Red Mosquito :: View topic - The Supreme Court

I'm confused by all the fake news about this case... did the baker offer to sell them an existing cake from the store (just not decorate as they requested)? Did the baker sell cakes for other LGBTQ events? What is real anymore?!?!?!?!

In 2012, Respondent Craig and Mullins walked into Masterpiece Cakeshop and were looking through a photo album of owner Jack Phillips’s custom-designed cakes. Phillips sat down to greet them at a consultation table. According to Phillips’s own account, “the men said they wanted a wedding cake for ‘our wedding.’” Phillips replied that he does not “create wedding cakes for same-sex weddings.” Phillips then added, “I’ll make your birthday cakes, shower cakes, sell you cookies and brownies, I just don’t make cakes for same-sex weddings.” The couple got up and left, with no further discussion. The entire exchange lasted 20 seconds.

Bi_3 wrote:

As I understand the facts (copied from that Carpenter/Volokh brief I linked):

Quote:

Bi_3 wrote:

As I understand the facts (copied from that Carpenter/Volokh brief I linked):

Quote:

Y'know, I don't think businesses should be able to discriminate, but this really just looks like some liberals looking for a problem where there wasn't one.

(Allegedly the baker doesn't do Halloween cakes that depict gore for religious reasons as well.)

Did the Alabama Special Election Increase the Odds of Justice Kennedy's Retirement?

http://reason.com/volokh/2017/12/13/did ... on-increas

Green Habit wrote:

Did the Alabama Special Election Increase the Odds of Justice Kennedy's Retirement?

http://reason.com/volokh/2017/12/13/did ... on-increas

Hopefully Trump will identify a suitable judge that is suddenly moore available.

Did the Alabama Special Election Increase the Odds of Justice Kennedy's Retirement?

http://reason.com/volokh/2017/12/13/did ... on-increas

Green Habit wrote:

Did the Alabama Special Election Increase the Odds of Justice Kennedy's Retirement?

http://reason.com/volokh/2017/12/13/did ... on-increas

That's a pretty decent prediction although I would hope it'd be on the day he reads from his Gill v. Whitford / Benisek v. Lamone opinion ending partisan gerrymandering.

4/5 wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

Did the Alabama Special Election Increase the Odds of Justice Kennedy's Retirement?

http://reason.com/volokh/2017/12/13/did ... on-increas

That's a pretty decent prediction although I would hope it'd be on the day he reads from his Gill v. Whitford / Benisek v. Lamone opinion ending partisan gerrymandering.

Partisan gerrymandering? Not here in Maryland!

Bi_3 wrote:

4/5 wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

Did the Alabama Special Election Increase the Odds of Justice Kennedy's Retirement?

http://reason.com/volokh/2017/12/13/did ... on-increas

That's a pretty decent prediction although I would hope it'd be on the day he reads from his Gill v. Whitford / Benisek v. Lamone opinion ending partisan gerrymandering.

Partisan gerrymandering? Not here in Maryland!

The Court did just accept a case dealing with MD.

It's gonna be great when I can sit at Fenway Park, open up an app, and place a legal prop bet mid game.

cutuphalfdead wrote:

It's gonna be great when I can sit at Fenway Park, open up an app, and place a legal prop bet mid game.

Lukin -> Not for You 3:1

Bi_3 wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:

It's gonna be great when I can sit at Fenway Park, open up an app, and place a legal prop bet mid game.

Lukin -> Not for You 3:1

Parlay that with the over on number of covers played and there's your kids' college funds.

Simple Torture wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:

It's gonna be great when I can sit at Fenway Park, open up an app, and place a legal prop bet mid game.

Lukin -> Not for You 3:1

Parlay that with the over on number of covers played and there's your kids' college funds.

How high would the over/under on covers have to be for you to stay away? If it were 6.5 I would still put action on it.

Simple Torture wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:

It's gonna be great when I can sit at Fenway Park, open up an app, and place a legal prop bet mid game.

Lukin -> Not for You 3:1

Parlay that with the over on number of covers played and there's your kids' college funds.

How high would the over/under on covers have to be for you to stay away? If it were 6.5 I would still put action on it.

Is Crazy Mary a cover?

