Go to Villagebet.com.au for free horse racing tips - Click here now |
|
THE POSTAL VOTE/POLL |
Post Reply | Page <1 155156157158> |
Author | ||
Dr E
Champion Joined: 05 Feb 2013 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 28563 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I'm going to learn to speak Hungarian.
|
||
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
|
||
stayer
Champion Joined: 10 Aug 2010 Status: Offline Points: 21914 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Been waiting for the usual suspects to raise the issue but strangely quiet (maybe it's been forgotten about by now... short attention spans...)
The SCOTUS has ruled in favour (7-2) of the much laughed at wedding cake guy. Why? |
||
stayer
Champion Joined: 10 Aug 2010 Status: Offline Points: 21914 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Just checked back a couple of pages to see what PT et al were blathering aboyt at that point... and all I get is,
Doc, did you end up seeing the new Star Wars??? |
||
Passing Through
Champion Joined: 09 Jan 2013 Location: At home Status: Offline Points: 79532 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Not quite a victory for the Christians, but a victory for that individual.. They ruled in the bakers favor in this case because they said that not enough consideration was given to the religious argument by the judge, but said that it wouldn't necessarily vote that way again if a judgement was handed down if more fairly considered.
|
||
|
||
stayer
Champion Joined: 10 Aug 2010 Status: Offline Points: 21914 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Mmm... no, they said a bit more than that, which you might like to bear in mind.. |
||
stayer
Champion Joined: 10 Aug 2010 Status: Offline Points: 21914 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
But yes, a victory for the Individual.
|
||
Passing Through
Champion Joined: 09 Jan 2013 Location: At home Status: Offline Points: 79532 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
In this case, not generally
|
||
|
||
Passing Through
Champion Joined: 09 Jan 2013 Location: At home Status: Offline Points: 79532 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
One of the commissioners in the appeal to the civil rights commission had gone on a rant about what damage religion had caused over centuries and the SCOTUS ruled that was inappropriate, so they reversed their ruling.
|
||
|
||
stayer
Champion Joined: 10 Aug 2010 Status: Offline Points: 21914 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Can you find a link to Justice Kennedy's full statement? I can't seem to find it via google |
||
Passing Through
Champion Joined: 09 Jan 2013 Location: At home Status: Offline Points: 79532 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
|
||
stayer
Champion Joined: 10 Aug 2010 Status: Offline Points: 21914 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
... which is bloody amazing really...
The internet makes everyone an expert, but when you want to find facts all you get is endless opinion pieces. I've tried finding the link for 10 mins... all I get is garbage articles... |
||
stayer
Champion Joined: 10 Aug 2010 Status: Offline Points: 21914 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Except for that, which I thought couldn't be pasted because it involves making it a PDF?
|
||
Passing Through
Champion Joined: 09 Jan 2013 Location: At home Status: Offline Points: 79532 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Supreme Court rules in favor of baker who would not make wedding cake for gay couple
The Supreme Court on Monday ruled for a Colorado baker who refused to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, but it left undecided whether a business owner’s religious beliefs or free speech rights can justify refusing some services to gay people. Instead, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s 7-to-2 decision focused on what he described as religious bias on the part of Colorado Civil Rights Commission members who ruled against baker Jack Phillips, who owns Masterpiece Cakeshop. “The neutral and respectful consideration to which Phillips was entitled was compromised here,” Kennedy wrote, adding that the commission’s decision that the baker violated the state’s anti-discrimination law must be set aside. But Kennedy acknowledged that the decision was more of a start than a conclusion to the court’s consideration of the rights of those with religious objections to same-sex marriage and the rights of gay people, who “cannot be treated as social outcasts or as inferior in dignity and worth.” Future cases that raise those issues “must be resolved with tolera.... |
||
|
||
stayer
Champion Joined: 10 Aug 2010 Status: Offline Points: 21914 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Worth a read, for anyone who takes the effort.
|
||
stayer
Champion Joined: 10 Aug 2010 Status: Offline Points: 21914 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
The PDF, I mean - not the article! |
||
stayer
Champion Joined: 10 Aug 2010 Status: Offline Points: 21914 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Surely you can see how selective that (and evry google-able) article is, compared to the full statement- not to mention the unsaid things in the statement.
