Judge Rules In Favor Of Christian T-Shirt Company That Declined To Print T-Shirts For A Gay Pride Festival
[guest post by Dana]
Back in November, I posted about the T-shirt company Hands On Original, whose owner Blaine Adamson had declined a request by the Gay and Lesbian Services Organization of Lexington to make shirts for an upcoming Lexington Pride Festival. Adamson declined, not wanting to violate his religious beliefs by endorsing groups or events he did not agree with:
To be very clear, Hands On Originals does not and never has discriminated against any individuals or groups. As my earlier statement clarifies, we both employ and do business with people from all walks of life.
My decision not to print the shirts requested of us has nothing to do with who was ordering the shirts; it had only to do with the message of the shirts no matter who was ordering them.
In this situation, the message is in disagreement with my values. My faith calls me to love all people regardless of whether they share my values or not.
As result of Adamson’s decision, the Kentucky Human Rights Commission ruled that he had violated a city law prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Yesterday, in a heartening decision, a Lexington judge sided with Adamson and overturned the commission’s ruling:
A judge in Lexington has ruled in favor of a shop that refused to print gay pride festival T-shirts.
The ruling Monday by Fayette County Circuit Judge James Ishmael overturns a decision by the city’s Human Rights Commission. The commission had ruled in 2014 that the print shop, Hands On Originals, violated a city law that bans discrimination based on a person’s sexual orientation. The shop says it has refused several jobs because of its Christian beliefs.
Ishmael said the Human Rights Commission went beyond its statutory authority in siding with the Gay and Lesbian Services Organization. The judge said that the print shop’s refusal in 2012 was based on the message of the gay group and pride festival and “not on the sexual orientation of its representatives or members.”
Ishmael said the business never inquired about the sexual orientation of the representatives from the Gay and Lesbian Services Organization. The owners of Hands On Originals have “treated homosexual and heterosexual groups the same,” Ishmael wrote, noting that the business has in the past turned down orders for shirts promoting strip clubs and containing violent messages.
The Gay, Lesbian Service Organization released a statement:
We feel that this is just a reminder that there are still many out there who feel that their citizenship is worth more than that of members of the (gay, lesbian and transgender) community.
The Alliance Defense Fund, which argued on behalf of the shop, stated:
The government can’t force citizens to surrender free-speech rights or religious freedom in order to run a small business, and this decision affirms that
–Dana
Hello.
Dana (86e864) — 4/28/2015 @ 5:04 pmwhen christian bigots assert that gay people are inherently unchristian it makes it hard to feel sorry for them when their bigot asses get sued
happyfeet (831175) — 4/28/2015 @ 5:09 pmthis is pretty much the same ruling that a Colorado court had going the other way, a homosexual sign company (think it was t-shirts too) did not have to do work entailing anti-SameSexMarriage.
seeRpea (181740) — 4/28/2015 @ 5:12 pmhere’s a picture of the oh so unchristian “message” the trashy pseudo-christian bigots refused to print
happyfeet (831175) — 4/28/2015 @ 5:16 pmclear beyond dispute srsly?
this idiot momo kentuckyslut judge divined an awful lot of intent from the could-not-be-less-offensive imagery linked in #4
he made up a lot of crap basically
I do not respect his authoritah.
happyfeet (831175) — 4/28/2015 @ 5:26 pmMr. Feets – What about the Crusades?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/28/2015 @ 5:28 pmthe Crusades are what happen when people run off half-cocked without sitting down and making a spreadsheet first where in one column you put Reasons FOR Crusades and in the other column you lost Reasons AGAINST Crusades
happyfeet (831175) — 4/28/2015 @ 5:30 pm
happyfeet (831175) — 4/28/2015 @ 5:31 pmlostput==Ishmael said the business never inquired about the sexual orientation of the representatives from the Gay and Lesbian Services Organization. ==
Like an inquiry was necessary? I have to admit this sentence made me chuckle a little bit.
elissa (6a947f) — 4/28/2015 @ 5:31 pmR.I.P. Jack Ely, lead singer of The Kingsmen, whose one hit, “Louie Louie,” was a wonder.
