SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    SCOTUS rules (7-2) in favor of Colorado cake baker
Page 1 2 3 4 5 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
SCOTUS rules (7-2) in favor of Colorado cake baker Login/Join 
Info Guru
Picture of BamaJeepster
posted
Held: The Commission’s actions in this case violated the Free Exercise
Clause.

"Whatever the confluence of speech and free exercise principles might be in some cases, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission's consideration of this case was inconsistent with the State's obligation of religious neutrality. The reason and motive for the baker's refusal were based on his sincere religious beliefs and convictions."


Link to decision:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/o...7pdf/16-111_j4el.pdf



“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
- John Adams
 
Posts: 29408 | Location: In the red hinterlands of Deep Blue VA | Registered: June 29, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Lighten up and laugh
Picture of Ackks
posted Hide Post
Wow!! That is fantastic!!!
 
Posts: 7934 | Registered: September 29, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
I believe in the
principle of
Due Process
Picture of JALLEN
posted Hide Post
Note that it is the government entity, not the gay couple, which is on the losing end.




Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.

When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson

"Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown
 
Posts: 48369 | Location: Texas hill country | Registered: July 04, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Wait, what?
Picture of gearhounds
posted Hide Post
Sanity prevails.




“Remember to get vaccinated or a vaccinated person might get sick from a virus they got vaccinated against because you’re not vaccinated.” - author unknown
 
Posts: 15626 | Location: Martinsburg WV | Registered: April 02, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Lighten up and laugh
Picture of Ackks
posted Hide Post
LOL Reuters called 7-2 a narrow win.
 
Posts: 7934 | Registered: September 29, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by JALLEN:
Note that it is the government entity, not the gay couple, which is on the losing end.

It's the gay couple that doesn't get their gay cake.

Still a narrow ruling in my mind if it's based on religion-only.


--------------------------
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.
-- H L Mencken

I always prefer reality when I can figure out what it is.
-- JALLEN 10/18/18
 
Posts: 9177 | Location: Illinois farm country | Registered: November 15, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Shit don't
mean shit
posted Hide Post
I've been to the shop a few times and threw a twenty into his legal defense fund coffee can. I think I'll give him another twenty today.
 
Posts: 5768 | Location: 7400 feet in Conifer CO | Registered: November 14, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Corgis Rock
Picture of Icabod
posted Hide Post
Colorado failed when they publicly demeaned religious beliefs and supported bakers that refuse to bake cakes with anti-gay messages.

quote:
That consideration was compromised, however, by the Commis- sion’s treatment of Phillips’ case, which showed elements of a clear and impermissible hostility toward the sincere religious beliefs moti- vating 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 Hol- ocaust. No commissioners objected to the comments. Nor were they mentioned in the later state-court ruling or disavowed in the briefs filed here. The comments thus cast doubt on the fairness and impar- tiality of the Commission’s adjudication of Phillips’ case.
Another indication of hostility is the different treatment of Phillips’ case and the cases of other bakers with objections to anti-gay mes- sages who prevailed before the Commission. The Commission ruled against Phillips in part on the theory that any message on the re- quested wedding cake would be attributed to the customer, not to the baker. Yet the Division did not address this point in any of the cases involving requests for cakes depicting anti-gay marriage symbolism. The Division also considered that each bakery was willing to sell oth- er products to the prospective customers, but the Commission found Phillips’ willingness to do the same irrelevant.



“ The work of destruction is quick, easy and exhilarating; the work of creation is slow, laborious and dull.
 
Posts: 6060 | Location: Outside Seattle | Registered: November 29, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of sigcrazy7
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Ackks:
LOL Reuters called 7-2 a narrow win.


I think they mean that the decision itself is narrow in scope.



Demand not that events should happen as you wish; but wish them to happen as they do happen, and you will go on well. -Epictetus
 
Posts: 8222 | Location: Utah | Registered: December 18, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Info Guru
Picture of BamaJeepster
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by sigcrazy7:
quote:
Originally posted by Ackks:
LOL Reuters called 7-2 a narrow win.


I think they mean that the decision itself is narrow in scope.


Yes.




“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
- John Adams
 
Posts: 29408 | Location: In the red hinterlands of Deep Blue VA | Registered: June 29, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I am happy to see Kagan siding with the majority here. I'm honestly surprised Sotomayor did not. I wasn't surprised when I saw that Ginsburg authored the dissent.
 
