That's not why they're doing it. One could argue they're acting in bad faith but then the Lefty Brigade gets all up in arms.

I don't know why I bother, but would you like to explain yourself instead of just putting cryptic one sentence useless comments?

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

My Dad's solution for this "problem" was basically treating people like shit and making it clear they weren't welcome. He was a barber, so I guess he could have given them a shitty haircut too, maybe he did.

i mportant to allow denial. what if it was someone asking the website designer to make a porn site? yes, you must pose these what-ifs for these cases....

I think the issue would be if you made porn sites but then wouldn't do it for one protected group in particular.

If you just didn't make porn sites, it wouldn't be an issue.

For a bakery case an "acrivist" explicitly chose a baker who didn't want to do a gay wedding so they could sue them and force the baker to make a cake.

Should a gay baker me forced to make Westboro Baptist cakes?

I dont believe the porn industry is federally protected against discrimination.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

Um being gay ain't a protected class....hence the state law in question here

Have you heard this joke before?

A masochist and a sadist are walking down the street together. The masochist says ‘hit me,’ and the sadist says, ‘no, I won’t.’

Windy is classically guilty of the same technicality he blames others of. It is important to note it is the righty brigade that is all up in arms bringing the case. The anti gay website designer wants the Supreme Court to give them cover. This is not some gay couple looking to have her make them a website bringing this to court.

Are Westboro Baptist protected by federal law from discrimination?

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

Everyone should have the right to deny their service or whatever they do to anyone they choose, that simple. If people are discriminatory or otherwise out of line then the free market should correct the situation.

Yes, if said discrimination is based on their religion.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Yes

Theoretically I agree with this but practically I'm not as solid in my agreement

Sex is clearly a protected class. And if you will do a website for a man and a woman, but won't do one for a man and a man, you are clearly discriminating based on sex. Because the only reason you are refusing is because of the sex of the individuals.

That’s your opinion, and it’s shared by many people, but it isn’t currently codified by federal law that way.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Facts don't matter to true believers

This is one of those cases where the Libertarian position sounds good at first blush but then if you think about it, it's not.

Interesting.

African Americans were/are widely discriminated against since the end of the US Civil War. Discrimated against by private individuals and private organizations. And by parts of the US govt, and by the DOD. How well did the free market "correct the situation"? There sure was lots of time for the market to do so.

Serious question.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

I said in my post they should be allowed to deny service to "anyone" they choose, but really I should have said "any-thing." Denying service because the couple is gay = discriminatory and not okay. But not wanting to make a gay-themed cake should be within the rights of the baker. Same deal with race... can't deny service to someone because of race, but I should be able to deny the service based on what they might want me to do that might involve race...

But going back to the gay couple:

They just want you (the baker) to make a cake for them. Just like a straight couple would. What is different? How would the market fix this?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

The market should fix things because if it becomes known the baker is a discriminatory asshole, people go elsewhere.

The cake in question in most of the cases has a gay theme or is celebrating a gay marriage or something, right? As in it's not entirely "just another cake," but a cake celebrating something the baker doesn't agree with. And by the way, I think the baker's are assholes in these situations. But I still think the most logical approach is to allow people the right to deny. If you force these people to make cakes celebrating a gay marriage, are you cool forcing less popular opinions as well? And if not where do you draw the line?

I think the greatest central libertarian myth about "free" markets is that they have a bias towards freedom and justice. But in terms of economic theory, they have no such thing. They just provide economic characteristics, like market efficiency. Markets don't care if most market agents are bigoted. Not one bit. I don't think they should be considered a tool to solve social problems.



Like a child porn cake? I'll watch out for that slipperly slope when pedophiles become a protected class.

But how did that method/approach work regarding black discrimination in the 150+ years since the US civil war?


But the cake is just another cake celebrating a marriage. Yes, a gay marriage. One could have a cake celebrating a straight marriage, a mixed race marriage, a black marriage, an asian marriage, a native american marriage, and so on. Nothing is different about the cake except the status/orientation/race of the people getting married.


This is an interesting question. We all know that a change of opinion causes a change of behavior. Fewer people understand that a change of behavior also causes a change of opinion. Legislating behavior has historically worked to a degree in the usa. Yes, it would be nice if we did not have to do so, but some people are pretty hateful.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Okay, but I already said I am denying service based on the theme of the cake, not the people ordering. People are a protected class, cake themes obviously aren't.

And I'm just going to state once again for the record... in the case of the baker denying the service of baking a gay wedding cake, I don't like the baker... I'll bake rainbow cakes all day long. Won't be very good but I'll do it. I'm playing devil's advocate to make my point people should be able to deny service of whatever they want.