Icy (d962d5) — 4/28/2015 @ 5:33 pmMr. Feets – That’s a really ghey T-shirt. If I owned a T-shirt business I would be embarrassed to print it for a customer.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/28/2015 @ 5:49 pmi think you’re exaggerating how embarrassed you would actually be to print that t-shirt for a customer if you owned a T-shirt business
happyfeet (831175) — 4/28/2015 @ 5:51 pmhey happyfeet, surely in Lexington there must be Tshirt stores run by fags or dykes. why not get the shirts done there, to patronize a sympathetic company? this whole tactic is just an attempt by the pinkshirts to persecute those who disagree with them.
John Cunningham (9f3ba7) — 4/28/2015 @ 5:55 pmno it is not a tactic Mr. Cunningham
the tactics here are all on the side of the hatey plaintiff and this squirrelly loser judge trying to hide their rank bigotry behind the gay marriage issue
this is NOT even a little bit a gay marriage issue
look at the image
no message there about marriage
it’s as anodyne as anything you can ever imagine
raindrops on roses
whiskers on kittens
happy t-shirts with the number 5 on them
happyfeet (831175) — 4/28/2015 @ 5:58 pmHappyfeet – what else would you force people to do? What limiting principle is there to your fascist principles?
JD (3b5483) — 4/28/2015 @ 6:26 pmI never said I would force nobody to do nothing I said this is no bueno
happyfeet (831175) — 4/28/2015 @ 6:27 pmThis is what happens when courts and governments get involved.. the old fashioned way of doing things meant you’d give your business to someone else. Maybe tell everyone you know not to do business with them…. tshirts aren’t that tough to come by… you can get them online and shipped to your door in 3 days
steveg (fed1c9) — 4/28/2015 @ 6:28 pmhappyfeet,
You conveniently ignore that there is an attempt being made these days to force individual citizens to surrender their free-speech rights and/or religious freedoms. Doesn’t that concern you?
Dana (86e864) — 4/28/2015 @ 6:29 pmWe can talk more tomorrow Dana is bedtime
happyfeet (831175) — 4/28/2015 @ 6:30 pmIt’ll likely be reversed on appeal. Gay tyranny will run a few more years until Muslims take over. Hopefully, I’ll be gone by then.
Mike K (90dfdc) — 4/28/2015 @ 6:30 pmThat, to me, steveg, is why I don’t believe this had really anything to do with a business not providing an item the gays wanted, rather it was about forcing someone to be punished for living their principles. This is just a microcosm of the real battle taking place. Zealots forcing others to bend to their will, all the while surrendering to government.
If this really were about t-shirts for an event, they would have done just what you said – they would have taken their business elsewhere. But it wasn’t about t-shirts.
Dana (86e864) — 4/28/2015 @ 6:32 pmAs a non-lawyer looking on, I’m guessing that part of the winning argument was that the business owner had turned down other business because he did not like what he was being asked to print.
If they appeal it, I can only guess the argument is something like if you don’t agree to support a gay pride festival then you are guilty of hate-think, and hate-think is close enough to hate-speech, and if there isn’t a law against it, there ought to be.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 4/28/2015 @ 6:38 pmbut feets, how would you feel if it was for a transvestite pride festival, because you’ve said very uncomplimentary things about them.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 4/28/2015 @ 6:41 pmI have to admit this sentence made me chuckle a little bit.
elissa (6a947f) — 4/28/2015 @ 5:31 pm
That sounds like classic lawyerese to me.
“How could I have discriminated against them for being gay when I didn’t know whether or not they were gay?”
a case of blind justice as Arlo would say
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 4/28/2015 @ 6:46 pmIf you think someone is ignorant, backwards and hateful, why not just let them alone to die in the infectious pus of their own boils and call it a day. Who needs government
steveg (fed1c9) — 4/28/2015 @ 6:52 pmI realize facts will never get in the way of your need to will to power, happyfascist, but Christians don’t assert that. They’re no more un-Christian than a lot of other people. As long as they turn to Christ and away from sin.
1 Corinthians 6:10
I know you’re going misrepresent this, but if you’re going to be a Christian you have to follow Christ. Not demand Christ follow you.
Steve57 (08cad4) — 4/28/2015 @ 7:05 pmHe won’t be back. He knows he’s one more insane outburst from oblivion on this site.
Gazzer (c1d25a) — 4/28/2015 @ 7:07 pmShort answer, no.
