the details
adf is one of the groups koch's n the devos' donate to
it's a fake lawsuit money fund to slowly whittle away at the first amendment n pocket rich libertarian money while doing so... like lovecraft unintentionally hinted at

here's the case they had that made it to the supreme court, and here's why it was highly dubious
private industry owners hellbent on owning n running everything is not a win. they use a small business but the end goal is corporations doing it
it's already backfiring for some of the ppl it was supposed to "help"

nobody needs to cheerlead private money thinktank lawyers making the money for their 5th yacht by fucking a legal loophole
(students for fair admissions is another conservative pet project... ran by edward blum, who is 52, white, n not an asian student)

 

[Lovecraft]

the devil is in the details
adf is one of the groups koch's n the devos' donate to
it's a fake lawsuit money fund to slowly whittle away at the first amendment n pocket rich libertarian money while doing so... like lovecraft unintentionally hinted at

here's the case they had that made it to the supreme court, and here's why it was highly dubious
private industry owners hellbent on owning n running everything is not a win. they use a small business but the end goal is corporations doing it
it's already backfiring for some of the ppl it was supposed to "help"
View attachment 22180

nobody needs to cheerlead private money thinktank lawyers making the money for their 5th yacht by fucking a legal loophole
(students for fair admissions is another conservative pet project... ran by edward blum, who is 52, white, n not an asian student)

Nothing unintentional about it.
Yanks think and brag about how the first amendment gives them the right to say anything anywhere to anyone, ignoring the massive amount of caselaw saying that there are indeed plenty of limits on free expression, especially on any non-governmental platform or arena. Every little group of insufferable twats expect to have the right whilst simultaneously working to restrict the rights of those other twats, eroding your imaginary privileges from the foundations upwards.
In a less polarized and much less sue-happy society, this would have ended with a handful of bad reviews and maybe five minutes of coverage in the news on a slow day.

 

[Crassmeister]

Every little group of insufferable twats expect to have the right whilst simultaneously working to restrict the rights of those other twats, eroding your imaginary privileges from the foundations upwards.

nailed it
left or right, they wanna twist the law just to silence the other guy
musk does it on x-shitter every day (and pretends he isn't)

id rather have a german chocolate cake anyway
wedding cakes are usually boring and awful to actually eat

 

[Call Me Tim]

None of the groups you mentioned are protected classes though.

"Blacks and jews are not protected classes in America." LOL You're literally retarded.

Ironically your example jew could go after the anyone who did what you suggested, and the same for your black baker or any other imagined edge-case scenario of harrassment based on direct race, religion or sexuality. They could just withhold the reason, but they didn't.

Retard. If a Klansman walks into a black bakery, and says, "make me a cake celebrating the Klan's 80th Birthday, nigger," he would be physically run out. The black baker is NOT going to file a fucking complaint first. He'll file after he's immorally kicked out the Klansman.

If the joo baker is accosted by a "Nazi," the joo will bitch, moan, and kvetch until he leaves. Then he'll file any number of complaints with the ADL etc.

Your scenario only happens in your highly medicated head.

And pretending you understand the first amendment isn't going to fly, practically no yanks do and the more conservative or libertarian they are the more distorted is their understanding it seems.

Faggot it's literally what the First Amendment is. The ACLU won several cases in SCOTUS on protecting an 'artist's right to present work unedited.'

Fuck the hell off euro-faggot. You don't know jack shit about anything, well except the metric system. Take your fucking meds and take a nap. Preferably a nap that lasts forever.

 

[minty]

Nothing unintentional about it.
Yanks think and brag about how the first amendment gives them the right to say anything anywhere to anyone, ignoring the massive amount of caselaw saying that there are indeed plenty of limits on free expression, especially on any non-governmental platform or arena. Every little group of insufferable twats expect to have the right whilst simultaneously working to restrict the rights of those other twats, eroding your imaginary privileges from the foundations upwards.
In a less polarized and much less sue-happy society, this would have ended with a handful of bad reviews and maybe five minutes of coverage in the news on a slow day.

while this description is true, i still think it's unintentional since you post that sort of diatribe any time america is mentioned

here's your door prize

 

[Call Me Tim]

while this description is true, i still think it's unintentional since you post that sort of diatribe any time america is mentioned

here's your door prize
View attachment 22190

I was worried that our resident joo communist wouldn't comment.

 

[lolnotnx]

Honestly Tim is the only guy who could say "YOU HAVE ACCESS TO MEDICINE!!!" as an insult and mean it

 

[lolnotnx]

Which is funny because if anyone needs it it's the country whose every meal is +100 microplastics, +62 bugs, +4 blood clots and +2 clogged arteries

 

[Call Me Tim]

Honestly Tim is the only guy who could say "YOU HAVE ACCESS TO MEDICINE!!!" as an insult and mean it

You mean access to medicine which other people pay for.

I do not want to pay for some woman's abortion.
I do not want to pay for some retard's transition.
I do not want to pay for someone else's YouTube stunt gone wrong.
I do not want to pay for cosmetic surgery. etc.,

Should big Pharma price gouge the American public because it can? No. There has to be a reasonable middle ground. many pharmaceuticals are forced to sell their drugs at a predetermined price fixed by that foreign government. If they presented a worldwide same price for everyone, this eliminates the problem. The current situation is the world gets one price, drastically lower than average depending on nation and Merica picks up the difference.

The patent for insulin should expire. That's Congress' job. Write your congressman/woman.

I understand that insurance is a pool of money to be used by all participants. However, if you are prone to injury you premiums go up so you don't disproportionately take from the pool. It shouldn't mean you should be rejected for pre-existing conditions, however forcing the bulk of the cost onto others because you feel that your booze/pot/drug/sex budget shouldn't be affected is stupid.

Experimental procedures should be covered, because many are testing them and need only a minimal cost to cover the application (consumables etc.,) Some people can't afford this and it's a win-win. New options will be tested and the person feels like they have a shot at being cured or at least have the illness sent into remission so that they may have some quality of life.

I won't mention that ever since Obunghole Care has been implemented the costs have gone up, doctor pay has gone down (leading to many to retire) and wait times and inability to see a provider has increased.

But if you really want to fix the problem really fast, get all the jews/leftists out of the gubbermint, healthcare industry, medical lobby, and decision making process.

 

[Call Me Tim]

Which is funny because if anyone needs it it's the country whose every meal is +100 microplastics, +62 bugs, +4 blood clots and +2 clogged arteries

Theres microplastics in everyone and everything now. You can thank the jews for making faux "bio-degradable" plastics.