Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's petition
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's petition
Just released orders this morning.
-
- Posts: 3192
- Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 5:27 pm
Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti
Since Nolan is "generally pro business", and endorsed the gym discriminating on the basis of political beliefs, I'm sure he will be the first to urge the court to rule in favor of the bakers here.
- awesome guy
- Posts: 54187
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
- Party: After 10
- Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti
Heck yeah, time to overturn this travesty of justice.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
-
- Posts: 13399
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm
Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti
depends on which lie of his you beleive tho, he has played both sides in the last few months. I think he believes in wafflesCFB Apologist wrote:Since Nolan is "generally pro business", and endorsed the gym discriminating on the basis of political beliefs, I'm sure he will be the first to urge the court to rule in favor of the bakers here.
- awesome guy
- Posts: 54187
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
- Party: After 10
- Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti
Yep, he's for making ridiculous positions and then feigning disinterest when the ridiculousness is pointed out.cwtcr hokie wrote:depends on which lie of his you beleive tho, he has played both sides in the last few months. I think he believes in wafflesCFB Apologist wrote:Since Nolan is "generally pro business", and endorsed the gym discriminating on the basis of political beliefs, I'm sure he will be the first to urge the court to rule in favor of the bakers here.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti
So, any guesses as to the ruling?
In a sane world, it would be 9-0 in the Baker's favor.
But I think Locke v. Davey seems similar and that one was 7-2 for the pro-religious-discrimination side. (Scalia and Thomas dissented.) Of course, now we have Alito and Roberts instead of O'Conner and Rehnquist and so they might switch to the anti-religious-discrimination side. It still looks like 5-4 against the baker, though.
In a sane world, it would be 9-0 in the Baker's favor.
But I think Locke v. Davey seems similar and that one was 7-2 for the pro-religious-discrimination side. (Scalia and Thomas dissented.) Of course, now we have Alito and Roberts instead of O'Conner and Rehnquist and so they might switch to the anti-religious-discrimination side. It still looks like 5-4 against the baker, though.
Posted from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk
Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti
SupCFB Apologist wrote:Since Nolan is "generally pro business", and endorsed the gym discriminating on the basis of political beliefs, I'm sure he will be the first to urge the court to rule in favor of the bakers here.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti
What did I lie about with regards to this case and the KY t-shirt case?cwtcr hokie wrote:depends on which lie of his you beleive tho, he has played both sides in the last few months. I think he believes in wafflesCFB Apologist wrote:Since Nolan is "generally pro business", and endorsed the gym discriminating on the basis of political beliefs, I'm sure he will be the first to urge the court to rule in favor of the bakers here.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
- HokieHam
- Posts: 26561
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
- Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....
Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti
It's going to be 5-4 for the baker.BigDave wrote:So, any guesses as to the ruling?
In a sane world, it would be 9-0 in the Baker's favor.
But I think Locke v. Davey seems similar and that one was 7-2 for the pro-religious-discrimination side. (Scalia and Thomas dissented.) Of course, now we have Alito and Roberts instead of O'Conner and Rehnquist and so they might switch to the anti-religious-discrimination side. It still looks like 5-4 against the baker, though.
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."
ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
-
- Posts: 13399
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm
Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti
you played both sides of the same argument, it is called being a waffle, congrats, you win either waynolanvt wrote:What did I lie about with regards to this case and the KY t-shirt case?cwtcr hokie wrote:depends on which lie of his you beleive tho, he has played both sides in the last few months. I think he believes in wafflesCFB Apologist wrote:Since Nolan is "generally pro business", and endorsed the gym discriminating on the basis of political beliefs, I'm sure he will be the first to urge the court to rule in favor of the bakers here.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti
The issue the Court will have to decide on is if public accommodation can be denied to someone based on a threatened action from the customer. That is, perhaps a baker can discriminate if the customer informs her that the cake will be used in a fashion which she doesn't approve because of her religion. The Court would have a hard (impossible?) time showing that she could discriminate based simply on who the customer is since in CO, sexual orientation is a protected class.BigDave wrote:So, any guesses as to the ruling?
In a sane world, it would be 9-0 in the Baker's favor.
But I think Locke v. Davey seems similar and that one was 7-2 for the pro-religious-discrimination side. (Scalia and Thomas dissented.) Of course, now we have Alito and Roberts instead of O'Conner and Rehnquist and so they might switch to the anti-religious-discrimination side. It still looks like 5-4 against the baker, though.