Steve57 (08cad4) — 4/28/2015 @ 7:08 pmThey may not have been gay themselves. Just like whoever went in to get T-shirts printed up to promote a strip club may not have been straight.
Steve57 (08cad4) — 4/28/2015 @ 7:12 pmTime to chime in with a totally irrelevant link.
http://scribol.com/environment/adorable-snapshots-of-stray-puppies-who-stole-the-hearts-of-soldiers-in-afghanistan/1
Warning. It has enough fancy flashing sidebars I would not be surprised if it set someone’s adware off.
kishnevi (9c4b9c) — 4/28/2015 @ 7:14 pmThis shop was just one of three vendors they brought they went to for custom T-shirts. And considering the owners of HOO had a sign prominently displayed saying that they were Christians, and wouldn’t print any message on a T-shirt that violated their beliefs, you have to conclude they were targeted precisely because of that sign.
Steve57 (08cad4) — 4/28/2015 @ 7:15 pmThey have to mandate what they claim everybody wants. It t’were true then these businesses would wither on the vine from lack of custom. See also: If Obamacare is so awesome why must it be mandatory?
Gazzer (c1d25a) — 4/28/2015 @ 7:15 pmNotice how the gaystapo does the classic fascist role reversal. The bullies claim to be victims of those they tried to bully.
Naturally it’s he other way around the gay Nazis think their rights are more important than the second class Christian citizens. Who have no First Amendment rights. Or any rights at all.
Which makes happyfeets happy.
Steve57 (08cad4) — 4/28/2015 @ 7:20 pmthe tactics here are all on the side of the hatey plaintiff and this squirrelly loser judge
Happyfeet, you’re an interesting case study because you demand (certainly in terms of attitude) that no one smirk about the GLBT, that no one refuse to accommodate its socio-political games, that no one be anything less than touchy-feely about the GLBT, yet you often use the word “gay” disparagingly and have resisted being candid about your own personal experiences (if any) with homosexuality—and broaching that is not necessarily a matter of impinging on a person’s privacy since most guys in public — even more so in an anonymous setting like this message board — have no trouble revealing the existence of a girlfriend or wife).
You’re as schizophrenic as Sybil.
Mark (607f93) — 4/28/2015 @ 7:56 pmThere was no tactic at all by the T-shirt maker. He’s just refusing to do something. That’s not a tactic. He just doesn’t want to do it.
I won’t bother to ask feet about the legal reasoning of the judge. That’s an irrelevant point to him. He operates in the logic-free zone that typifies the gay rights crowd on this issue and wants everyone to agree with it.
Gerald A (6b504a) — 4/28/2015 @ 8:12 pmHappyfascist,
How do you do it? You think everyone should be forced to believe as you do or they should lose their place of business or job. Yet in the next instance you claim you’re just being cute and saying they are mean?
Does being that nasty come naturally to you?
The judge got it right. No one has the right to compel another to work for them and the message matters.
Suck it up buttercup.
njrob (c94106) — 4/28/2015 @ 8:26 pmPlease do not ban happyfeet.
I often come here just to read his entertaining lunacy.
Fred Z (5db617) — 4/28/2015 @ 8:41 pmI came here to see if HF poured on the hate-filled fascist stupid like he always does on topics like this. He did. I was not surprised. Disgusted, but not surprised.
John Hitchcock (52c972) — 4/28/2015 @ 9:54 pmFZ, sadly that says a lot more about you than it does about hf.
Gazzer (c1d25a) — 4/28/2015 @ 10:14 pmQuite honestly — and not to be gotcha! about things — but if happyfeet is gay or bisexual, some of his seemingly very personalized reactions (ie, plenty of indignation) to opponents of the GLBT agenda would be more understandable to me. By the same token, if I observed a person who was way too indignant about, way too hostile towards the pro-GLBT agenda, I’d apply the same concept to him or her.
Mark (607f93) — 4/28/2015 @ 10:21 pmWhat was interesting is how often the Court ruled that the Commission’s findings were completely outside of the facts and law.
Several times, the ruling dismisses the Commission’s rulings, which it is required to give deference to, as contradictory to the actual facts and the law.
