Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's petition

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
Post Reply
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's petition

Post by USN_Hokie »

Just released orders this morning.
CFB Apologist
Posts: 3192
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 5:27 pm

Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti

Post by CFB Apologist »

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.
User avatar
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

Post by awesome guy »

Heck yeah, time to overturn this travesty of justice.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti

Post by cwtcr hokie »

CFB 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.
depends on which lie of his you beleive tho, he has played both sides in the last few months. I think he believes in waffles
User avatar
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

Post by awesome guy »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
CFB 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.
depends on which lie of his you beleive tho, he has played both sides in the last few months. I think he believes in waffles
Yep, he's for making ridiculous positions and then feigning disinterest when the ridiculousness is pointed out.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
BigDave
Posts: 8012
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 11:20 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Republican

Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti

Post by BigDave »

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
nolanvt
Posts: 13116
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:01 pm
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.

Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti

Post by nolanvt »

CFB 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.
Sup


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
nolanvt
Posts: 13116
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:01 pm
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.

Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti

Post by nolanvt »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
CFB 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.
depends on which lie of his you beleive tho, he has played both sides in the last few months. I think he believes in waffles
What did I lie about with regards to this case and the KY t-shirt case?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
User avatar
HokieHam
Posts: 26373
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

Post by HokieHam »

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.
It's going to be 5-4 for the baker.
Image
"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
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti

Post by cwtcr hokie »

nolanvt wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
CFB 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.
depends on which lie of his you beleive tho, he has played both sides in the last few months. I think he believes in waffles
What did I lie about with regards to this case and the KY t-shirt case?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
you played both sides of the same argument, it is called being a waffle, congrats, you win either way
VisorBoy
Posts: 4404
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 9:13 pm

Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti

Post by VisorBoy »

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.
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.
Do justice, love mercy, walk humbly.
User avatar
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

Post by awesome guy »

VisorBoy wrote:
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.
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.
Religious liberty > CO law.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
nolanvt
Posts: 13116
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:01 pm
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.

Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti

Post by nolanvt »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
CFB 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.
depends on which lie of his you beleive tho, he has played both sides in the last few months. I think he believes in waffles
What did I lie about with regards to this case and the KY t-shirt case?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
you played both sides of the same argument, it is called being a waffle, congrats, you win either way
No, because they were two different cases.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti

Post by cwtcr hokie »

nolanvt wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
CFB 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.
depends on which lie of his you beleive tho, he has played both sides in the last few months. I think he believes in waffles
What did I lie about with regards to this case and the KY t-shirt case?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
you played both sides of the same argument, it is called being a waffle, congrats, you win either way
No, because they were two different cases.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
its the same principle, wether a private business has the ability to deny service based on some unprotected class
nolanvt
Posts: 13116
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:01 pm
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.

Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti

Post by nolanvt »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
its the same principle, wether a private business has the ability to deny service based on some unprotected class
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.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
User avatar
BigDave
Posts: 8012
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 11:20 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Republican

Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti

Post by BigDave »

VisorBoy wrote:
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.
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.
Who is "she"? Everyone involved in this story is a "he".
Posted from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk
VisorBoy
Posts: 4404
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 9:13 pm

Re: Supreme Court is going to hear the Colorado baker's peti

Post by VisorBoy »

BigDave wrote:
VisorBoy wrote:
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.
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.
Who is "she"? Everyone involved in this story is a "he".
I was referring to a fictional baker as a general case.
Do justice, love mercy, walk humbly.
Post Reply