Well didn't work to well in the south, for .. well someone might say it still doesn't.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

Yeah I don't know the details of the cake. In my mind there is something about it that differentiates it from a "standard" cake, but I could be totally wrong on that and that is a pretty crucial detail to this whole deal. In general legislation should be the "don't do this" list, not "you have to do this..." Trail mentioned the term "slippery slope" which I think is used quite often but actually really applies here.

While your ideas are interesting, it is hard to know what works or does not work on a purely philosophical basis. But looking directly at what has worked and what has not worked in the distant and recent past, that is a test and a pile of evidence that, I think, prevails in this debate.

And, irrelevant of your opinion or mine, market forces failed miserably at changing US discrimination against former US slaves. Still failing to this day. So I highly doubt that we can rely on market forces solving other cases of blatant discrimination.

Or, if not, tell me what I am missing.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

I don't think you are missing anything at all... It's a complex situation with infinite "what-ifs". I still think though you are looking at it as discriminating towards people because of their race/religion/sexual orientation/etc... as opposed to denying a certain service that may go against your beliefs. But in reality it isn't a fine line of course. At the end of the day the only way I see to logically avoid all the "what-ifs" is to not mandate that people do things they don't want to do. Otherwise you go down the rabbit hole and eventually we get to a place that we'd all agree is crazy...

Markets are an economic mechanism, not a social values mechanism. The market corrects for poorly made product, or product the consumer doesn’t want, or over/underpriced goods, etc.

They’re not supposed to be the mechanism by which all of societal values are adjudicated. Capitalism is just a model for economics, and people probably should stop trying to apply its theory to everything else as is economic laws are universal to all other areas of thought or human interaction.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

But I don't think the baker is denying the gay clients because making wedding cakes goes against his beliefs.

Because he loves making wedding cakes. He just does not want to make wedding cakes for gay people's weddings. Next he will decide that his religious beliefs preclude him from making wedding cakes for mixed race marriages (people with such beliefs do exist, there are lots of them, but maybe none of them are wedding cake bakers ... yet ...).

Should we let wedding cake bakers that have religious views against mixed race marriages (and such religions exist in the usa) also flagrantly discriminate? And should we just let market forces do all of the heavy lifting here as well ? Even though market forces have historically failed in such cases, and failed quite badly?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

I don't disagree entirely but it's equally as troublesome to legislate societal values and morality.

That shouldn't be troublesome. That's part of what the Legislature is for. We come together as a society because we presumably share some values. We send our representatives to make laws that reflect those values.

That's kind of the whole point.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

I have to take a timeout for dinner... I'll be back shortly.

I'm enjoying this discussion and peoples' opinions...

From the link and the court case, with a healthy dose of rewriting (but keeping to the spirit of the dilemma):

"Enter Jane Doe, the owner of ReligilousUnCreative LLC, a designer of websites and graphics based in Crazytown, CO. Doe is a devout Christian nutter who believes that marriage “is only between one man and one woman of the same race.” So although Doe wants to expand her business to include wedding websites, she does not want to design websites for mixed race weddings, and she wants to post a message on her own website to make that clear."

OK, so you're a justice in the scotus. How would you rule?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

I’d rule that describing the plaintiff as a “nutter” is prejudicial.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Well done !



(But, yeah, truthfully, l think that people that are against mixed race marriages ARE nutters ... )

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Man here we go with the "what-ifs", Pandora's Box is open... perfect because I've got a few drinks in me now.

In your scenario, I rule that shithead LLC owner may NOT discriminate against the clients based on their race, but that they MAY object to and ultimately not accommodate certain specific aspects of the specific website design that they do not want to sign their name to.

Here is my scenario to you.

I'm a woman who once upon a time made a very difficult decision to get an abortion. Maybe it was medical in nature and it saved my life, maybe something else, whatever... For the purpose of this exercise, let's say it somehow drastically changed my life for the better. Now I design websites. Ultra religious cult type folks show up at my office, they want to make a new website AbortionIsMurder.com. Can I politely tell them to fuck off?

Yes, l think that you can tell them to f*ck off.

You can discriminate based on the nature and content of the work. You just can't discriminate based on the nature of the person. Especially if the nature of the person is protected by constitutional and/or federal law (race, religion, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and so on)

For example, if the mixed race couple wanted to you to make a website that celebrated their upcoming wedding and also encouraged people to donate to the nazi party of the usa, you could decline to do that. (Unless you have made identical wedding and nazi party supporting websites for white only couples).

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Like any other service, just quote 3x going rate and availability to do work is 6-12 most out.