Author:	Green Habit [ Thu December 07, 2017 3:36 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
Bi_3 wrote: I'm confused by all the fake news about this case... did the baker offer to sell them an existing cake from the store (just not decorate as they requested)? Did the baker sell cakes for other LGBTQ events? What is real anymore?!?!?!?! As I understand the facts (copied from that Carpenter/Volokh brief I linked): Quote: In 2012, Respondent Craig and Mullins walked into Masterpiece Cakeshop and were looking through a photo album of owner Jack Phillips’s custom-designed cakes. Phillips sat down to greet them at a consultation table. According to Phillips’s own account, “the men said they wanted a wedding cake for ‘our wedding.’” Phillips replied that he does not “create wedding cakes for same-sex weddings.” Phillips then added, “I’ll make your birthday cakes, shower cakes, sell you cookies and brownies, I just don’t make cakes for same-sex weddings.” The couple got up and left, with no further discussion. The entire exchange lasted 20 seconds.

Author:	B [ Thu December 07, 2017 3:50 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
Green Habit wrote: Bi_3 wrote: I'm confused by all the fake news about this case... did the baker offer to sell them an existing cake from the store (just not decorate as they requested)? Did the baker sell cakes for other LGBTQ events? What is real anymore?!?!?!?! As I understand the facts (copied from that Carpenter/Volokh brief I linked): Quote: In 2012, Respondent Craig and Mullins walked into Masterpiece Cakeshop and were looking through a photo album of owner Jack Phillips’s custom-designed cakes. Phillips sat down to greet them at a consultation table. According to Phillips’s own account, “the men said they wanted a wedding cake for ‘our wedding.’” Phillips replied that he does not “create wedding cakes for same-sex weddings.” Phillips then added, “I’ll make your birthday cakes, shower cakes, sell you cookies and brownies, I just don’t make cakes for same-sex weddings.” The couple got up and left, with no further discussion. The entire exchange lasted 20 seconds. Y'know, I don't think businesses should be able to discriminate, but this really just looks like some liberals looking for a problem where there wasn't one.

Author:	Bi_3 [ Thu December 07, 2017 3:57 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
Green Habit wrote: Bi_3 wrote: I'm confused by all the fake news about this case... did the baker offer to sell them an existing cake from the store (just not decorate as they requested)? Did the baker sell cakes for other LGBTQ events? What is real anymore?!?!?!?! As I understand the facts (copied from that Carpenter/Volokh brief I linked): Quote: In 2012, Respondent Craig and Mullins walked into Masterpiece Cakeshop and were looking through a photo album of owner Jack Phillips’s custom-designed cakes. Phillips sat down to greet them at a consultation table. According to Phillips’s own account, “the men said they wanted a wedding cake for ‘our wedding.’” Phillips replied that he does not “create wedding cakes for same-sex weddings.” Phillips then added, “I’ll make your birthday cakes, shower cakes, sell you cookies and brownies, I just don’t make cakes for same-sex weddings.” The couple got up and left, with no further discussion. The entire exchange lasted 20 seconds. That's definitely discrimination against a protected class engaging in a legal activity, but in such a limited scope I could totally see a judge siding with the baker. (Allegedly the baker doesn't do Halloween cakes that depict gore for religious reasons as well.) B wrote: Y'know, I don't think businesses should be able to discriminate, but this really just looks like some liberals looking for a problem where there wasn't one. My first thought as well, but I haven't read anything to suggest the couple was acting in bad faith, and we are at a point where the SCOTUS could become very unfriendly to certain communities should Kennedy or Ginsberg retire during Trump's reign so maybe it's fight to have now.

Author:	Green Habit [ Thu December 07, 2017 5:08 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
Bi_3 wrote: (Allegedly the baker doesn't do Halloween cakes that depict gore for religious reasons as well.) A friend of mine in Denver says this baker turned down a request from his wife to make Harry Potter themed stuff, because witchcraft.

Author:	McParadigm [ Mon December 11, 2017 8:48 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court

Red Mosquito http://forums.theskyiscrape.com/

The Supreme Court http://forums.theskyiscrape.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=15	Page 28 of 192

Author:	Green Habit [ Wed December 13, 2017 9:09 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
Did the Alabama Special Election Increase the Odds of Justice Kennedy's Retirement? http://reason.com/volokh/2017/12/13/did ... on-increas

Author:	Bi_3 [ Thu December 14, 2017 1:49 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
Green Habit wrote: Did the Alabama Special Election Increase the Odds of Justice Kennedy's Retirement? http://reason.com/volokh/2017/12/13/did ... on-increas Hopefully Trump will identify a suitable judge that is suddenly moore available.

