US supreme court strikes blow against LGBTQ+ rights with Colorado ruling

[Desk trauma]

No need for signage on a business, if homosexuals want to push their agenda on a Christian business it will be refused, as simple as it gets

Again, why waste the time when you could have "homosexuals need not enter" right on the door?

 

[BPPLEE]

Sounds like criminal mob rule against American citizens and a Supreme Court ruling

I understand and the case was an important ruling but there’s no need to stir up controversy when it’s not necessary. Like you said no sign required

 

[Truth7t7]

Yep, so go on and get it out in the open what clients you refuse to work with.

No need to give the issue homosexuality any advertising on a Christian business, their agenda will be settled quickly in person

One thing is a fact, the conservative US Supreme Court is unraveling the progressive liberal agenda that took decades of liberal decisions to build, like a ball of yarn in a tornado, thank you Jesus!

 

[BPPLEE]

Again, why waste the time when you could have "homosexuals need not enter" right on the door?

The issue was a gay wedding that the designer had a religious objection to. I don’t think that’s blanket permission to refuse service to gay people for any reason

 

[Sabri]

I see your point. But if I don’t want to do a job I shouldn’t have to explain why. If I don’t want the business I should just be able to say I can’t do it. Put up a sign that says “I don’t do work for LGBTQ people “ and you’re asking for trouble.

Right. I have a business it’s my right to say no or yes. If i don’t want your money or business just be ok with it.

 

[Truth7t7]

I understand and the case was an important ruling but there’s no need to stir up controversy when it’s not necessary. Like you said no sign required

A very important ruling, the homosexual woke agenda has been stopped dead in its tracks!

Decades of liberal rulings undone, and conservative Americans now have open freedom to stand up without the worry of being hit with intentional frivolous lawsuits, like the brave cake baker in Colorado (Jack Phillips) 2-3 lawsuits and targeted by the progressive liberal homosexual community

Freedom Rings "Case Closed"!

 

[Desk trauma]

No need to give the issue homosexuality any advertising on a Christian business, their agenda will be settled quickly in person

Waste of time, the sign would go nicely next to the no smoking one.

 

[Hammster]

I’m onboard, so long as they have prominent signage at their business entrances and in their advertising indicating who they refuse to serve.

Why? It will get out on its own.

 

[Truth7t7]

Waste of time, the sign would go nicely next to the no smoking one.

Is that a trolley or a trolling?

 

[Desk trauma]

Is that a trolley or a trolling?

Its my proposal for an out to public accommodation laws. You get to discriminate, you just have to be up front about it.

 

[Truth7t7]

Its my proposal for an out to public accommodation laws. You get to discriminate, you just have to be up front about it.

Your proposal is DOA, it will be taken care of at the business counter, no need to use a Christian business in advertising for homosexuals or their agendas, next!

 

[Belk]

The sense I get from this thread is people want the right to discriminate but for some reason it's an issue to let people know this up front.

 

[Desk trauma]

You’re likely to lose a lot business

Wouldn't the silent majority be beating a path to your door?

 

[JSRG]

The issue was a gay wedding that the designer had a religious objection to. I don’t think that’s blanket permission to refuse service to gay people for any reason

Yes, this was a case where the objection was (as far as I can understand) not to who was the customer, but the specific product the customer wanted. It's an objection to the product being requested, not the person requesting the product.

 

[Sabri]

Waste of time, the sign would go nicely next to the no smoking one.

Hmm. No smoking. That’s been taken care of long time ago. Most people with a brain do not try to smoke indoors.

 

[Desk trauma]

No need to give the issue homosexuality any advertising on a Christian business, their agenda will be settled quickly in person

One thing is a fact, the conservative US Supreme Court is unraveling the progressive liberal agenda that took decades of liberal decisions to build, like a ball of yarn in a tornado, thank you Jesus!

Lawrence Vs Texas next up?

 

[Truth7t7]

Lawrence Vs Texas next up?

I think (Obergefell V. Hodges) will be up next, then (Lawrence V. Texas)

FoxNews​

Clarence Thomas mentions Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell as examples of rulings that could be reconsidered​

Jun 24, 2022

 

[A2SG]

I think (Obergefell V. Hodges) will be up next, then (Lawrence V. Texas)

FoxNews​

Clarence Thomas mentions Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell as examples of rulings that could be reconsidered​

Jun 24, 2022

I guess the long-standing fear of the SCOTUS becoming judicial activists is finally being realized.

-- A2SG, who knew it was more a hope than a fear......

 

[Bradskii]

Why? It will get out on its own.

This wasn't a specific case of someone wanting something and the woman demanding the right to refuse. She said she WILL want the right to refuse any request with which she disagrees.

It seems a lot of work and a lot of dollars spent taking this right-to-deny-but-yet-to-be-requested video to the SC. But now she's got it then I also think she should make her position clear. If you don't allow people in your establishment without a shirt, then put up a notice. If you don't want hen parties celebrated in your bar, then put up a notice. If you don't want to produce a video for gay people getting married, then make that clear upfront.

What is it with you guys that if someone gets what they want, you don't want them to advertise it?

Well, dumb question really, wasn't it. We know the answer. We know that you are kinda worried that as the vast majority of people have no problem with gay marriage and would think the woman wrong to refuse a gay couple then that majority would make the decision not to use her services. But you don't don't want that.

But I do. I certainly do. I most definitely want to know who in my local area discriminates against gay people. And I guarantee a lot of other people would like to know. And would pass on that information to others.

I mean, really...what do you actually think would happen?

 

[Truth7t7]

I guess the long-standing fear of the SCOTUS becoming judicial activists is finally being realized.

-- A2SG, who knew it was more a hope than a fear......

More like rightly interpreting the constitution as it should have been long ago, when the liberals took majority and practiced political activism

To think the liberal justice Ketanji couldn't define what a "Woman" is when asked by congress, talk about political activism, woke, woke, woke til ur broke!

I can't wait to see same sex marriage in Obergefell V. Hodges reversed, and the definition of (Personhood) being established as at conception, that would be icing on the cake!

Hang on to your hat, it's coming soon!