I remember back in the 60's and 70's a lot of stores had signs at the cash that read "Management has the right to refuse service to anyone". What happened to that?

I am curious, if you were in the scotus, how would you rule on my scenario?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

DarkSpeedWorks wrote:

I am curious, if you were in the scotus, how would you rule on my scenario?

On scenario that I posed to you? I would rule precisely how you stated you would rule:

You can discriminate based on the nature and content of the work. You just can't discriminate based on the nature of the person. Especially if the nature of the person is protected by constitutional and/or federal law (race, religion, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and so on)

This matches very closely with what I said for the scenario you posed to me:

In your scenario, I rule that shithead LLC owner may NOT discriminate against the clients based on their race, but that they MAY object to and ultimately not accommodate certain specific aspects of the specific website design that they do not want to sign their name to.


I don't think you and I are that far off here on our opinions, at least it doesn't seem so. We are looking nice and consistent across the political spectrum on our supreme court LOL...

Thanks, l enjoy discussing this with you, l am hoping to gain new insight on how best to view this dilemma.

So you feel that the wedding site web designer can make a wedding announcement website with rainbows and hearts for straight couples. But then this designer can legally refuse to make an IDENTICAL wedding website with rainbows and hearts for gay couples?


On the related topic, any thoughts why market forces did not do a good job of reducing US racism in the 150 years after the civil war?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

saw on news a good argument... a store should not be able to put up a sign "we do not serve jews or blacks" which is discriminatory. Rather the business owner should just deny the customer if they have some bias, but not be required to give reason.

I am a business owner myself as a landlord, and should be able to deny renters who I view as risk that can destroy my property , rob me, etc. .... because infact back in the day sublet to a shady roommate who tried to stab me when I asked for rent money

You can. What you can't do is decide you're not going to rent to blacks, Jews, or Christians, women, etc.

We rented our house for 10 years before selling it. You can protect yourself and property as a landlord without discriminating based on protected classes. You knew that already, but seemed to feel it necessary to post that as somehow it contributes to a conversation about business owners wanting to discriminate based on protected class. Which it doesn't.

Good analysis by the ACLU

https://www.nytimes.com/...t-supreme-court.html


303 Creative argues that it is not turning away same-sex couples because they are gay, but because it objects to the message that making a wedding website for them would convey. The company has, however, asked the court to declare its right to refuse to make any website for a same-sex couple’s wedding, even if its content is identical to one it would design for a straight couple. According to this line of argument, the company could refuse a gay couple even a site that merely announced the time and location of the wedding and recommended places to stay.

Colorado’s law doesn’t dictate the content of what a business sells. 303 Creative is free to post on all the websites it designs, “The Bible condemns gay marriage.” And by the same token, it could refuse to design a site that says, “The Bible blesses gay marriage,” if it would not design that website for anyone. In that case, the decision would not be discrimination based on the customer’s identity, but a permissible decision to define the product it sells.

303 Creative has plenty of freedom to speak or not speak as it wishes. It need not serve the public and it need not design wedding websites featuring content it would not sell to anyone. But the First Amendment does not give it an exemption from laws requiring equal treatment of customers simply because its service is “expressive.”

Otherwise, interior decorators, landscape architects, tattoo parlors, sign painters and beauty salons, among countless other businesses whose services contains some expressive element, would all be free to hang out signs refusing to serve Muslims, women, the disabled, African Americans or any other group. The First Amendment protects the right to have and express bigoted views, but it doesn’t give businesses a license to discriminate.

What if it was a Gay porn website? This whole situation is not black and white. One law could not fit all situations current and future. Do you discriminate against one's religion or discriminate against one'ssexual liking? What a disaster our country has become.

No, it is not exactly black and white, but it is close.

In the US, you can always discriminate based on the nature and content of the work. You just can't discriminate based on the nature of the person. Especially if the nature of the person is protected by constitutional and/or federal law (race, religion, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and so on)

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Agreed, good discussion.


I guess so, yes, based on the symbolism of things? Does seem weird though...


Tough question that deserves more thought than I can give it right now. I'd say the short answer is because people, and thus "the market," were / are still racist to some degree that has changed over time? But I also think the market does do a decent job of this, at least sometimes... Businesses / people get axed via public opinion all the time when it comes out they are assholes in some form or fashion...

Fascinating.

But, if yes, how is that any different from a landord that can rent his apartments to white people. But then this landloard can legally refuse to rent an identical apartment to black people (who have identical backgrounds to the white people)?


Well, not many racist businesses / people got axed via public opinion in the 150 years since the end of slavery, since racism thrived quite well in that period (and thrives today as well, but slightly less since the passage of the 1960s civil rights and affirmative action laws). And then today, if some racist person or business does get "axed", the nutters complain, "oh, they were unfairly cancelled!!"