JWB (6cba10) — 4/29/2015 @ 12:14 amDana all these people want is the freedom to be bigots
and the cowards don’t even have the courage to admit it
nope their problems are not my problems
first they came for the bigoty t-shirt makers
and I made a tasty nespresso
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 3:30 amShort answer, no.
yes yes short answer no
hello?
the bigots WON
hence there is no reason to be terribly concerned about their freedoms such as they are is there?
no there is not
but i will do my part as a good american to heap contempt and scorn on they heads
i be there for you
like i been there before
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 3:40 amHappy,
Are you registered to vote?
EPWJ (68f58f) — 4/29/2015 @ 4:08 amno i’m not registered to vote here in chicago yet
i’m still settling in
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 4:12 amHere is the hypothetical I always give in these cases. Fred is gay and owns a printing shop. One day a member of the Westboro Baptist Church comes in and asks him to print up 100 signs that say GOD HATES F—S to be used at their next rally. Fred refuses.
Is Fred guilty of religious discrimination? He has refused the business of a religious group that wants to print signs with their religious message. Under the logic of the Human Rights Commission, he has.
Under the trial judge’s logic, he has not, or if he has, he has a First Amendment right not to do so.
Bored Lawyer (34a3e2) — 4/29/2015 @ 5:40 amfeets speak
bigoty = when you don’t agree with me
fine the bastards, shut their businesses, send them to reeducation camp, so the bigots who agree with me can win.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/29/2015 @ 6:19 amthat is not true i never said nobody should be fined or have to go to summer camp
i said the t-shirt people are big poopyheads
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 6:20 amoh speaking of bigots and summer camp i went to summer camp with this poor guy
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 6:21 amfeets speak
My bigots are more vocal than your bigots and there are just some issues more important than the First Amendment. It says so in the Constitution somewheres.
It’s a thing.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/29/2015 @ 6:23 amthat’s not true neither i think the first amendment is super neat
i’m not saying the t-shirt people do not have the right to refuse to make the t-shirts for the gay people I’m saying they ignant
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 6:25 amfeets speak
My intolerance trumps your freedom of religion and needs to be crushed by the forces of the state.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/29/2015 @ 6:26 amrefusing to make t-shirts for nice gay people is like refusing to floss
it’s your choice but you ignant
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 6:27 amfeets speak
ignant choices require overwhelming application of state force to crush dissent and ensure right thinking in the future in true Soviet fashion.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/29/2015 @ 6:33 amfeets speak
i’m not saying the t-shirt people do not have the right to refuse to make the t-shirts for the gay people, I just think they should be punished to the full extent of the law, shunned, named and shamed, but I did explicitly say that.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/29/2015 @ 6:37 amthese things you say i say, they do not have the ring of truth
i do not think the government of kentucky should have powers to make people do the t-shirts
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 6:42 amrefusing to make t-shirts for nice gay people is like refusing to floss
happyfeet,
“Nice”??? How nice are people who want the state to force individuals who are minding their business to violate their religious beliefs and submit to their will? That is not what I would call nice people. Nice people let other people live by their own lights and principles, even when they don’t agree with them.
Dana (86e864) — 4/29/2015 @ 6:48 amNice people let other people live by their own lights and principles, even when they don’t agree with them.
bigoty pseudo-christians fought for years and years to disallow gay people the right to live by their own lights and principles
some of them are *still* fighting
i do not feel sorry for them when they whine whine whine about their precious freedoms
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 6:52 amand nobody has explained even once in this whole thread what religious belief is implicated by printing that wholly innocuous t-shirt
it’s not religious it’s just bigotry
regular old trailer park gap-toothed bigotry
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 6:58 amyep yep that what it is
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 6:58 amDADDEH!!
what’s a three doller beeyull?
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 6:59 amFor a Christian who has a sincerely held religious belief as is outlined in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 that:
Making a T-shirt or baking a cake for a Gay Pride day or same sex wedding while believing that participants of that behavior will not enter the Kingdom of God would cause them to be bigots.
Do you really want to force Christians to become bigots, happy?
A Christian who does not participate in activities that support homosexual behavior is not a bigot because homosexuality is a behavior not politics.
A Christian who participates in activities that promote homosexual behavior would be a bigot since the bible specifically tells them that homosexuals will not go to heaven and they would be acting against their moral beliefs.