Posts: 500 | Location: Pennsylvania | Registered: December 27, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
I believe in the
principle of
Due Process
Picture of JALLEN
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by newtoSig765:
quote:
Originally posted by JALLEN:
Note that it is the government entity, not the gay couple, which is on the losing end.

It's the gay couple that doesn't get their gay cake.

Still a narrow ruling in my mind if it's based on religion-only.


Point missed!

Colorado can make this baker bake a cake if they keep their mouths shut about his religious objections.




Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.

When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson

"Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown
 
Posts: 48369 | Location: Texas hill country | Registered: July 04, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of CQB60
posted Hide Post
Kagan & Breyer were the two in dissent. Kagan should’ve recused herself due to her “orientation”and Breyer? Just retire...


______________________________________________
Life is short. It’s shorter with the wrong gun…
 
Posts: 13819 | Location: VIrtual | Registered: November 13, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by JALLEN:
Point missed!

Colorado can make this baker bake a cake if they keep their mouths shut about his religious objections.

My early reaction. As more comes out, this decision may not be that major. You're probably right.


--------------------------
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.
-- H L Mencken

I always prefer reality when I can figure out what it is.
-- JALLEN 10/18/18
 
Posts: 9177 | Location: Illinois farm country | Registered: November 15, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Anybody that's spent time around the culinary world knows there's a segment of gay's working in the kitchen, particularly women who overwhelmingly make up the bakery/pastry/dessert field. The fact that there's been a number of gay couples pursuing litigation against private bakery's and their perceived bias, is more proof that their intent is more about legal/social upheaval and less private grievance. Follow the money.
 
Posts: 14692 | Location: Wine Country | Registered: September 20, 2000Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Corgis Rock
Picture of Icabod
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by sigcrazy7:
quote:
Originally posted by Ackks:
LOL Reuters called 7-2 a narrow win.


I think they mean that the decision itself is narrow in scope.


USA Today started with "A divided Supreme Court on Monday absolved a Colorado baker of discrimination for refusing to create a custom wedding cake for a same-sex couple." Read it fast and it sounds more like a 5-4 vote.



“ The work of destruction is quick, easy and exhilarating; the work of creation is slow, laborious and dull.
 
Posts: 6060 | Location: Outside Seattle | Registered: November 29, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of TigerDore
posted Hide Post
This should have never, ever, been a controversy, but given the current state of Leftist influence in this country, I believed this would go 5-4 in favor of the establishment clause. I am pleasantly shocked that it went 7-2. Apparently, even if by accident, all the synapses fired in unison on that day for 2 of the liberal justices. This is truly amazing.



.
 
Posts: 8628 | Registered: September 26, 2013Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of TigerDore
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by JALLEN:

Point missed!

Colorado can make this baker bake a cake if they keep their mouths shut about his religious objections.

If the baker refuses based solely on religious grounds, how could Colorado, or any other government entity, keep its mouth shut about his religious objections?



.
 
Posts: 8628 | Registered: September 26, 2013Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of sigcrazy7
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Icabod:
quote:
Originally posted by sigcrazy7:
quote:
Originally posted by Ackks:
LOL Reuters called 7-2 a narrow win.


I think they mean that the decision itself is narrow in scope.


USA Today started with "A divided Supreme Court on Monday absolved a Colorado baker of discrimination for refusing to create a custom wedding cake for a same-sex couple." Read it fast and it sounds more like a 5-4 vote.


Of course you're spot on. Just look at the wording "absolved ... of discrimination...", assuming the baker was wrong and SCOTUS let him off the hook. My guess is the editor was crying while writing the headline.



Demand not that events should happen as you wish; but wish them to happen as they do happen, and you will go on well. -Epictetus
 
Posts: 8222 | Location: Utah | Registered: December 18, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Shaql
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by CQB60:
Kagan & Breyer were the two in dissent. Kagan should’ve recused herself due to her “orientation”and Breyer? Just retire...


KENNEDY, J.,delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS,C. J.,and BREYER, ALITO, KAGAN, and GORSUCH, JJ., joined.

KAGAN, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which BREYER, J., joined.

GORSUCH, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which ALITO,J., joined.

THOMAS, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, in which GORSUCH, J., joined.

GINSBURG, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOTOMAYOR, J., joined.





Hedley Lamarr: Wait, wait, wait. I'm unarmed.
Bart: Alright, we'll settle this like men, with our fists.
Hedley Lamarr: Sorry, I just remembered . . . I am armed.
 
Posts: 6852 | Location: Atlanta | Registered: April 23, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3 4 5  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    SCOTUS rules (7-2) in favor of Colorado cake baker

© SIGforum 2024