Democrat Party’s Brand Of Intolerance

[USFREEDOM911]

I know they're not a race. I'm asking about race because I'm curious about consistency.
Do you think it's ok to deny service to someone based on race?

Since it has nothing to do with race, then why are you bringing it up; except to try and make them equal, for some reason.

[StoneByStone]

Since it has nothing to do with race, then why are you bringing it up; except to try and make them equal, for some reason.

I want to see if you're consistent or a hypocrite.

[Adolf_Twitler]

My side's intolerance is less shitty than your side's intolerance so there!

lol!

Come on y'all! That was funny!

[USFREEDOM911]

I want to see if you're consistent or a hypocrite.

Untrue; because you're just trying to equate homosexuality and race.

[StoneByStone]

Untrue; because you're just trying to equate homosexuality and race.

Not at all.
You said that it should be legal to refuse to do business with someone for their sexuality. So I'm curious if you also think it should also be legal to refuse to do business with someone for their race.

[USFREEDOM911]

Not at all.
You said that it should be legal to refuse to do business with someone for their sexuality. So I'm curious if you also think it should also be legal to refuse to do business with someone for their race.

And you're still failing; because they are two separate issues, seeing as how a homosexual can be any race.

[StoneByStone]

And you're still failing; because they are two separate issues, seeing as how a homosexual can be any race.

Yes, I know that. You already admitting you think discrimination based on sexuality should be legal. So I'm asking how you feel about other things, such as race. Should discrimination based on race be legal?

[USFREEDOM911]

Yes, I know that. You already admitting you think discrimination based on sexuality should be legal. So I'm asking how you feel about other things, such as race. Should discrimination based on race be legal?

I've never said discrimination based on sexuality should be legal, unless you want to actually provide that supposed post; because you're known for just making up shit and then promoting it as facts.

[Into the Night]

Here's the way it works, bitch.

When you run a business in the secular world, you play by secular rules. There are laws regarding discrimination against certain groups. To review for idiots like you, they include:

Race
Gender
Age
National Origin
Disability
Creed
Religion

In most locations these days, sexual orientation is another. Comprende, dumbfuck?

As for the remainder of your rambling piece of bullshit ->

So...running his business according to his religion is not allowed??? WTF??

[Into the Night]

Not at all.
You said that it should be legal to refuse to do business with someone for their sexuality. So I'm curious if you also think it should also be legal to refuse to do business with someone for their race.

Yes.

I have no problem, for instance, if a black restaurant owner refuses to serve me because I'm not black. It's his restaurant, he can run it the way he wants.

[Into the Night]

Do you know why there are civil rights laws against discrimination, stupid fuck?

Because of idiots like you.

[Into the Night]

And you're still failing; because they are two separate issues, seeing as how a homosexual can be any race.

Quite right. Homosexuality is a choice of behavior. It is not a race.

[Flanders]

FAG UPDATE

Jack Phillips won his case in the Supreme Court, but that is not the end of it:

https://f4.bcbits.com/img/a3859327518_16.jpg

It is never over even though the fat lady is singing:

It’s now been eight years since liberal activists began their campaign to attempt to drive Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips out of business for the sin of refusing to decorate cakes with messages that conflicted with his religious values. Thus far, his antagonists have managed to tie him up in court endlessly, but after the Supreme Court sided with him it sounded as if the brouhaha might be over. No such luck, sadly. One of the usual suspects immediately tried to order a cake from Jack to celebrate his “transition” from male to female. Phillips declined and was promptly sued again. This week, a court in Colorado refused to throw the suit out and ruled that the plaintiff could move forward. (Washington Examiner)

The newest case against Jack Phillips, the infamous owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, cannot be dismissed, a Colorado district court decided Wednesday. Autumn Scardina, a transgender woman, filed a complaint against Phillips in 2017 with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, unsuccessfully. Scardina filed the suit after Phillips declined, due to his religious beliefs, to make a cake celebrating the transition Scardina made from male to female.

Scardina, an attorney, then filed a new lawsuit in state court that seeks monetary damages of more than $100,000 against Phillips. Although attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom had requested that the case be dismissed, the court has decided to let it continue.

The person attempting to drive Phillips from the market is one we’ve heard from before. Autumn Scardina is the same transgender lawyer who previously attempted to force Jack to create a case showing Satan smoking marijuana under an upside-down crucifix.


Phillips is once again being represented by Alliance Defending Freedom. They’re pointing out something that should have been obvious to everyone long before now. Scardina has no interest in purchasing a cake. There are any number of bakers who would jump at the opportunity to pick up some business. What Scardina is trying to do is bankrupt Phillips with nuisance lawsuits and drive him out of business.

Sadly, Phillips is hardly the only business owner to be targeted in this fashion and the tactics are almost always identical. The left identifies a perceived “enemy” of progressive values and tries to drive them out of business. And sometimes there isn’t even an aggrieved party to claim damages.

Here’s one great example I always come back to. Do you remember a small business in Indiana named Memories Pizzaria? It’s the joint that was nearly hounded out of existence after they refused to cater a wedding for a lesbian couple, or at least that’s the legend that you still hear on the left. But the minor detail you rarely hear people discussing is that there never was a lesbian couple. There never was a wedding reception. The entire scenario was fictional.