What you are asking is for Christians to be bigots and not follow their religious beliefs.
You keep using the word bigots, but I do not believe you know the true meaning of that word.
Tanny O'Haley (c674c7) — 4/29/2015 @ 6:59 ami think that’s all a buncha piffle-twaddle Mr. tanny I really do
i’m a good christian pikachu and I think gay people should have t-shirts and i think these other “christians” (notice the quotes) is just using religion to justify their innate kentucky-bred ignance hate and bigotry
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 7:05 amMr. *Tanny* I mean
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 7:06 ampikachu, agrees with Obama, ‘about bitter clingers’,
narciso (ee1f88) — 4/29/2015 @ 7:06 amHappy,
A Christian is someone who accepts that Jesus Christ died for their sins then rose from death to life so that they may enter the kingdom of God. That the bible is a historical document that also tells them how to live. They believe 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 is true and participating in any of those behaviors will prevent a person from entering the Kingdom of God.
Not entering the Kingdom of God is death. A person who professes to be a Christian, yet encourages people to participate in behavior that prevents them entrance to heaven would not be acting in a Christian like manner.
Tanny O'Haley (c674c7) — 4/29/2015 @ 7:17 am9-10 does not say you can’t make a t-shirt for some gay fellers
that’s just twisting it into meaninglessness like how the supreme court do on the constitution
bible is a great book but you gotta use common sense with it too
love thy neighbor
i tell you what that’s some biblical wisdom right there
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 7:20 amregular old trailer park gap-toothed bigotry
happyfeet, that’s the stereotype you’ve applied to people involved in polygamy, so look in the mirror when labeling someone a bigot. Multi-partner relationships are no more disconnected from human nature — and, in terms of male nature, may, if anything, be a more common aspect of human behavior — than same-sex relationships.
Moreover, you’ve often used “gay” in a pejorative, mocking way through the years — which is something I’ve never or rarely seen done by the anti-SSM folks in this forum — so you yourself are full of it when you think a reaction of discomfort or disquiet about homosexuality is somehow totally alien, totally baffling amongst the populace.
That along with your resistance to proclaiming your own choices in personal lifestyle (which evokes the quip of “not that there’s anything wrong with that”) makes me think you’re just trying to be a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian and laughing at flame baiting this thread.
Mark (607f93) — 4/29/2015 @ 7:20 ampolygamy is no bueno
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 7:23 amHappyfeet @53, we aren’t talking about the nice gay people like those two NYC hotel guys.
We are talking about you and your vicious, nasty, totalitarian, fascist gaystapo friends who attack Christians AND the nice gay people who don’t hate them enough. Like you and your gaystpo friends.
Steve57 (eb141b) — 4/29/2015 @ 8:14 amthat seems a little overwrought is my first reaction to that comment Mr. 57
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 8:18 amHappyfeet, why is polgamy no bueno? The only reason why marriage is two people is because it takes one man and one woman to make babies. If marriage isn’t about making babies then everything goes.
This fight over marrige is supposed to be about LGBT rights and marrying who you love. Nobody talks about the B part. Why can’t a bi woman marry both a man and a woman, you h8er? And if the dude is bi, too, then why can’t he marry the guy he loves? Making it four. Only a small minded bigot would deny them their shot at happiness.
I see according to facebook we are up to thirty eight genders. Why do you hate them, feets? Why don’t you want them to be happy since marriage is now all about who you love? Why do want to force your outdated prejudices on them?
Steve57 (eb141b) — 4/29/2015 @ 8:35 amwell it’s kind of a logistical nightmare, speaking practically, but it’s not’s pikachu’s brand of nespresso,
narciso (ee1f88) — 4/29/2015 @ 8:40 ampolygamy does not promote economic security
marriage does
plus it’s tacky
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 8:43 am“i do not think the government of kentucky should have powers to make people do the t-shirts”
Mr. Feets – Well then what the heck is your point other than savoring the opportunity to call the T-shirt store owners ignant bigots and mocking people of faith, which you have so far done at least 10 times on this thread.