Author:	McParadigm [ Thu December 14, 2017 1:55 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
Bi_3 wrote: Green Habit wrote: Did the Alabama Special Election Increase the Odds of Justice Kennedy's Retirement? http://reason.com/volokh/2017/12/13/did ... on-increas Hopefully Trump will identify a suitable judge that is suddenly moore available.

Author:	4/5 [ Thu December 14, 2017 2:06 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
Green Habit wrote: Did the Alabama Special Election Increase the Odds of Justice Kennedy's Retirement? http://reason.com/volokh/2017/12/13/did ... on-increas That's a pretty decent prediction although I would hope it'd be on the day he reads from his Gill v. Whitford / Benisek v. Lamone opinion ending partisan gerrymandering.

Author:	Bi_3 [ Thu December 14, 2017 2:26 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
4/5 wrote: Green Habit wrote: Did the Alabama Special Election Increase the Odds of Justice Kennedy's Retirement? http://reason.com/volokh/2017/12/13/did ... on-increas That's a pretty decent prediction although I would hope it'd be on the day he reads from his Gill v. Whitford / Benisek v. Lamone opinion ending partisan gerrymandering. Partisan gerrymandering? Not here in Maryland!

Author:	B [ Thu December 14, 2017 5:37 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
I'm surprised they even dare to use the term in NC. The 4th and the 12th are just the natural flow of the state's population.

Author:	Green Habit [ Thu December 14, 2017 7:15 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
Bi_3 wrote: 4/5 wrote: Green Habit wrote: Did the Alabama Special Election Increase the Odds of Justice Kennedy's Retirement? http://reason.com/volokh/2017/12/13/did ... on-increas That's a pretty decent prediction although I would hope it'd be on the day he reads from his Gill v. Whitford / Benisek v. Lamone opinion ending partisan gerrymandering. Partisan gerrymandering? Not here in Maryland! The Court did just accept a case dealing with MD.

Author:	4/5 [ Thu December 14, 2017 7:20 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
Green Habit wrote: Bi_3 wrote: 4/5 wrote: Green Habit wrote: Did the Alabama Special Election Increase the Odds of Justice Kennedy's Retirement? http://reason.com/volokh/2017/12/13/did ... on-increas That's a pretty decent prediction although I would hope it'd be on the day he reads from his Gill v. Whitford / Benisek v. Lamone opinion ending partisan gerrymandering. Partisan gerrymandering? Not here in Maryland! The Court did just accept a case dealing with MD. I'm hoping that's to give them cover from accusations of partisanship if they were to strike down the Wisconsin map.

Author:	Norris [ Mon May 14, 2018 5:03 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
It's gonna be great when I can sit at Fenway Park, open up an app, and place a legal prop bet mid game.

Page 28 of 192	All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Monkey_Driven [ Mon May 14, 2018 5:12 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
cutuphalfdead wrote: It's gonna be great when I can sit at Fenway Park, open up an app, and place a legal prop bet mid game. Yup. Good day for sports fans.

Author:	Bi_3 [ Tue May 15, 2018 1:04 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
cutuphalfdead wrote: It's gonna be great when I can sit at Fenway Park, open up an app, and place a legal prop bet mid game. Lukin -> Not for You 3:1

Author:	Simple Torture [ Tue May 15, 2018 1:47 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
Bi_3 wrote: cutuphalfdead wrote: It's gonna be great when I can sit at Fenway Park, open up an app, and place a legal prop bet mid game. Lukin -> Not for You 3:1 Parlay that with the over on number of covers played and there's your kids' college funds.

Author:	Norris [ Tue May 15, 2018 4:49 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
Simple Torture wrote: Simple Torture wrote: Bi_3 wrote: cutuphalfdead wrote: It's gonna be great when I can sit at Fenway Park, open up an app, and place a legal prop bet mid game. Lukin -> Not for You 3:1 Parlay that with the over on number of covers played and there's your kids' college funds. How high would the over/under on covers have to be for you to stay away? If it were 6.5 I would still put action on it. Is Crazy Mary a cover?

Author:	Simple Torture [ Tue May 15, 2018 4:57 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Supreme Court
cutuphalfdead wrote: Simple Torture wrote: Simple Torture wrote: Bi_3 wrote: cutuphalfdead wrote: It's gonna be great when I can sit at Fenway Park, open up an app, and place a legal prop bet mid game. Lukin -> Not for You 3:1 Parlay that with the over on number of covers played and there's your kids' college funds. How high would the over/under on covers have to be for you to stay away? If it were 6.5 I would still put action on it. Is Crazy Mary a cover? I have long argued that it shouldn't be counted as one, but most setlist trackers do.