Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Court: Baker Who Refused Gay Wedding Cake Can't Cite Beliefs
Yahoo News ^ | 8/13/15 | AP

Posted on 08/13/2015 7:11:31 PM PDT by marshmallow

Edited on 08/13/2015 7:22:02 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

DENVER (AP)

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Current Events; Moral Issues; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: 1moretime; searchworks
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 last
To: Talisker
Only privileges, no rights.

Not true, exactly. For legal purposes, corporations fall into a class called "juridic persons". They have some rights that natural persons have. For example, they have the rights to free speech (look up the Citizens United SCOTUS decision).

41 posted on 08/14/2015 2:14:49 AM PDT by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
What is freedom? I'm only free if I can articulate, to your satisfaction, my systematic theology?

How about this: "I'm not baking a cake for you because I don't want to."

42 posted on 08/14/2015 2:25:29 AM PDT by good1 (Valiant for the Truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: good1
What is freedom? I'm only free if I can articulate, to your satisfaction, my systematic theology?

I believe that you're reading the title wrong. It's worse than that. The judge didn't say that he couldn't refuse to bake the cake because he failed to properly quote chapter and verse... the judge is saying he is NOT ALLOWED to quote chapter and verse in his defense at this trial.

43 posted on 08/14/2015 2:39:17 AM PDT by Teacher317 (We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242

18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law

“Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States . . . shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.”

Every judge, gay-thug plaintiff, and other petty tyrant involved in this war against religion should be hunted down and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law as soon as the rule of law is restored. There is no statute of limitations for federal crimes that carry the death penalty. Whether it takes until January 20, 2017, or fifty years, these thugs need to be hunted down and given life without parole. The First Amendment is closer to an absolute than anything else in law other than the Second Amendment. Those who trample freedom of religion are as bad as Nazis and should be treated the same as those criminals.


44 posted on 08/14/2015 3:09:15 AM PDT by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

CO leftward slide beginning in 1972 has turned into an avalanche.


45 posted on 08/14/2015 3:28:14 AM PDT by Theodore R. (Liberals keep winning; so the American people must now be all-liberal all the time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

So many in CO are on the hard left: many think it’s Californians moving there who changed everything, but as the CA people moved out, CO moved further left and so did CA. It is complicated.


46 posted on 08/14/2015 3:29:40 AM PDT by Theodore R. (Liberals keep winning; so the American people must now be all-liberal all the time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Another Freeper suggested a sign that says, to paraphrase, “All proceeds from gay wedding cakes are donated to Cruz”.


47 posted on 08/14/2015 3:38:50 AM PDT by TwelveOfTwenty (See my home page for some of my answers to the left's talking points.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mechanicos

Then hang the judge.


48 posted on 08/14/2015 5:25:47 AM PDT by Arm_Bears (Biology is biology. Everything else is imagination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Apparently, only homosexuals have rights in America.


49 posted on 08/14/2015 7:50:34 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Not true, exactly. For legal purposes, corporations fall into a class called "juridic persons". They have some rights that natural persons have. For example, they have the rights to free speech (look up the Citizens United SCOTUS decision).

I have to disagree. A juridical person is a legal entity which achieves legal personhood through incorporation. The important point is that it is created by the state, as opposed to being created by God. As our constitution acknowledges rights as above the reach of the state, rights therefore cannot be granted BY the state. Thus corporate "rights" are a term of art indicating the only thing the state CAN grant - limited privileges. That's why the laws are so whack, because the state can changed those privileges at any time.

Juridical persons were actually first created by the Catholic Church through Canon Law, to represent an aggregate of human beings being treated as a single person. This seems to be the conceptual framework used to address the Church itself. But translated into statutory law in the US, it directly conflicts with the founding relationship between the state and the people. Therefore it is assigned corporate status.

The use of the word "rights" for corporations is a common, but severely misleading abuse of the mechanism of terms of art. The courts get away with it by pretending they are writing only for attorneys "well versed in the art," (since these are virtually all appellate rulings, as appellate hearings can only be filed and argued by attorneys). This single misuse of this particular word has served to hide the truth about this issue for a very long time - to tremendous detriment. It is literally THE answer to the common American cry of "what happened to my rights?!"

50 posted on 08/14/2015 11:45:16 AM PDT by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Psalm 10


51 posted on 08/18/2015 12:05:48 PM PDT by 444Flyer (How long O LORD?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

There are circumstances where there is going to be discrimination against someone regardless of which side of the issue you are on. Given a choice between discrimination against homosexuals and discrimination against Christians the court came down for discrimination against Christians. Not surprising.


52 posted on 08/18/2015 12:11:20 PM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson