US Supreme Court Justice Kennedy Retiring

aftershocks

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,352
Ratings
12,216
The clips on PBS NewsHour of Trump's celebration of Kav victory was another surreal WTF episode and way too idiotic for words. There were members of the Supreme Court trying to sit through the act without throwing up or laughing. I believe I caught Justice Breyer slightly shaking his head in disbelief with a bemused or perhaps a stunned half-smile on his face, while RBG was seemingly catching a couple of winks in order to conserve her energy and extend her life cycle. As Kate McKinnon portraying RBG on SNL continues to remind her alter ego: MUST NOT DIE! :drama: :saint:

Funnily* enough (*I think that's the right word, unless you have a better one to offer @ballettmaus :p) Justice Clarence Thomas was looking down at his lap apparently throughout the WH victory ceremony. I can imagine Thomas swearing under his breath: "F' Kav, why'd you have to bring your beer-drinking, Clinton-hating, Trump-sucking ass up into our collegial provenance?! You the f' singlehandedly dredged up that AH shizz they had me under-the-gun about 27 years ago! Just when I wuz beginning to relax, feeling I could let my guard down, enjoying my pet Repub Justice partisan conservative dog status and making best friends with Roberts!":p :rolleyes: Kavanaugh on his very first day is trying to make sure everyone knows he isn't about to fade into the wallpaper like Thomas, albeit there's no doubt Kav has more cred than Thomas in terms of legal knowledge, though in terms of character and non-partisanship, they both suck.

I don't watch in entirety anything with Trump's vain lying and puffing himself up, but I can't escape the clips and snippets. I was just so glad to see Amanpour pulling no punches in the questions she asked her guests (including Hillary Clinton) regarding the Kavanaugh confirmation and Trump's ridiculous and offensive puffery.
 

VIETgrlTerifa

Well-Known Member
Messages
25,941
Ratings
40,975
He will make any pastry for a gay customer!! But not a wedding cake where many Christian leaders say gay marriage is a sin. All the Christian leaders must decide if designing a cake making a cake and serving a cake for a gay wedding Is endorsing gay marriage. A wedding cake is not a brownie!! Bakers can spend hours and hours working with a couple to create a wedding cake for them and making it and then serving it.
And that's discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Next!
 

Aussie Willy

Hates both vegemite and peanut butter
Messages
21,373
Ratings
8,210
He will make any pastry for a gay customer!! But not a wedding cake where many Christian leaders say gay marriage is a sin. All the Christian leaders must decide if designing a cake making a cake and serving a cake for a gay wedding Is endorsing gay marriage. A wedding cake is not a brownie!! Bakers can spend hours and hours working with a couple to create a wedding cake for them and making it and then serving it.
Marriage is part of the legal system. People can choose to get married in a church as the venue, but overall they are getting married under the law. If God (if you believe) is watching over you, that is fine. But it is still a law for marriage.
 

snoopy

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,911
Ratings
8,668
It's because the interest rates went up. It will almost certainly bounce back. That's not that big of a loss.

People who talk about a correction mean like 20%, that's like 5,000+
I don’t know if this is the start of the big correction or not but there are stop gaps so you couldn’t have a 20% drop in one day.
 

overedge

crying in the TSL bathroom
Messages
24,773
Ratings
18,763
He will make any pastry for a gay customer!! But not a wedding cake where many Christian leaders say gay marriage is a sin. All the Christian leaders must decide if designing a cake making a cake and serving a cake for a gay wedding Is endorsing gay marriage. A wedding cake is not a brownie!! Bakers can spend hours and hours working with a couple to create a wedding cake for them and making it and then serving it.
Funny, I don't see the name of the shop being "Masterpiece Bakery except for Baking Wedding Cakes for Gay Couples". Sorry, but if you're not providing a service to a customer that is available to every other customer, and refusing to provide that service on the basis of the customer's sexual orientation, that's discrimination and it's illegal.
 
Messages
25,941
Ratings
40,975
And that’s allowed because of conscience clauses
Except when it's not allowed. In fact, The Supreme Court has said numerous times that religious-based objections cannot interfere with non-discrimination laws in settings where the religious institution is participating in the economy and providing services to the general public. You really ignored everything I posted before, haven't you? You certainly ignored my questions about what's the difference between refusing to serve an interracial couple a wedding cake if your religion does not believe in interracial marriage and refusing to serve a same-sex couple a wedding cake for their religious objections in a state that protects both classes from discrimination in areas of public accommodation.

If you keep responding in the manner that you're doing, then this isn't really a fruitful conversation.
 