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

From Huff Post: this is our SCOTUS circus.......sorry for the weird text font mis-mashes.

"While hearing the case of a Christian graphic artist in Colorado who says designing wedding websites for gay couples is against her faith, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson asked attorney Kristen Waggoner whether, following her arguments, a hypothetical photographer would be able to refuse taking photos of a white Santa Claus with Black children
Waggoner, who is representing the designer, responded that the photographer would be able to refuse taking the photos.
Alito later tried to turn around Jackson’s analogy by asking whether a Black Santa had to have his picture taken with a child dressed in a Ku Klux Klan robe.
Colorado Solicitor General Eric Olson said no, adding that “Ku Klux Klan outfits are not protected characteristics under public accommodation laws.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor then chimed in that, “presumedly, that would be the same Ku Klux Klan outfit regardless whether if the child was Black or white or any other characteristic.”
Alito then joked, “You do see a lot of Black children in Ku Klux Klan outfits all the time.”"

We are just chasing our tails. What if the nature and content of the work offends you? I don't want two males or females kissing over my wedding cake in a ceremony I don't believe in or I don't want to film it as a wedding photographer because it is just as bad a pornography to my virgin Christian eyes? Who wins in the case? Does religion trump sexual orientation or vise versa? There is no clear answer and right answer to every situation that a law or decision cannot possibly address. This decision will be as clear as mud.

The "originalist" justices on the scotus are just a bunch of pathetic jokers and hypocrites. And super weak legal minds.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Would that mean if lifetime platonic female friends kissed, it would offend you ??

Would that mean if a father kissed his son, it would offend you ??

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

You're an idiot sometimes

Maybe, but they are idiots all the time.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Again those are not my personal beliefs I'm just pointing out this is a very complicated issue. When I wrote "I" I did not mean in myself, "I" meant the person making that argument. Looking at both sides of the argument here.

Also are these sexual kisses? Are the two girls hot or not?

Alito's quip is silly. If a photographer refuses to take pictures of someone wearing KKK robes, that does not mean they are discriminating against white people. Presumably, they are willing to photograph the 99.9999% of white people who don't wear KKK robes to the photo-shoot. In that hypothetical, the discrimination really is about the KKK robes, not the race of the person wearing them (even if we assume that the only people who wear KKK robes are white).

There may be close cases where it's not obvious whether the photographer really is objecting to the clothing or, instead, is using the clothing as a pretext for discriminating on the basis of race, etc. (e.g., if the photographer refuses to photograph anyone wearing a turban). But, Alito's KKK point is not one of those close cases.

23494 pts for you

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

Don't forget about Clayton Bigsby.

It’s probably already been said, but if Christians were honest with themselves about what parts of the Bible they cherry-pick, it would be easy for them to realize why so many see them as hypocritical.

Plus, most Christians eat lobster. And that is, according to the Bible, an abomination.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Which part? And you're wrong but i am somewhat bored and this is a layup

This part:
But anything in the seas or the rivers that has not fins and scales, of the swarming creatures in the waters and of the living creatures that are in the waters, is detestable to you.


You're bored? Maybe find a hobby? More swim-bike-run perhaps?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

I encourage you to read Thomas Aquinas. I shall award you three points for creativity in your wrongness however

Seriously? I need to read a book to understand another kooky book? Thanks, I'll pass.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

https://www.newadvent.org/summa/2098.htm

TLDR

Catholics don't have to follow the old testament ceremonial law

Shit I thought this would be good, but the Lev... which I think is old testament so Jews can't eat it but Christians are all new testament.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

You should make him answer why that is the case though

This case is just so fucked up and I assume that the right wing nut jobs on the court will lie about the case to justify their ruling, like they did in Kennedy v Bremerton (the one about the asshole football coach).

Here are the facts:

1)Nobody asked her to make a website for a gay wedding.
2)She has never been asked to make a website for any sort of wedding.
3)Colorado law does not force her to make a website for a gay couple, even if she is asked.
4)Colorado law only insists that once Smith has designed a wedding website, she must allow same-sex couples to purchase that product. In essence, Colorado says she must sell her website template to all customers, regardless of their identity.

So Colorado law is not forcing her to make a gay website, it only forces her to provide the same blank template if she makes a blank template for someone, which she hasn't even done.

If she made a custom website for a straight couple's wedding, with their pictures, names, link to their registries, etc, Colorado law would not force her to do the same for a gay couple, because they would want different pictures, names, etc. The Colorado law only applies to the same product. This is why it would only really apply if she was selling blank templates.

