Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports

Patty cake, patty cake

Kaos

  • *
  • 29548
  • It's GO time
    • No, YOU Move!
Patty cake, patty cake
« on: June 04, 2018, 11:46:36 AM »
Baker's man,  
Bake me a cake
I don't take it up the can...


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/06/04/supreme-court-rules-against-gay-wedding-exemptions/1052989001/

Are we finally sliding back toward common sense again?
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

wesfau2

  • ***
  • 13855
  • I love it when you call me Big Poppa
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #1 on: June 04, 2018, 12:15:11 PM »
Baker's man,  
Bake me a cake
I don't take it up the can...


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/06/04/supreme-court-rules-against-gay-wedding-exemptions/1052989001/

Are we finally sliding back toward common sense again?
This opinion doesn't say what you seem to think the headlines mean.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You can keep a wooden stake in your trunk
On the off-chance that the fairy tales ain't bunk
And Imma keep a bottle of that funk
To get motel parking lot, balcony crunk.

Kaos

  • *
  • 29548
  • It's GO time
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #2 on: June 04, 2018, 12:28:08 PM »
This opinion doesn't say what you seem to think the headlines mean.
For one who champions subltely you surely don’t see it when it exists. 
It’s not the full decision I hoped for, but it’s a step in the right direction.   
All the lower courts ruled against the baker.  In a 7-2 opinion the SC leaned toward the side of sensible response. 
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

wesfau2

  • ***
  • 13855
  • I love it when you call me Big Poppa
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #3 on: June 04, 2018, 12:31:07 PM »
For one who champions subltely you surely don’t see it when it exists.
It’s not the full decision I hoped for, but it’s a step in the right direction.  
All the lower courts ruled against the baker.  In a 7-2 opinion the SC leaned toward the side of sensible response.
Still did not read the opinion, huh?

The only real court that heard this was the Col Appellate court (the Col Sup denied to take the case), the remainder of the procedural history exists before lay boards and commissions, rather than a full hearing in court (ALJ proceedings are decidedly different from traditional courtroom proceedings.)

The SC opinion basically says that one commissioner mouthed off in a hearing and, since no other commissioner disavowed the statements, the procedure was "hostile" to the baker and the entire process has to start over.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2018, 12:47:16 PM by wesfau2 »
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You can keep a wooden stake in your trunk
On the off-chance that the fairy tales ain't bunk
And Imma keep a bottle of that funk
To get motel parking lot, balcony crunk.

chinook

  • ****
  • 5651
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2018, 01:12:21 PM »
I would have baked them a fruit cake.  
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Kaos

  • *
  • 29548
  • It's GO time
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #5 on: June 04, 2018, 01:30:30 PM »
Still did not read the opinion, huh?

The only real court that heard this was the Col Appellate court (the Col Sup denied to take the case), the remainder of the procedural history exists before lay boards and commissions, rather than a full hearing in court (ALJ proceedings are decidedly different from traditional courtroom proceedings.)

The SC opinion basically says that one commissioner mouthed off in a hearing and, since no other commissioner disavowed the statements, the procedure was "hostile" to the baker and the entire process has to start over.
The liberal takeaway. 
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

WiregrassTiger

  • *
  • 12237
  • Don't touch Tappy, he's a service tiger.
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #6 on: June 04, 2018, 01:32:12 PM »
Still did not read the opinion, huh?

The only real court that heard this was the Col Appellate court (the Col Sup denied to take the case), the remainder of the procedural history exists before lay boards and commissions, rather than a full hearing in court (ALJ proceedings are decidedly different from traditional courtroom proceedings.)

The SC opinion basically says that one commissioner mouthed off in a hearing and, since no other commissioner disavowed the statements, the procedure was "hostile" to the baker and the entire process has to start over.
I not only didn’t read the decision but I only read the first sentence of your post. Which is actually farther than I’ve made it with one of your posts in a very long time.
But it was exhilarating.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Like my posts on www.tigersx.com

wesfau2

  • ***
  • 13855
  • I love it when you call me Big Poppa
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #7 on: June 04, 2018, 01:51:24 PM »
The liberal takeaway.
Or the actual language in the opinion.

See, the "fact-fluid" nature of this forum's current iteration strikes again.  If you really are interested in discussing the opinion, then let's...otherwise just another waste of time thread in here.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You can keep a wooden stake in your trunk
On the off-chance that the fairy tales ain't bunk
And Imma keep a bottle of that funk
To get motel parking lot, balcony crunk.

Kaos

  • *
  • 29548
  • It's GO time
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #8 on: June 04, 2018, 02:09:15 PM »
Or the actual language in the opinion.

See, the "fact-fluid" nature of this forum's current iteration strikes again.  If you really are interested in discussing the opinion, then let's...otherwise just another waste of time thread in here.
Your interpretation is the most liberal interpretation of the ruling period.  It pretty much mirrors what your average LBGTQRSPD blog says.  

