Supreme Court ducks Important Free Speech Case (Page 3): agree...

Anna M-W Loc: New York City

chrisscholbe wrote:

While .............er photographers to choose from who might actually want to be involved.

agree

Los-Angeles-Shooter Loc: Los Angeles

Checkmate wrote:

Why would a couple of sexual deviant biological errors want a photographer who doesn't approve of their desire for getting married to record their ceremony? It would be like going to a restaurant knowing that the chef disdains you and my slip something very foreign in your food. The photographer may end up shooting some very unflattering photos.

There are two possibilities.

1. The gay couple deliberately set up a Christian photographer to create a court case. And had powerful financial/legal backing at the time they approached the photographer. This is the more likely scenario.
2. The gay couple felt 'dissed' when the Christian photographer turned down the wedding gig, and sued out of vindictiveness. This is unlikely.

In either case there is a notable difference between a "public accommodation" business like a fast food restaurant, and something more private and personal like a photo gig such as this. The court's decision was idiotic, cowardly, and contrary to the constitution since it requires photographers to act against their religious beliefs.

chrisscholbe Loc: Kansas City, MO

Los-Angeles-Shooter wrote:

In either case there is a notable difference between a "public accommodation" business like a fast food restaurant, and something more private and personal like a photo gig such as this. The court's decision was idiotic, cowardly, and contrary to the constitution since it requires photographers to act against their religious beliefs.

My hope is that the courts refused the case in order to avoid having to come up with various lists of what is an isn't a "public accommodation" business.

I still think that, photographers at least, this isn't going to become a big deal. People will tend to choose photographers who want to be there over ones who do not want to be there.

At least that's my hope.

dljen Loc: Central PA

Checkmate wrote:

Why would a couple of sexual deviant biological errors want a photographer who doesn't approve of their desire for getting married to record their ceremony? It would be like going to a restaurant knowing that the chef disdains you and my slip something very foreign in your food. The photographer may end up shooting some very unflattering photos.

You must be a real piece of work to say something like you did. Would you call your grandchild those names? You probably have a gay relative and don't know it or maybe you do and that's why you're spreading such venom. Gays are people, they want to love, unlike you, you are a hater.

Checkmate Loc: Southern California

dljen wrote:

You must be a real piece of work to say something like you did. Would you call your grandchild those names? You probably have a gay relative and don't know it or maybe you do and that's why you're spreading such venom. Gays are people, they want to love, unlike you, you are a hater.

I don't have a problem describing them accurately. Why do you insist on calling them Gay when in reality when they may or may not gay (happy)? As a left-wing 'Bama Brown Shirt' you and your ilk are trying to foist your ideas of right and wrong from your perverted side. My truth may be your perverted venom, but the majority of the world is on my side.
No I don't hate them, but most would be happier according to their own voices if they were normal.

FrumCA

ole sarg wrote:

A private person can do what they want because they ar not in business.

I would certainly hope so but with all the out of control climate of political correctness and folks looking for any lame reason to sue, I really wonder.

chrisscholbe Loc: Kansas City, MO

Checkmate wrote:

No I don't hate them, but most would be happier according to their own voices if they were normal.

Most of the world would be happier if everyone was jsut like them and believed the same things they did.

Possible conversation where everyone thinks the same.

First speaker - I think taxes are too hi.
Everyone Else - I agree.

Silence

First speaker - I think businesses should only have to pay minimum wage.
Everyone Else - I agree.

Silence

First speaker - I think we should ship children of illegal immigrants back with their illegal partents.
Everyone Else - I agree.

Silence

I think you get the idea.

It would be a pretty boring place if everyone was just like everyone else......Can you say Stepford People?

dljen Loc: Central PA

Checkmate wrote:

I don't have a problem describing them accurately. Why do you insist on calling them Gay when in reality when they may or may not gay (happy)? As a left-wing 'Bama Brown Shirt' you and your ilk are trying to foist your ideas of right and wrong from your perverted side. My truth may be your perverted venom, but the majority of the world is on my side.
No I don't hate them, but most would be happier according to their own voices if they were normal.

I take it that you're American and have an understanding of the English language? If not, I suggest you get a dictionary before arguing with ppl on my "perverted side." I'm through answering any of your posts, you've shown yourself to be one of those that were caught up in a lower form of evolution.

Checkmate Loc: Southern California

dljen wrote:

I take it that you're American and have an understanding of the English language? If not, I suggest you get a dictionary before arguing with ppl on my "perverted side." I'm through answering any of your posts, you've shown yourself to be one of those that were caught up in a lower form of evolution.

That puts me about 20 points higher than Neanderthals such as you. Bye.

Shellback Loc: North of Cheyenne Bottoms Wetlands - Kansas

My .02 worth -

If you must argue, remember that it is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in argument

If you must argue, remember, for onlookers, it is impossible to tell which one is the idiot.

Michael66 Loc: Queens, New York

Los-Angeles-Shooter wrote:

The following comment is from an informal legal ne... (show quote)

The photographer could not have been "setup" if she hadn't been an idiot to begin with. She just showed her true colors.

I'm a Christian and I am truly disgusted by how other Christian's treat people. Weren't we taught not to judge others? Ugh. I guess folks that are insecure of their own sexual identity find it necessary to persecute those that have come to accept who and what they are.

Comparing a gay couple getting married to a slaughterhouse? Seriously? That is disturbing on so many levels. We are talking about two people that love each other and want to get married.

In my life, I've known, maybe, two dozen people that were gay. To a person, they were decent human beings, no different than you or I. Well, me. I'm not so sure about the 'you's out there.

Michael66 Loc: Queens, New York

Checkmate wrote:

Did I touch a nerve? Hope I did! I didn't say I hated them as you suggest, but I don't accept their lifestyle. If it is in their genes maybe they should support science to locate that gene to modify it or correct it to become hetrosexual.

:shock: You are an idiot. How the heck did you learn to even login to this site or hold a camera? Wow. Just wow.

chrisscholbe Loc: Kansas City, MO

Checkmate wrote:

That puts me about 20 points higher than Neanderthals such as you. Bye.

I'm curious why you thought it was necessary to name call (calling them a Neanderthal) in order to promote your argument?

Whatever happened to civil discussion?

Photographer Jim Loc: Rio Vista, CA

Checkmate wrote:

I don't have a problem describing them accurately. Why do you insist on calling them Gay when in reality when they may or may not gay (happy)? As a left-wing 'Bama Brown Shirt' you and your ilk are trying to foist your ideas of right and wrong from your perverted side. My truth may be your perverted venom, but the majority of the world is on my side.
No I don't hate them, but most would be happier according to their own voices if they were normal.

I insist on using the term "gay" because my gay friends use the term gay when discussing gay rights issues.

I understand that you plead "accuracy" as your defense, but if you are truly honest you will admit that using the term "sexual deviant biological error" is intended as an insult rather than an effort to promote clarity. You claim that you "don't hate them", so you might consider dropping the use of a term that most people, gay or straight, would consider to be hateful speech.

manderson Loc: Northeast Nebraska

The way to fix it is take the photos, but make sure they are all out of focus. So by the logic of this court, If I call a lawn service to take care of my yard and they say they can't because they don't have the time, they don't really have a choice and can't turn me down. Or I get to sue them.