scotsman

Joined

• started 36 topics
• posted 1,446 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by scotsman

• 
  286

  Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Baker Who Refused to Bake Cake for Gay Couple

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  seems like such an obviously correct decision to overturn the previous overreach - it should never have been necessary to go to the supreme court but happened because the rights of the religious were being ignored.. as the fundamental level, no one should be able to compel you to work for them or to provide services that go against your beliefs, and certainly not have the government be able to force you to comply.. if this was allowed there would be so many unreconcilable situations that would clog up courts over nonsense.. i also have little patience for these activists that intentionally look to be offended.

  it really doesn't do their cause any good to go round looking to make trouble for people.

  it's also misguided because it ends up strengthening religious rights over effectively stupid issues.. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.html.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scotsman

  Neither NFL players nor Westboro are selling a commercial service.
• 
  286

  Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Baker Who Refused to Bake Cake for Gay Couple

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  seems like such an obviously correct decision to overturn the previous overreach - it should never have been necessary to go to the supreme court but happened because the rights of the religious were being ignored.. as the fundamental level, no one should be able to compel you to work for them or to provide services that go against your beliefs, and certainly not have the government be able to force you to comply.. if this was allowed there would be so many unreconcilable situations that would clog up courts over nonsense.. i also have little patience for these activists that intentionally look to be offended.

  it really doesn't do their cause any good to go round looking to make trouble for people.

  it's also misguided because it ends up strengthening religious rights over effectively stupid issues.. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.html.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scotsman

  Custom artwork as personal service hasn’t washed with the Arizona court. It’s not free speech it’s a commercial service.
• 
  286

  Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Baker Who Refused to Bake Cake for Gay Couple

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  seems like such an obviously correct decision to overturn the previous overreach - it should never have been necessary to go to the supreme court but happened because the rights of the religious were being ignored.. as the fundamental level, no one should be able to compel you to work for them or to provide services that go against your beliefs, and certainly not have the government be able to force you to comply.. if this was allowed there would be so many unreconcilable situations that would clog up courts over nonsense.. i also have little patience for these activists that intentionally look to be offended.

  it really doesn't do their cause any good to go round looking to make trouble for people.

  it's also misguided because it ends up strengthening religious rights over effectively stupid issues.. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.html.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scotsman

  Some viagra for the thread: The Masterpiece vs Colorado decision has already had consequences.

  The Brush & Nib Studio in Phoenix must provide their artistic services to LGBT couples in a preemptive lawsuit brought by the Alliance Defending Freedom (note, not brought by bothersome SJWs). See Phoenix Business Journal. And the decision quotes the Colorado case.

  Looks like the gays don't have to ride at the back of the bus in Arizona.
• 
  286

  Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Baker Who Refused to Bake Cake for Gay Couple

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  seems like such an obviously correct decision to overturn the previous overreach - it should never have been necessary to go to the supreme court but happened because the rights of the religious were being ignored.. as the fundamental level, no one should be able to compel you to work for them or to provide services that go against your beliefs, and certainly not have the government be able to force you to comply.. if this was allowed there would be so many unreconcilable situations that would clog up courts over nonsense.. i also have little patience for these activists that intentionally look to be offended.

  it really doesn't do their cause any good to go round looking to make trouble for people.

  it's also misguided because it ends up strengthening religious rights over effectively stupid issues.. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.html.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scotsman

  But would that sign be incorrect if it hung in Masterpiece Bakery? It would be honest. Perhaps he could add "due to sincerely held beliefs" to soften it.

  And if it's acceptable to refuse to make a custom made gay wedding cake it should be acceptable for a photographer to say they'll take your portrait but not your gay wedding photos, or MC your birthday party but not your gay wedding.
• 
  286

  Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Baker Who Refused to Bake Cake for Gay Couple

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  seems like such an obviously correct decision to overturn the previous overreach - it should never have been necessary to go to the supreme court but happened because the rights of the religious were being ignored.. as the fundamental level, no one should be able to compel you to work for them or to provide services that go against your beliefs, and certainly not have the government be able to force you to comply.. if this was allowed there would be so many unreconcilable situations that would clog up courts over nonsense.. i also have little patience for these activists that intentionally look to be offended.

  it really doesn't do their cause any good to go round looking to make trouble for people.

  it's also misguided because it ends up strengthening religious rights over effectively stupid issues.. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.html.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scotsman

  Apologies, I meant the sign should read "custom made wedding things for heterosexuals only"
• 
  286

  Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Baker Who Refused to Bake Cake for Gay Couple

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  seems like such an obviously correct decision to overturn the previous overreach - it should never have been necessary to go to the supreme court but happened because the rights of the religious were being ignored.. as the fundamental level, no one should be able to compel you to work for them or to provide services that go against your beliefs, and certainly not have the government be able to force you to comply.. if this was allowed there would be so many unreconcilable situations that would clog up courts over nonsense.. i also have little patience for these activists that intentionally look to be offended.

  it really doesn't do their cause any good to go round looking to make trouble for people.

  it's also misguided because it ends up strengthening religious rights over effectively stupid issues.. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.html.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scotsman

  Nothing gives some members of JWD a raging hard-on quite like a gay topic.

  Looks very like a short term win for the baker if you read the grounds for the decision: it wasn't about protecting Masterpiece's right to freedom of religious belief but about the fact that Colorado was hostile to their religious views, describing them "despicable". It was this that was impermissible. The ruling does not settle the wider issues referred to in this thread.

  If the USA were to allow bakers, photographers, MC, musicians, venues to say no to legal gay weddings on religious grounds, are they to post "Heterosexuals Only" in their shops and on their websites? I'd rather know than ask and be refused...

  For the record, I think marriage and weddings are an anachronism.
• 
  170

  UK justice..

  by zeb in

  1. social
  2. current

  tommie robinson has reported often about what he sees as the demise of british society by the imposition of 'sharia' norms.. https://www.infowars.com/update-tommy-robinson-gets-13-months-for-livestreaming-outside-courthouse/?utm_source=nightly+newsletter&utm_campaign=9e3ceb30f6-email_campaign_2018_05_25_03_10&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_e12661a83c-9e3ceb30f6-38680565.

  yesterday he was jailed for 13 months for reporting outside a court in the uk.

  his was a non violent offence.. what no community service?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scotsman

  Tommy Robinson is just an ordinary bloke

  yeah, we've all joined the BNP by mistake at some time or another. #apologist
  
  
• 
  43

  Did You Ever Luke ANY Songs From The “Songbook “?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i went on line looking for old jw songs and some of them were pretty good and some were just awful!.

  did you ever like any of those songs?

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scotsman

  cofty

  lazarus lay sleeping, in a cold stone grave...
• 
  9

  UK Guardian article on JW child abuse

  by scotsman in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  published today.

  jehovah's witnesses accused of silencing victims of child abuse.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scotsman

  Published today

  Jehovah's Witnesses accused of silencing victims of child abuse
  
• 
  22

  Disfellowshipped/disassociated – How did your parents handle it?

  by Richard_I in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  to those who were disfellowshipped/disassociated – how did your still-in parents handle it?.

  i don’t want to fade, so i am thinking about disassociating soon – i don’t care if i’m playing by the org’s rules, i just want out.. however, i am concerned about how my parents will react.

  i don’t want them to become super depressed or whatever due to me leaving the org.. i don’t want them to be hurt by my decision to leave the org, but i feel like there is no way of avoiding this..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scotsman

  I'm not DA/DF but my departure still left my mother in a permanently depressed state and she no longer sees me - it was tears every six months anyway.

  It'll hurt them however you leave but it's not you, it's the religion that's hurting them.