Other interpretations are different.  

Most, even in mainstream media, view this as a victory for the baker.  

It may stop short of what I would have preferred in terms of affirming absolute freedom for business owners to uphold their own values, but it does not completely close that door.  

Believe it or not, you aren’t always the sharpest bulb in the sack. Your elite view from on high isn’t always right.  
« Last Edit: June 04, 2018, 02:10:50 PM by Kaos »
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

wesfau2

  • ***
  • 13855
  • I love it when you call me Big Poppa
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #9 on: June 04, 2018, 02:31:08 PM »
Your interpretation is the most liberal interpretation of the ruling period.  It pretty much mirrors what your average LBGTQRSPD blog says.  

Other interpretations are different.  

Most, even in mainstream media, view this as a victory for the baker.  

It may stop short of what I would have preferred in terms of affirming absolute freedom for business owners to uphold their own values, but it does not completely close that door.  

Believe it or not, you aren’t always the sharpest bulb in the sack. Your elite view from on high isn’t always right.  
My post isn't an "interpretation."  It's the actual language from the actual opinion.

Quote
That [neutral and respectful] consideration [of his claims] was compromised, however, by the Commission’s treatment of Phillips’ case, which showed elements of a clear and impermissible hostility toward the sincere religious beliefs motivating his objection. As the record shows, some of the commissioners at the Commission’s formal, public hearings endorsed the view that religious beliefs cannot legitimately be carried into the public sphere or commercial domain, disparaged Phillips’ faith as despicable and characterized it as merely rhetorical, and compared his invocation of his sincerely held religious beliefs to defenses of slavery and the Holocaust. No commissioners objected to the comments. Nor were they mentioned in the later state-court ruling or disavowed in the briefs filed here. The comments thus cast doubt on the fairness and impartiality of the Commission’s adjudication of Phillips’ case.

friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You can keep a wooden stake in your trunk
On the off-chance that the fairy tales ain't bunk
And Imma keep a bottle of that funk
To get motel parking lot, balcony crunk.

WiregrassTiger

  • *
  • 12237
  • Don't touch Tappy, he's a service tiger.
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #10 on: June 04, 2018, 02:53:20 PM »
Or the actual language in the opinion.

See, the "fact-fluid" nature of this forum's current iteration strikes again.  If you really are interested in discussing the opinion, then let's...otherwise just another waste of time thread in here.
Name one other example of a "waste of time" thread in here, bucko.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Like my posts on www.tigersx.com

Kaos

  • *
  • 29548
  • It's GO time
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #11 on: June 04, 2018, 03:02:22 PM »
My post isn't an "interpretation."  It's the actual language from the actual opinion.
You. Take. From. That. What. You. Want. It. To. Mean.
Not that hard.  

Also not the entire opinion, just the part you and the LTBRGQMFZ blogs have siezed on. 
« Last Edit: June 04, 2018, 03:04:09 PM by Kaos »
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

wesfau2

  • ***
  • 13855
  • I love it when you call me Big Poppa
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #12 on: June 05, 2018, 08:39:18 AM »
FFS.

I'm back to drive-by posting here.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You can keep a wooden stake in your trunk
On the off-chance that the fairy tales ain't bunk
And Imma keep a bottle of that funk
To get motel parking lot, balcony crunk.

WiregrassTiger

  • *
  • 12237
  • Don't touch Tappy, he's a service tiger.
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #13 on: June 05, 2018, 03:59:02 PM »
FFS.

I'm back to drive-by posting here.
Could you post a schedule? Then, I could only show up on the days you’re off.

boom!
#makinxgreatagain
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Like my posts on www.tigersx.com

Snaggletiger

  • *
  • 44556
  • My Fighting Pearls
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #14 on: June 05, 2018, 05:27:49 PM »
Back on the opinion for a second. Although I agree that the part Wes posted focused on the hostility of the Commission during what was supposed to be a fair and unbiased hearing, I think it also hits directly at the crux of the issue. The Justices got a glimpse of how religion is treated in certain areas in our current environment.  I'm assuming that Phillips is sincere in his assertion that his religious beliefs precluded him from baking teh gay cakes.  It also appears that up until the SCOTUS took a look at it, his religious beliefs were dismissed as balderdash...shenanigans even...and he was not allowed to take a position based on his faith. I believe (Just my opinion)the SCOTUS saw in the extremely biased language of the Commission's decision, and that it was never challenged, that Phillips was in fact, the one discriminated against.    
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
My doctor told me I needed to stop masturbating.  I asked him why, and he said, "because I'm trying to examine you."