What really happened was that a local reporter was supposed to do a story on businesses that don’t participate in gay weddings. But after calling around to every caterer in the area, nobody refused. They all wanted the business. So the reporter started calling every place that serves food of any kind and asking if they would be willing to cater a gay wedding until they finally dialed up Memories and the phone was answered by the family’s grandmother who was opposed to gay marriage. (And honestly… who asks a pizza parlor to cater their wedding anyway?) But the shop was instantly “famous” and the mob came to try to shut them down.

That’s what’s happening with Jack Phillips now. And it’s a shame. This entire situation should have been resolved after the Supreme Court ruling, but some agitators will never be satisfied until Jack is driven out of business.

Cancel culture warriors still trying to cancel Masterpiece Cakeshop
Jazz Shaw
Posted at 7:01 pm on May 2, 2020

https://hotair.com/archives/jazz-sha...iece-cakeshop/

[StoneByStone]

Quite right. Homosexuality is a choice of behavior.

[Flanders]

NEVER ENDING UPDATES

I posted numerous messages about involuntary servitude cases since Elane Photography first hit the news:

The New Mexico Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment does not protect the owners of a photography studio who refused, because of their Christians beliefs, to serve a lesbian couple.

Judges order Christians to work for 'gays'
Court rules photographers must violate religious faith
Published: 08/22/2013 at 4:10 PM
BOB UNRUH

http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/judges-or...work-for-gays/

Jack Phillips won his case in the Supreme Court, but that is not the end of it:

I have been posting messages about involuntary servitude cases from the beginning.

NOTE: No plaintiff ‘s lawyer ever fought his client’s case on the grounds of involuntary servitude:

VIII Amendment

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

XIII Amendment

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Every one of those case will drag on until planet Earth is a burned out cinder before Congress and/or an American court put an end to involuntary servitude:

The state of Colorado, which was determined by the Supreme Court to have exhibited "hostility" to Christianity in its prosecution of a baker who declined to create messages that violated his faith, now has put him on trial for the same charge.

The trial for Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop began Monday on the charge that he refused to bake a cake celebrating the anniversary of a man's "transition" to a woman, Courthouse News reported.

The Supreme Court ruled in a previous case in which the state prosecuted him for refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. He has stated will bake cakes for anyone, but he won't create any message that violate his Christian beliefs.

The latest case was brought by a transgender lawyer, Autumn Scardina. The court has thrown out one of the counts in the case, an allegation of deceptive business practices, pointing out that none of the statements relied upon by the plaintiff was an advertisement.

Lawyer John McHugh argued Monday on behalf of Scardina before Denver County Judge Alan Jones that Scardina wanted a cake but was refused "based on her identity."

Scardina admitted she had "vented" against Phillips by writing him emails when his same-sex wedding cake case was going on.

Scardina called him a bigot and hypocrite, according to testimony.

Then Scardina claimed to have forgotten about being upset and wanted Phillips to make a "birthday" cake.

Courthouse News reported Phillips "refused to make a pink cake with blue frosting to celebrate the anniversary of Scardina’s transition, so she filed a new complaint through the Colorado Civil Rights Commission in 2018 claiming gender discrimination."

"Since this was not his first course with the commission, Phillips sued the state for harassment in federal court. In 2019, the state and Phillips reached a settlement and withdrew their complaints, leaving Scardina where she started with an empty plate. She sued the cakeshop directly in Denver state court in June 2019."

Phillips' lawyer, Sean Gates, said the objection was not to the cake or the customer but to the message.

"Jack Phillips’ cakes convey a message," he explained. “But Jack Phillips is a Christian and his religion affects what he can create. Jack Phillips will make cakes for all people, but he cannot make cakes for all messages."

Phillips has a policy of declining to make cakes with messages regarding Halloween, alcohol, racism and marijuana/

In 2017, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 on favor of Phillips. It determined that the state of Colorado's Civil Rights Commission expressed unconstitutional "hostility" toward religion in response to Phillip's conscience-based defense for his actions.

James Dobson, the noted Christian psychologist, agreed with the Supreme Court that Colorado's Civil Rights Commission is biased and exhibits hostility to people of faith.

"We call upon the Colorado legislature to provide unbiased, fair, constitutional due process for all Coloradoans, including people of faith, and to prevent future hostility by this biased government agency," he said in August 2018.

It was Diann Rice, then a member of the state commission, who expressed hostility against Christian faith.

"I would also like to reiterate what we said in the hearing or the last meeting. Freedom of religion and religion has been used to justify all kinds of discrimination throughout history, whether it be slavery, whether it be the Holocaust, whether it be – I mean, we – we can list hundreds of situations where freedom of religion has been used to justify discrimination," she said. "And to me it is one of the most despicable pieces of rhetoric that people can use to – to use their religion to hurt others."

When Scardina filed the case in 2018, the late talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh commented.

"The latest lawsuit against Jack Phillips is – I'm not making this up, now. The latest lawsuit against Jack Phillips, the owner of the Masterpiece Cakeshop, is filed by a guy who harassed the bakery for months, requesting things like a cake with a picture of Satan performing fellatio," he said. "The guy walks in, requested that Jack Phillips bake a cake with a picture of Satan performing fellatio. Of course, Jack Phillips said 'no.'

"This discrimination suit's utterly baseless," he said. "Any person with two functioning brain cells can see."

War on Christian baker now in NINTH year as state puts him on trial
By Bob Unruh
Published March 22, 2021 at 7:22pm

https://www.wnd.com/2021/03/religiou...n-baker-trial/