Nobody is forcing her speech here.

This is just going to end with an absolutely insane ruling that has nothing to do with the actual facts here.

Given your past performance here I am assuming your analysis is near golden. I listened to the much of the oral arguments today and I have worked my way through this thread and up until your post summary I was thoroughly fucking confused. Thanks for the cliff notes. I am less confused now.

One question though. My daughter has made a rainbow colored layer cake for her son for his 5th and 6th birthdays. Were I to ask the baker in Colorado to bake that same cake could he refuse?

You are hilarious. We can make rules, and exceptions to rules, and exceptions to exceptions endlessly. And we can create reasons why certain rules apply and create reasons why certain other rules don't apply. It is just never ending. But none of it makes any sense at all.



Me? I'm gonna stay away from lobster because god told me to !

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Don't give graduate-level material to someone who isn't familiar with the basics.

Nothing like intentional ignorance

Oh? Because your fabulous book that has so many rules, and exceptions to rules, and exceptions to exceptions. And has endless reasons why certain rules apply and endless reasons why certain other rules don't apply. One should study it all very, very thoroughly. Because those that have done that, many of them are now part of an immense and wonderful organization of enablers of sex predators that mostly prey on children.

So, yeah, joining that club, that's not super high on my list of things to do.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

This isn’t exactly some fuzzy obscure new rule that Windy made up. It’s a pretty fundamental belief of
Christianity, and part of what separates Christianity from Judaism.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

You're embarrassing yourself dumb fuck.

Aquinas is not part of the Bible.

You want to be ignorant be my guest I can lead a horse to water .....

It is wonderful to see how your dedication to your religion has helped you become an immensely kind and decent person. I imagine that even the way that you communicate and interact with so many posters on this very forum has brought countless others into the fold. You are a great example of that shining light.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Yes I'll rely on the intentionally ignorant for theological and canonical interpretation.

BTW calling a fucking idiot a fucking idiot isn't taking the Lord's name in vain so..... you're still a fucking ignoramus

I guess you prove that no amount of Catholicism makes up for the absence of a conscience.

Or in reality, a number of the Proud Boys and their ilk appear to be Latinos.

It also flies in the face of the argument that the problem with a human based morality is that it is mutable or relative, where as "God's" is fixed and unchanging (which for some reason makes it more valid).

america, get fucking serious.

---

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/

You have surprising skill in the art of justifying and rationalizing your own behavior.

You keep digging.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Okay ignoramus

Don't forget to open your wonderful book. I think it has excellent guidance on dealing with others. You are a shining light on a hill.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

It just gives him something to hold over others and argue about here. I'd be surprised if he even believes any of it.

It falls in line with the whole "speak it into existence through repetition" phenomenon and the doubling and tripling down on utilizing ad hominem ad nauseum. Kind of reminds me of someone else really.

Are you talking about the big fat orange-skinned fellow ?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Behold your wonderment

Did I speak into existence fucking Thomas Aquinas?

Look a bunch of assholes want to mock religion go right ahead but at least do it fucking intelligently. Citing to Hebrew dietary laws to mock Christians is fucking just stupid. When presented why it's fucking stupid the answer is I can't be arsed to read a book it exposes the stupidity. When given the fucking exceprt needed fucking mouth breather just shifts tactics.

You want to be grouped in with that level of intellectual curiosity I'll do so but I would be surprised.

How Christian of you.

---

===============
Proud member of the MSF (Maple Syrup Mafia)

https://www.instagram.com/...rce=ig_web_copy_link

I assume you all will be as outraged when the coin is flipped......

My deal with you is that you cannot seem to exhibit enough self control when confronted with someone jerking your chain that you can post in a manner to be taken seriously. You'd carry more weight if you took it from an 11 to like a 5.

You could respond like this: "I don't seek to mock religion, but simply to highlight that I don't feel courts or laws adequately challenge the entire 'sincerely held religious belief' aspect."

Because personally, I feel like folks are using religion as an excuse to discriminate and we're not allowed to really poke at the "sincerity". Because the sincerity is horseshit when you boil it down as they don't have any existing questionnaires about what other sins possible clients are habitually committing: divorced folks remarrying, do you look at pornography, lie, cheat time at work, etc........

The whole "sincerely held" religious belief falls apart once you actually challenge it. I wonder if they ask every single man/woman couple if they're remarried folks or not to determine whether to do work for them. I bet that would be exceedingly rare someone actually holds fast to ALL of the belief sets necessary to remain consistent and it be "sincere".

I've felt this way since the bake a cake case. It isn't sincere, but we can't challenge sincerity.