WiregrassTiger

  • *
  • 12237
  • Don't touch Tappy, he's a service tiger.
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #15 on: June 05, 2018, 06:40:23 PM »
Back on the opinion for a second. Although I agree that the part Wes posted focused on the hostility of the Commission during what was supposed to be a fair and unbiased hearing, I think it also hits directly at the crux of the issue. The Justices got a glimpse of how religion is treated in certain areas in our current environment.  I'm assuming that Phillips is sincere in his assertion that his religious beliefs precluded him from baking teh gay cakes.  It also appears that up until the SCOTUS took a look at it, his religious beliefs were dismissed as balderdash...shenanigans even...and he was not allowed to take a position based on his faith. I believe (Just my opinion)the SCOTUS saw in the extremely biased language of the Commission's decision, and that it was never challenged, that Phillips was in fact, the one discriminated against.   
I know that you and Wes got a good look at my SCROTUM. You want to tell us about that?

How about it, Wes? Fly by post about my SCROTUM.


friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Like my posts on www.tigersx.com

Kaos

  • *
  • 29548
  • It's GO time
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #16 on: June 05, 2018, 07:08:54 PM »
Back on the opinion for a second. Although I agree that the part Wes posted focused on the hostility of the Commission during what was supposed to be a fair and unbiased hearing, I think it also hits directly at the crux of the issue. The Justices got a glimpse of how religion is treated in certain areas in our current environment.  I'm assuming that Phillips is sincere in his assertion that his religious beliefs precluded him from baking teh gay cakes.  It also appears that up until the SCOTUS took a look at it, his religious beliefs were dismissed as balderdash...shenanigans even...and he was not allowed to take a position based on his faith. I believe (Just my opinion)the SCOTUS saw in the extremely biased language of the Commission's decision, and that it was never challenged, that Phillips was in fact, the one discriminated against.   

You used a lot of words and got to the same general area: 

The opinion could easily be interpreted as a win for the baker and a statement upholding his religious rights. That requires you to read the ENTIRE opinion. 


Or.... you could cherry pick a section and drive by with the same view as the typical LBNG539QWERTY blog.  

The SC tried to be Solomon. Typical.  Left the meaning open to interpretation. Regardless of what some would have you think 
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

Snaggletiger

  • *
  • 44556
  • My Fighting Pearls
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #17 on: June 05, 2018, 10:24:40 PM »
Admittedly, I'm not versed in procedural issues at that level.  Just asking and would love for Wes to weigh in because I guarantee his knowledge on the subject kicks mine in the ass. 

If the SC made this decision solely on their perception that Phillips didn't get a fair shake at the lower levels strictly due to bias, would they not remand/send it back down for a do over.  Or by the time it reaches their ears, do they have to make a decision and that's final? 

I still tend to read into that part of the opinion Wes posted as not only was the Commission's decision off the charts bias, but they (SC) also tended to acknowledge Phillips' right to take a position based on his religious beliefs. 
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
My doctor told me I needed to stop masturbating.  I asked him why, and he said, "because I'm trying to examine you."

Kaos

  • *
  • 29548
  • It's GO time
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #18 on: June 05, 2018, 10:50:48 PM »
Admittedly, I'm not versed in procedural issues at that level.  Just asking and would love for Wes to weigh in because I guarantee his knowledge on the subject kicks mine in the ass.

If the SC made this decision solely on their perception that Phillips didn't get a fair shake at the lower levels strictly due to bias, would they not remand/send it back down for a do over.  Or by the time it reaches their ears, do they have to make a decision and that's final?

I still tend to read into that part of the opinion Wes posted as not only was the Commission's decision off the charts bias, but they (SC) also tended to acknowledge Phillips' right to take a position based on his religious beliefs.
Now, now.  You know it's not open for interpretation.  Do better.  

Seriously?  Your take is pretty much what everyone other than the most screechingly left viewpoints drew from the ruling.   Which is why I said in the beginning that it didn't go quite far enough for me.  

I think what Wes is missing that you (and most) seem to grasp is that even without the instance of the religion being mocked, this decision would likely have gone the same way.  The mocking aspect of it just allowed the Supreme Court to kick the can a little further down the road.  I can't envision any circumstance where one person's freedom to be gay overrides another's right to object and that's what the Court nudged up against in this ruling.  

It's not a full victory for either side, but most rational observers counted it as a win in the baker's column. 
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

Re: Patty cake, patty cake
« Reply #19 on: June 05, 2018, 11:35:04 PM »
Admittedly, I'm not versed in procedural issues at that level.  Just asking and would love for Wes to weigh in because I guarantee his knowledge on the subject kicks mine in the ass.

If the SC made this decision solely on their perception that Phillips didn't get a fair shake at the lower levels strictly due to bias, would they not remand/send it back down for a do over.  Or by the time it reaches their ears, do they have to make a decision and that's final?

I still tend to read into that part of the opinion Wes posted as not only was the Commission's decision off the charts bias, but they (SC) also tended to acknowledge Phillips' right to take a position based on his religious beliefs.
I believe Wes kick you in ass, too. Special if you not give fair shake and hold by ears.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions