Posted on 07/01/2023 9:47:55 AM PDT by buckalfa
The Colorado web designer who wanted to refuse LGBTQ customers and just won her case at the Supreme Court had claimed in court filings that a man inquired about her services for his same-sex wedding.
But the man says he never reached out to Lorie Smith, the web designer who argued at the Supreme Court that she shouldn’t be forced to create same-sex wedding websites because of her religious objections. In fact, the man says he’s straight and married to a woman.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
How do you know who is telling the truth, CNN? He might very well have misrepresented himself to the website designers to shut them down.
OTOH, we know that Jane Roe from Roe v Wade lied about being raped and about the father being black.
Interesting false flag scenario. If he never asked her, then how did the case get started? Sounds like an investigation is needed into the origins of this case.
First, who sued whom?
The nature of such a case says that the state charged this web designer with failing to design a gay wedding something. In that case there would be a named victim who would know of his involvement. In that case this is a farce.
If instead the designer sued for injuctive relief from the law, there would be no victim named, and this is a farce.
Regardless of how the case got started (and Stewart is clearly lying) the end result is that artists can rely on religious objections to being forced to create something that goes against their religious convictions. Period. End of story.
Indeed, who brought the lawsuit in the first place?
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2022/21-476
Facts of the case
Lorie Smith is the owner and founder of a graphic design firm, 303 Creative LLC. She wants to expand her business to include wedding websites. However, she opposes same-sex marriage on religious grounds so does not want to design websites for same-sex weddings. She wants to post a message on her own website explaining her religious objections to same-sex weddings.
The Colorado AntiDiscrimination Act (“CADA”) prohibits businesses that are open to the public from from discriminating on the basis of numerous characteristics, including sexual orientation. The law defines discrimination not only as refusing to provide goods or services, but also publishing any communication that says or implies that an individual’s patronage is unwelcome because of a protected characteristic.
Even before the state sought to enforce CADA against her, Smith and her company challenged the law in federal court, alleging numerous constitutional violations. The district court granted summary judgment for the state, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed.
From the article..
“Stewart, who previously worked for CNN, said that he is a web designer himself, and that “it would make zero sense to hire a web designer when I can do that for myself.”
Zero sense, unless he were sandbagging the ‘straight’ web designer. Either on his own, for a good story, or because CNN paid him to do it.
Besides, he is married(now) so he must be straight, right? Right? Right?
Sounds to me like somebody knew or had suspected that Colorado was a very liberal state & figured that the state would go along with liberal ideas for legislation.
I wonder if I can sue CNN to get back these 2 minutes of my life?
I don’t see how this possibly went through the entire court system without reaching out to him. He was a huge part of the case. A lot of negligence if this is proven true.
It doesn’t matter if a man had or had not inquired about her services. Her case was against the law. But this article is just doing what the Left always does, try to discredit the ruling by discrediting the person involved.
Yup, my guess is he purposely wanted to get her in trouble knowing she would turn down a gay wedding job.
I believe that ALL of these cases are by perverts intentionally seeking out businesses that they know will turn them down.
Yeah. Sure. This went allllllllll the way through the American court system and that little detail was somehow missed.
CNN ... You are, as always, gullible, agenda-driven cultists.
.
Appeals don't work that way. THere has to be a suit and someone has to lose and then you get to appeal because the court misapplied the law. It takes at least two adverse parties willing to do battle in a court of law, and all kinds of evidence to support some claim of an injury in order to get a case all the way to the SC.
Same reason the dumbasses have to fabricate white supremacists or nurture them up themselves.
Yeah right
Stop screwing with people
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.