It seems to me all the bigotry is flowing from your direction.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/29/2015 @ 9:11 amwell i’m sorry you feel that way
but i never told anybody we won’t do business with you cause of their of some kind of special religion or sexual orientation or whatever
i try to be kind and helpful to the people
i don’t see why these t-shirt people think they’re so special they get to be rude
i think that’s just putting yourself above other people, and that’s just not professional
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 9:20 amoh.
cause of *they’re* of some kind of special…
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 9:20 amYour misrepresuntations of what these Christians are doing is a classic Bolshevik/fascist tactic, Mr. Feets.
They lied about dissenters and bullied them to force them into conformity, too.
I believe the German word for what you and your gaystapo friends are doing is Gleichaltshung.
Steve57 (eb141b) — 4/29/2015 @ 9:29 ambitter clingers, here there, everywhere:
http://babalublog.com/2015/04/29/another-round-of-violent-attacks-against-catholic-dissidents-after-sunday-mass-in-obamass-cuba/
narciso (ee1f88) — 4/29/2015 @ 9:32 amIf Cathlics in the US don’t get with happyfeet’s program and start buying Sandra Fluke her birth control and baking gay wedding cakes we can expect the same here one day, narcisso.
Steve57 (eb141b) — 4/29/2015 @ 9:43 amSteve57 – Don’t forget about the homo hate pizza!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/29/2015 @ 9:44 am“i don’t see why these t-shirt people think they’re so special they get to be rude”
Mr. Feets – I don’t see why other people gotta think they are so special they get to say to people I don’t care about your religious beliefs, you are gonna do what I want you to do or imma gonna put the state on yo butt. If that means you’re gonna eat pork when it’s against your beliefs, work on the sabbath, etc., etc., I don’t care, because I’m just more specialer than you.
So there.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/29/2015 @ 9:49 amwell maybe they can think of some way to compromise
half a loaf is better than none you know
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 9:55 amIma thinking the gay pride t shirt hunters would have just gone with the two vendors they already had if they were interested in compromise. Ima thinking compromise is not part of their agenda.
Steve57 (c84a13) — 4/29/2015 @ 10:05 ampride goeth before destruction Mr. 57, that’s what the book says
be peaceful my brother
have a sugar cookie
happyfeet (831175) — 4/29/2015 @ 10:34 amIt seem feets is either talking out of both sides of his mouth or is confused. Either the judge ruled incorrectly which is clearly implied by comment # 1, or he ruled correctly, implied by comment #2. If he ruled correctly then how is he hiding his rank bigotry?
Of course comment # 1 makes no sense on its own in at least one way, because, obviously, the judge did not rule on gay marriage or address it in any way. This case is unrelated to SSM. And as I pointed out before there must have been some legal reasoning behind his ruling, so unless he finds fault with his legal reasoning, of which he’s uninterested, attributing the ruling to bigotry is yet another illogical claim.
This is what I mean by happyfeet’s logic-free zone on this issue.
Gerald A (6b504a) — 4/29/2015 @ 7:05 pmHappyfeet just loves his buggery so much.
May the AIDS be with him.
Michael Ejercito (d9a893) — 4/29/2015 @ 11:17 pmThat is HF in a nutshell. He rejects all the parts of the Bible that go against his desire to see perversion accepted by all.
John Hitchcock (c20d66) — 4/30/2015 @ 12:10 ampolygamy does not promote economic security
marriage does
plus it’s tacky
Unattached, single women tend to be more vulnerable economically, and unattached, single people in general who can’t take advantage of positive group synergy on a full-time basis also are more vulnerable. Therefore, a group of more than 2 or 3 people in a committed relationship is no less beneficial to promoting economic stability than 2 guys in a relationship or 2 women in a relationship.
As for tacky, the epitome of that is on display at typical annual Gay Pride parades held in various urban areas throughout America, attended largely by folks who just love SSM.
Mark (607f93) — 4/30/2015 @ 12:36 amMr. A look at comment #5
judge invoked ssm in his ruling
he’s nuts!
happyfeet (831175) — 4/30/2015 @ 3:07 amJust so you know, Alito addressed this very question to the pro-SSM attorney. Not polygamy, though; polyamory.
Hilarity ensued as the pro-SSM attorney, who is arguing that the state has no compelling interest in defining marriage as between one man and one woman, attempted to argue that the state has a compelling interest in preventing this arrangement.
https://patterico.com/2015/04/28/gay-marriage-arguments-today/#comment-1759818
She didn’t raise the tackiness issue, though.
