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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Yeah right
Stop screwing with people