Do justice, love mercy, walk humbly.
- awesome guy
- Posts: 54187
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
- Party: After 10
- Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti
Religious liberty > CO law.VisorBoy wrote:The issue the Court will have to decide on is if public accommodation can be denied to someone based on a threatened action from the customer. That is, perhaps a baker can discriminate if the customer informs her that the cake will be used in a fashion which she doesn't approve because of her religion. The Court would have a hard (impossible?) time showing that she could discriminate based simply on who the customer is since in CO, sexual orientation is a protected class.BigDave wrote:So, any guesses as to the ruling?
In a sane world, it would be 9-0 in the Baker's favor.
But I think Locke v. Davey seems similar and that one was 7-2 for the pro-religious-discrimination side. (Scalia and Thomas dissented.) Of course, now we have Alito and Roberts instead of O'Conner and Rehnquist and so they might switch to the anti-religious-discrimination side. It still looks like 5-4 against the baker, though.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti
No, because they were two different cases.cwtcr hokie wrote:you played both sides of the same argument, it is called being a waffle, congrats, you win either waynolanvt wrote:What did I lie about with regards to this case and the KY t-shirt case?cwtcr hokie wrote:depends on which lie of his you beleive tho, he has played both sides in the last few months. I think he believes in wafflesCFB Apologist wrote:Since Nolan is "generally pro business", and endorsed the gym discriminating on the basis of political beliefs, I'm sure he will be the first to urge the court to rule in favor of the bakers here.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
-
- Posts: 13399
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm
Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti
its the same principle, wether a private business has the ability to deny service based on some unprotected classnolanvt wrote:No, because they were two different cases.cwtcr hokie wrote:you played both sides of the same argument, it is called being a waffle, congrats, you win either waynolanvt wrote:What did I lie about with regards to this case and the KY t-shirt case?cwtcr hokie wrote:depends on which lie of his you beleive tho, he has played both sides in the last few months. I think he believes in wafflesCFB Apologist wrote:Since Nolan is "generally pro business", and endorsed the gym discriminating on the basis of political beliefs, I'm sure he will be the first to urge the court to rule in favor of the bakers here.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti
That wasn't the issue in the KY case. It was addressing the question whether or not t-shirt companies should be compelled to design shirts with political messages they disagree with.cwtcr hokie wrote:
its the same principle, wether a private business has the ability to deny service based on some unprotected class
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti
Who is "she"? Everyone involved in this story is a "he".VisorBoy wrote:The issue the Court will have to decide on is if public accommodation can be denied to someone based on a threatened action from the customer. That is, perhaps a baker can discriminate if the customer informs her that the cake will be used in a fashion which she doesn't approve because of her religion. The Court would have a hard (impossible?) time showing that she could discriminate based simply on who the customer is since in CO, sexual orientation is a protected class.BigDave wrote:So, any guesses as to the ruling?
In a sane world, it would be 9-0 in the Baker's favor.
But I think Locke v. Davey seems similar and that one was 7-2 for the pro-religious-discrimination side. (Scalia and Thomas dissented.) Of course, now we have Alito and Roberts instead of O'Conner and Rehnquist and so they might switch to the anti-religious-discrimination side. It still looks like 5-4 against the baker, though.
Posted from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk
Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti
I was referring to a fictional baker as a general case.BigDave wrote:Who is "she"? Everyone involved in this story is a "he".VisorBoy wrote:The issue the Court will have to decide on is if public accommodation can be denied to someone based on a threatened action from the customer. That is, perhaps a baker can discriminate if the customer informs her that the cake will be used in a fashion which she doesn't approve because of her religion. The Court would have a hard (impossible?) time showing that she could discriminate based simply on who the customer is since in CO, sexual orientation is a protected class.BigDave wrote:So, any guesses as to the ruling?
In a sane world, it would be 9-0 in the Baker's favor.
But I think Locke v. Davey seems similar and that one was 7-2 for the pro-religious-discrimination side. (Scalia and Thomas dissented.) Of course, now we have Alito and Roberts instead of O'Conner and Rehnquist and so they might switch to the anti-religious-discrimination side. It still looks like 5-4 against the baker, though.
Do justice, love mercy, walk humbly.