Opinions based on facts about the evidence in the case applied to the law, in this case the constitution, the law of the land.
SCOTUS Rules You Can Refuse Service to Same-Sex Couples
- Thread starter CrittendenWildcat
- Start date
I say that everytime I read one of your asinine posts. Nothing I said was inaccurate.
^^stalker post
What do the justices write? Are they or are they not called opinions?
The bible also says you should not judge people. It also says do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Yet I find most christians love to violate these principles more than they love their own god. Again, ain’t no hate like christian love
Are you a sovereign citizen? That sounds exactly like an argument a sovereign citizen would make.
“SCOTUS decisions don’t contain opinions, but are in fact just opinions that don’t apply to me.”
I didn’t say they don’t apply to me. I will follow them just like you do. However, they are just opinions on an interpretation of law.
While I agree with the holding, I do think it is pretty ridiculous that SCOTUS issued a ruling that is essentially a declaratory judgment, i.e. a ruling about a dispute that could rather than did happen.
Like most culture wars issues, I think this is a colossal waste of time and energy.
Like most culture wars issues, I think this is a colossal waste of time and energy.
Disagree with your conclusion. The Court found she had standing, which I believe the 10th Circuit found, as well. Despite that fact, she lives in a state where a baker has been under attack pursuant to the same statute. So, she had good reason to address the law before she was pursued by the Alphabet Cult and cited under the law.
If the left wasn’t so predictably abusive to free thinking individuals who refuse to genuflect at the altar of government sanctioned group thought, there would have been no credible threat that her rights would have been violated.
Could have gone to any number of bakers in Colorado to get a cake, but they had to try and ruin one guys life. Was pretty obvious they’d do the same to a website creator if given the opportunity.
Could have gone to any number of bakers in Colorado to get a cake, but they had to try and ruin one guys life. Was pretty obvious they’d do the same to a website creator if given the opportunity.
The Court said that CA10 had found standing and that the litigants before the Court did not challenge that. Sounds like the lawyers for the State of Colorado failed to make the argument.
The district court found she lacked standing. 10th circuit disagreed. When the SCOTUS accepted cert, it was not on the standing issue, as the appellant won that battle below. The likelihood that the SCOTUS would accept cert and then rule on standing was probably close to nil. So, I doubt they failed to raise the argument, but rather abandoned it knowing that was not the issue the SCOTUS wanted.
I am all for you stopping with the petty name calling when you get in a pickle to which you cannot respond with your doomed or ignorant positions.
Eh. In my opinion, all of America (myself included) needs to learn to shut the f*** up and ignore things they don't like and quit imagining problems.
For instance, there have never been more words said about a less pressing problem than whenever ANYONE opens their mouth to talk about trannies. Unless you are Riley Gaines or another woman who lost to a male competitor, WHO CARES? (That one guy in Virginia whose daughter was raped by a tranny that was coddled by the local school board is a clear exception to this rule.)
SCOTUS doesn't need to get involved in imaginary problem solving on culture war issues, imo. Just another idiotic own goal where the institution does what its worst critics accuse it of doing.
Last edited:
Says the guy who wants to impose his religious beliefs and laws on society writ large.
And, unless you are a transgender who is labeled mentally ill by the christian right and who has been afraid to live in society because of abusive persecution by the so called moral sanctimonious moral majority who also cry like a baby when someone refuses to say merry christmas or kneels during the national anthem. All you holier than thou finger pointers that hate the “left” got some splainin’ to do when you meet your so called maker.
I’d actually be curious to hear about my “religious beliefs”. I tend to think about religions more as philosophical schools of thought. Like stoicisms and Buddhism, but I’m not at all an expert or scholar. Never been a focus of mine. Though I do think it’s equally likely that we live in a simulation as it is we live in a world with one christian God as it’s creator.
Congrats, you are not a religious whack job. So back to your post alleging and criticizing “leftist” group think, you do realize that the whole fox news rush limbaugh infotainment industry is built entirely on the gullibility of the “right”.
If you look at this thread, you called me a stalker. I responded in kind because you have a history of stalking multiple posters. You called me a snowflake. I admit I have called you names in the past (I believe you earned every last one of them) but so far here you are the only one resorting to name calling.
I’ll ask you again. Are they or are they not called opinions when SCOTUS releases rulings? You seem to conveniently failed to answer that question.
I would counter by saying there is definitely group think on the right. There are people who are going to support Trump no matter what, and are not open to debating his spending, criminal activities, Covid policies, etc.
But if you’re purely blaming the right for the development of an “infotainment” industry and implying only the right is gullible, then we disagree. The left just happens to fall more in line with what big moneyed interests are pushing these days, so the right may seem intentionally more fringe.
This is an odd take. If no one cared except the Riley Gaines of the world, those unfairly treated would have no advocates. And, there has been a political movement for those who would oppressed people like Riley. So, I disagree with the only care of it directly impacts you perspective.
The woman who exercised her right to bring a lawsuit should not be denied the system because her issue has become part of a political/culture war. Unconstitutional laws should be a concern to all of us, but especially the SCOTUS. I would agree if your point was that Colorado should have not stepped not the culture war by passing an unconstitutional law.
TCurtis, are you claiming that I started the “stalker” name-calling? Is that your claim?
And, you lie about me stalking anyone. I cannot stop your asinine posts about me. Nor can I get you to understand how message boards work. But, I will try yet again. You post for the “general discussion” (see forum name). If you want a private conversation, use messenger.
I never said SCOTUS opinion are not opinions. I said your comment was wrong.
You started the stalker comments in this thread and followed with the snowflake. In this thread, you literally started the name calling. We havent had many if any interactions weeks prior to this thread.
The post you said I was wrong literally said the rulings by the courts are just opinions. That’s not wrong.
Show me. You use that term with me any time you get uncomfortable. For you to complain about anyone namecalling is hypocritical. But, when I search the word , your post was first. Not just once, but twice.
You are gaslighting. You and some others have used that term, but just because you lie, does not make it true. Anyone who calls someone a stalker for responding to a public message is a snowflake. It’s a freaking public message board. LOL
More gaslighting. I answered your question. You can pretend otherwise over and over, but that is just gaslighting.
Last edited:
Spoken like the true gaslighter. You are a waste of time. Back to ignore you go. You dodge and deflect and then claim to have the moral high ground. You do it constantly because you know you the answers make you look like a fool. Deflect, deflect, deflect. Let’s see you do it again.
Yeah, I am happy to be on your ignore, but you just realized you lied and were caught in a lie, kind of like the Griner thread and others.
Making your case with lies is why no one takes you seriously here.
Ummmm duh, because we’re all sinners. No one can go by all the rules or they’d be perfect. There def are sects of churches that I don’t agree with that judge and look down upon others, like you know, any group of anyone you want to pick.The bible also says you should not judge people. It also says do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Yet I find most christians love to violate these principles more than they love their own god. Again, ain’t no hate like christian love
Wrong. If you were half as perfect as you thought you were, they would’ve nailed your *** to a cross.
So shouldn’t these so called christian folk loke this website designer just accept and serve people regardless instead of judging them and saying no I won’t do a same-sex wedding? Shouldn’t they love and embrace these clients and let god deal with their behavior. I mean a same-sex wedding isn’t hurting anyone and that person’s money is green I presume.