Steve57 (818fa4) — 4/30/2015 @ 7:39 amplus polygamists almost invariably have bad teeth Mr. 57
they’re too busy poligging it up all over their trailer to floss is why
happyfeet (831175) — 4/30/2015 @ 8:01 amIt must be all the gay wedding cakes they eat.
Sugar is very bad for the teeth unless you brush and floss religiously.
Steve57 (818fa4) — 4/30/2015 @ 8:05 amyes yes yes
cake does have a dark side
my goto now for cake is this place a couple blocks from here where you can get flourless chocolate by the slice
it’s hard to know for sure but it *likely* has a good bit fewer carbs than your regular cake
it’s all about making good choices
happyfeet (831175) — 4/30/2015 @ 8:15 amattempted to argue that the state has a compelling interest in preventing this arrangement.
That irritates me to no end when various folks of the left embrace and even demand SSM but respond with hesitation at best or flat-out opposition at worse towards the nature and idea of polygamy. It’s analogous to the way that certain liberals respond in such an easygoing, come-see-come-saw way towards marijuana and a joint but become up in arms when it comes to tobacco and a cigarette.
Mark (607f93) — 4/30/2015 @ 8:43 amNo, Mark. The leftists really do hate tobacco.
They only pretend to be opposed to polyamorous marriages. It’s what Rod Dreher at The American Conservative call the law of Merited Impossibility. And it’s how we got to SSM.
The left lies and argues that conservatives are wingnuts if they think X. Until it happens. Then conservatives are getting exactly what they deserve.
For instance, back after the Lawrence decision when activists started pushing for civil unions they said only a right-wing loon would be crazy enough to claim they were pushing for full on SSM.
Until they got civil unions, and said it was discriminatory to deny same sex couples the right to marry. But only a bats*** crazy xtofascist would think anyone’s rights would be affected.
And at each step the conservatives were only getting what they deserved because they were bigots.
Anyway, the cat’s already out of the bag about polyamory.
http://www.examiner.com/article/lesbian-activist-gay-marriage-fight-a-lie-to-destroy-traditional-marriage
Well, not as marriage exists now. But I’m sure something can be concocted and it will be called “marriage.” But it will be a mockery of marriage. Like this:
http://nypost.com/2014/04/23/married-lesbian-threesome-expecting-first-child/
It’s laughable that these activists are still using the “Merited Impossibility” method when they’re so brazen about admitting they’re out to redefine not only marriage, but gender and family. And by redefine I mean deconstruct, until all those words are meaningless.
So the pro-SSM attorney is attempting to deceive Alito when she responds to his question about four lawyers marrying. Whether she knows it is another question, as a lot of SSM supporters have been deceived about the endgame themselves.
Steve57 (818fa4) — 4/30/2015 @ 9:00 amI have to clarify. When conservatives started pushing back against SSM in the early days of the campaign and brought up the free exercise of religion, the pro-SSM crowd deployed an army of straw men in response. I.E. that the religious liberties of churches and clergy would not be affected.
Can anyone find for me where the first amendment guarantee of free exercise of religion mentions churches and clergy?
Steve57 (818fa4) — 4/30/2015 @ 9:07 am“Ima thinking the gay pride t shirt hunters would have just gone with the two vendors they already had if they were interested in compromise.”
Steve57 – Ima a guessing you might possibly be a teensy bit wrong and the t-shirt hunters are sort of like the Mayor of Baltimore and some destruction of people and businesses who do not fall in lockstep with their views is all part of the fascist thought crime agenda.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/30/2015 @ 9:27 amThat was my second sentence, daley.
Steve57 (818fa4) — 4/30/2015 @ 9:30 amIma thinking you’re 100% right, in other words, daley.
Steve57 (818fa4) — 4/30/2015 @ 9:30 amfeets #4 … and what is to be printed on the *back* of the t-shirt ?
When we make uninformed decisions without having the full information, we might as well be the anti-Christian hate-litigators that the complainants are demonstrating themselves to be …
Perhaps we need legislation banning hate-litigation ?
Alastor (2e7f9f) — 4/30/2015 @ 6:21 pmMany sports fans are bigoted.
Bryan Hann (c0839c) — 5/11/2015 @ 7:34 am