SCOTUS Rules in favor of Colorado Bakers

I

Irish Exit

Verified User
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/s...n-to-baker-over-gay-couple-dispute/ar-AAydEGF

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday handed a narrow victory to a Christian baker from Colorado who refused for religious reasons to make a wedding cake for a gay couple.

The justices, in a 7-2 decision, faulted the Colorado Civil Rights Commission's handling of the claims brought against Jack Phillips, saying it had showed a hostility to religion.

_____________________________

What cracks me up is MSNBC calls 7-2 a "narrow victory" :palm:
 
It was the correct interpretation of law. The baker had a right to refuse baking a cake that required him to participate in a homosexual marriage vis-a-vis his artistic talent.
 
Timshel said:
Different context. They meant his victory is narrow. They did not rule that he had a right to discriminate or an exemption from the law, just that the ccrc treated him unfairly.
Click to expand...

a 7-2 ruling is not a "narrow victory". It is a pretty resounding victory even if it was as a result of a narrow holding.
 
Kacper said:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/s...n-to-baker-over-gay-couple-dispute/ar-AAydEGF

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday handed a narrow victory to a Christian baker from Colorado who refused for religious reasons to make a wedding cake for a gay couple.

The justices, in a 7-2 decision, faulted the Colorado Civil Rights Commission's handling of the claims brought against Jack Phillips, saying it had showed a hostility to religion.

_____________________________

What cracks me up is MSNBC calls 7-2 a "narrow victory" :palm:
Click to expand...

I guess to MSNBC anything short of 100% support of Christian values by the SCOTUS is a narrow victory.
 
Eagle Eye said:
I guess to MSNBC anything short of 100% support of Christian values by the SCOTUS is a narrow victory.
Click to expand...

More or less. This is one of those issues where they could engage in productive debate on the balancing of rights. Instead they are trying to bury the loss.
 
Kacper said:
a 7-2 ruling is not a "narrow victory". It is a pretty resounding victory even if it was as a result of a narrow holding.
Click to expand...

Can't you read? Again, they were using a different context.

It was not narrow in the sense of the vote of the jurist but in regards to the legal issues involved.

Maybe read beyond a headline and you will be able to figure these things out on your own.
 
Timshel said:
Can't you read? Again, they were using a different context.

It was not narrow in the sense of the vote of the jurist but in regards to the legal issues involved.

Maybe read beyond a headline and you will be able to figure these things out on your own.
Click to expand...

I directly quoted the article. not in the headline dolt dolt dolt.
 
Timshel said:
Oh wow, you made it through two whole paragraphs. Let me get you a sticker.

Read the 4th paragraph. That's what they meant by "narrow."
Click to expand...

I directly quoted the article when I posted the thread. The article has since been changed by MSNBC undoubtedly because the internet is kicking their ass for calling this a "narrow victory". They must be paying you to come defend their HUGE mistake. Even teh POTUS called them out for calling this a "narrow victory."
 
Timshel said:
Oh wow, you made it through two whole paragraphs. Let me get you a sticker.

Read the 4th paragraph. That's what they meant by "narrow."
Click to expand...

Still makes no sense.

The headline is misleading. You don’t bury the lead in the 4th paragraph.

Many people get their news from scanning headlines.

And they will be misled into thinking it was a narrow vote; when, in fact, it was closer to a blowout and a smack down of the lower court and the CO authorities.
 
Kacper said:
I directly quoted the article when I posted the thread. The article has since been changed by MSNBC undoubtedly because the internet is kicking their ass for calling this a "narrow victory". They must be paying you to come defend their HUGE mistake. Even teh POTUS called them out for calling this a "narrow victory."
Click to expand...

They didn’t make a mistake- they’re just ignorant of what the ruling meant, as well as what narrow findings means. Some adult had to correct them.
 
Darth Omar said:
Still makes no sense.

The headline is misleading. You don’t bury the lead in the 4th paragraph.

Many people get their news from scanning headlines.

And they will be misled into thinking it was a narrow vote; when, in fact, it was closer to a blowout and a smack down of the lower court and the CO authorities.
Click to expand...

Editorializing headlines used to be an art form by old school liberals- the neo progressives aren’t quite as artful.
 
Kacper said:
I directly quoted the article when I posted the thread. The article has since been changed by MSNBC undoubtedly because the internet is kicking their ass for calling this a "narrow victory". They must be paying you to come defend their HUGE mistake. Even teh POTUS called them out for calling this a "narrow victory."
Click to expand...

Oh sorry, i did not realize you were insane.

Their meaning was obvious immediately. It was well expected that Kennedy might deliver a narrow (on legal issues) victory for the baker.
 
Burpin said:
... and ABC had a Right to Fire Rosanne ...
Click to expand...

Who is saying they don't strawman pontificator?

giphy.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top