Why was this a 7-2 decision? And why is it being reported (on google) as "narrow"? Worth a bit of digging in to. |
||
Passing Through
Champion Joined: 09 Jan 2013 Location: At home Status: Offline Points: 79532 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Not everyone wants to wade through a 59 page judgement.
The narrowness refers not to the margin of the vote, but the scope of the ruling. They ruled on that narrow point of the discriminatory comment by the commissioner.
|
||
|
||
ExceedAndExcel
Champion Joined: 20 Dec 2008 Status: Offline Points: 16245 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
It was “narrow” in what it was ruling on, not “narrow” in the margin of the decision - obviously 7-2 is not even close. |
||
stayer
Champion Joined: 10 Aug 2010 Status: Offline Points: 21914 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Why was it 7-2? (Not everybody wants to read through a 59 page ruling) |
||
Passing Through
Champion Joined: 09 Jan 2013 Location: At home Status: Offline Points: 79532 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
2 dissented. They ruled on the basis of the overall discrimination against the customers, rather than that narrower area of the anti religious bias by a single commissioner.
|
||
|
||
stayer
Champion Joined: 10 Aug 2010 Status: Offline Points: 21914 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
5 didn't. |
||
maccamax
Champion Joined: 18 Jun 2010 Status: Offline Points: 41473 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Funny Old Thread.
When will you lot realise , Crumpet is like electricity. Costly and Deadly if you touch it. |
||
RED HUNTER
Champion Joined: 21 Jun 2010 Location: PERTH Status: Offline Points: 16334 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
THE CAKE ISSUE
I saw a wonderful cartoon in THE AUSTRALIAN The Baker in the background and his female assistant returns to the gay male couple at the counter she " He says he will make the cake but you'll have to put the 2 little men on top of cake,yourself "
|
||
Dr E
Champion Joined: 05 Feb 2013 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 28563 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
... yes thanks stayer ... a very entertaining and at the same time, virtuous movie! Yes, bit of a blow for those gelati stirrers () who wouldn't support the cake shop that was run by fags! Can't blame them, you never know what they stick in the cake mix! ... or maybe they did know!
|
||
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
|
||
Dr E
Champion Joined: 05 Feb 2013 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 28563 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
That is simply the slant of the "progressive" meeja stayer, when it comes to ringing in the virtue signalling, and the click bait chasers just follow suit! ... but I must admit, it is unlike CNNPT to be lazy about finding impartial coverage on a subject like this ... maybe he was the one caught licking the spoon at the other cake shop!
|
||
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
|
||
ThreeBears
Champion Joined: 13 Apr 2017 Status: Offline Points: 2911 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Here's a pertinent part of the ruling you may find interesting Stayer -
That consideration was compromised, however, by the Commission’s treatment of Phillips’ case, which showed elements of a clear and impermissible hostility toward the sincere religious beliefs motivating his objection.
As the record shows, some of the commissioners at the Commission’s formal, public hearings endorsed the view that religious beliefs cannot legitimately be carried into the public sphere or commercial domain, disparaged Phillips’ faith as despicable and characterized it as merely rhetorical, and compared his invocation of his sincerely held religious beliefs to defenses of slavery and the Holocaust. No commissioners objected to the comments. Nor were they mentioned in the later state-court ruling |
||
ThreeBears
Champion Joined: 13 Apr 2017 Status: Offline Points: 2911 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
"When the Colorado Civil Rights Commission considered this case, it did not do so with the religious neutrality that the Constitution requires."
|
||
stayer
Champion Joined: 10 Aug 2010 Status: Offline Points: 21914 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Ah thabks 3B, I knew there was a reason. PT and the media must have missed it.
|
||
Tlazolteotl
Champion Joined: 02 Oct 2012 Location: Elephant Butte Status: Offline Points: 31448 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
That makes no sense to me. Sincerely held religious beliefs are often nutty, discriminatory, sexist, racist and so on. That's why you have the law of the land.
|
||
Carioca
Champion Joined: 13 Nov 2015 Status: Offline Points: 21830 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Nice to see Austria putting their foot down on parts of the Muslim community, shutting down mosques and clamping down on their ideals.
|
||
Post Reply | Page <1 155156157158> |
Tweet |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |