HOMOS BTFO

Essentially the finding is that artistic expression is protected speech AND the Colorado civil rights commission violated the constitutional rights of the baker during their proceedings by repeatedly mocking and denigrating his religious convictions. Which might leave them open to being sued now.

Oooo, so not only they have lost the case, but they could get sued?
Excuse me for a moment, I have an erection to deal with.

Attached: the shit I put up with.jpg (216x640, 18.32K)

It was especially damning for them because the minutes of the hearings are publicly available and the people on the panel were especially brutal in regards to their contempt for his religious beliefs.
On top of that in three seperate cases they ruled in the opposite manner in regards to bakers who refused to put anti-gay messages on cakes.

All nice and fine, for the baker, but the compensation will come from tax payer expenses, the bakers taxes too.

Correct me if I‘m wrong, but the member of the „equal rights commission“ will not be personal liable for the crass infringement of the bakers rights?

Pretty much. Though depending on damages awarded it may make them less likely to do such a thing in future

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
- American Constitution

Siding with either the fags or the Abrahamists would seem to violate the spirit of the Law.

What kind of deterrence against biased officials is it, if the culprit can push the compensation for damages to the public?

Here the Supreme Court ruled that members of the commission showed hostility. That is more than bias, that is intent to hurt the bakers rights by using their position as state official. I think that is pretty serious and should have consequences for the culprits.

Reminder that this entire debate, along with fag marriage, is a jewish red herring meant to get you debating the issue of whether or not to give cakes to fags instead of the real issue that faggots shouldn't be allowed in the society at all.

It isn‘t about fags at all.

It is about jewish power to push revolting degeneracy into your face and making you say how wonderful that is.

It‘s power play.

It is an jewish insult against us
It is an jewish show of power objectively, bend your knee
It is an jewish show of power subjectively, make you believe that shit

NO MORE

Attached: epic-appetizing-cake-fail-goatse1.jpg (533x383, 49.1K)

I wanna see salt though

Reminder that sexuality isn't a thing. There's intercourse with a vagina and penis with the possible end result of procreation, there's foreplay between a man and a woman and literally everything else is mental illness.
Saying "heterosexual" or "vaginal intercourse" just degrades normality so that mental illness can claim equal footing

It is possible they'd be subject to internal disciplinant procedures.
But they've probably all left by now

I like how they're saying it was a "narrow decision".

Attached: donald-trump-short-fingered-vulgarian-fingers-bruce-handy-ss02.jpg (768x917, 107.81K)

/beingsperg

Are not opinions of the reporter to go underneath, or separate, or otherwise be marked by horizontal line breaks both above and below to indicate clerical sections? In what universe is there any sanity present in mixing the clerk's job with the profession's job – it gives the appearance of re-title, re-date, and re-overwrite, which is not permitted. While this document certainly looks nice, and it goes through all the steps to look formal, it yet still commits deep violations of form. Someone fire the publisher, and tell the 'reporter' to go fuck off. They, 'the reporter', if they want to be just a reporter, if that is indeed what they subscribe to and feel their 'safe space' is, then they are to go do what reporters do, which is not to overwrite and co-mingle their place literally out-of-place.

/endsperg.

Fire the court reporter for being jewish.

That‘s it, no personal consequences for the apparatchiks.
There is virtually no risk for them to commit the crassest civil right violations, while the existence, life of citizen are destroyed.

Its not an establishment of religion, its a bakery.

finally
also gender and sex is not the same thing, gender refers to cattle while sex describes either the masculine sex or the feminine sex

Actually. Gender is a word that is in reference to a language construct that is barely (if at all) present in English.
It was present in older formats of the language in line with how people spoke on the continent but was with time dropped almost in its entirety.

What I am asked to believe. Retarded actions by retards, in a theatre of retardation, asked to be ruled on by slightly less retarded retards (ie the court and serial proceedings).

At least it opened correctly. A SAME SEX 'couple' – after stacking media + govt jobs + clerical narrative control with other SAME SEX FAGGOTS – strolled down the street and deliberately engaged in false commerce to provoke and instigate jewish zionism via literal dick wielding faggots. This case, from beginning to end, was about "I care so deeply" lying trolls. Trolls. A supreme court case about trolls – not the good trolls, bad trolls ; Literal faggot subanimal trolls – trying to troll and bait their way to occupy-paradise-commune-takeover. That the upper court has rule the lower court a bastardization, should be made painfully clear, and the lower court dismissed, else the -magnitude- of just how much of this is fucking faggotry will be lost, and all the supreme court's kingdom laid to waste with consanguinity.

“It is a discriminatory practice and unlawful for a person, directly or indirectly, to refuse, withhold from, or deny to an individual or a group, because of disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, or ancestry, the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of a place of public accommodation.”

Attached: 1387152068828.jpg (387x420, 47.67K)

U didn't sage new friend did you?

When it stop putting sage in the name field?

basically
"The "male-or-female sex" sense is attested in English from early 15c. As sex (n.) took on erotic qualities in 20c., gender came to be the usual English word for "sex of a human being," in which use it was at first regarded as colloquial or humorous. Later often in feminist writing with reference to social attributes as much as biological qualities; this sense first attested 1963. Gender-bender is from 1977, popularized from 1980, with reference to pop star David Bowie."
sorry for no archive it isn't loading on my browser
etymonline.com/word/gender

Can someone explain the state of the law to me? Does that mean you can legally deny any kind of service to anyone you don't like? Or is this a religion based ruling?

...