Messages
11,239
Ratings
2,404
Funny, I don't see the name of the shop being "Masterpiece Bakery except for Baking Wedding Cakes for Gay Couples". Sorry, but if you're not providing a service to a customer that is available to every other customer, and refusing to provide that service on the basis of the customer's sexual orientation, that's discrimination and it's illegal.
No it isn’t illegal because people can base service on religious beliefs
 

BittyBug

And the band played on
Messages
20,502
Ratings
16,469
Yep just saw that. Sigh. I was hoping to be able to convert my 401b to an ira first
Totally OT but the status of the market should not impede your ability to roll over your money. You should be able to make an in-kind rollover that would just transfer your current holdings to the IRA. You can then see how they do and liquidate at a better time. The only exception is if you're money is in some type of stable value fund that is proprietary, but in that case the current status of the Dow should not have any impact on that fund's worth (hence the "stable value").
 
Messages
11,239
Ratings
2,404
Marriage is part of the legal system. People can choose to get married in a church as the venue, but overall they are getting married under the law. If God (if you believe) is watching over you, that is fine. But it is still a law for marriage.
There is no distinction in the religious teachings for church marriage or government marriage! It’s not like gay marriage is a sin only if it’s performed by a church but not civil marriage. The important words are marriages and weddings!
 

rfisher

Well-Known Member
Messages
54,644
Ratings
44,257
Totally OT but the status of the market should not impede your ability to roll over your money. You should be able to make an in-kind rollover that would just transfer your current holdings to the IRA. You can then see how they do and liquidate at a better time. The only exception is if you're money is in some type of stable value fund that is proprietary, but in that case the current status of the Dow should not have any impact on that fund's worth (hence the "stable value").
It's our work retirement plan. I'm going to talk to hr and see if i can transfer some to my ira and just let employer contributions go into the 401b. I'm too close to retirement to recover a catastrophic loss
 
Messages
11,239
Ratings
2,404
Except when it's not allowed. In fact, The Supreme Court has said numerous times that religious-based objections cannot interfere with non-discrimination laws in settings where the religious institution is participating in the economy and providing services to the general public. You really ignored everything I posted before, haven't you? You certainly ignored my questions about what's the difference between refusing to serve an interracial couple a wedding cake if your religion does not believe in interracial marriage and refusing to serve a same-sex couple a wedding cake for their religious objections in a state that protects both classes from discrimination in areas of public accommodation.

If you keep responding in the manner that you're doing, then this isn't really a fruitful conversation.
What modern church says interracial is a sin? I said before all churches must clear this up and this includes the pope if participating in a gay wedding is a sin! Is renting a room for a gay wedding reception a sin? Is baking a cake a sin? Is renting a limo a sin? All this must be discussed and decisions made by religions not government! The government can’t decide what is sin. Also individual believers shouldn’t decide what is a sin. It would be good for all the religions to give rules on gay weddings in countries where gay marriage is legal.
 
Messages
25,941
Ratings
40,975
Again, you did not read what I wrote earlier or you did not comprehend it and thus were unable to understand it. There was indeed a court case where a business owner argued it was his religious expression that made him refuse service to black people. He was not just using his religion to hide his animus against black people. Even if he was, the Court isn't there to second guess whether that person's religious beliefs are real. There are indeed religious people who subscribed to that, especially as remnants of the pre-civil rights act era. There are pockets of communities in this country that subscribe to that, but they know better than to be that blatant about it. Either you feel religious objection can make people selectively discriminate against a protected class (all protected classes) by refusing to provide services that they provide to everyone else to people of that class or you don't. Race and sexual orientation are protected classes in many states and are seen the same.

The reason I was skeptical about whether you read what I wrote earlier because if you had then you would know better than to just make a blanket assumption that "conscience clauses" protected EVERY religious expression. There are tons of religious expressions that are deemed illegal because they harm society. Discrimination is seen as harmful to society.
 

overedge

crying in the TSL bathroom
Messages
24,773
Ratings
18,763
Discrimination on the basis of religion can also mean that you get discriminated against because of your religious beliefs, e.g. an employer telling an employee they have to work on Sunday if that employee's religious beliefs prohibit labour on Sundays. And before @caseyedwards goes off on a rant about how employers need to be able to run their businesses, the employer can accommodate that belief e.g. by telling job applicants that Sunday shifts are required (so applicants can decide whether that fits with their religious practice before accepting the job) or by allowing employees to make other arrangements such as working an extra day during the week so they can have Sundays off.

It's also worth keeping in mind that to have a *legitimate* reason to discriminate on the basis of religion, an employer or a business usually has to prove that doing or not doing something is an essential part of practicing their faith. Since the Bible doesn't explicitly say "gay marriage is evil and wrong" and one can still be a devout Christian and support same-sex marriage, the argument that baking a wedding cake for a gay couple violates Christian beliefs is not a valid argument for the baker to be allowed to discriminate.
 
Last edited:

BittyBug

And the band played on
Messages
20,502
Ratings
16,469
It's our work retirement plan. I'm going to talk to hr and see if i can transfer some to my ira and just let employer contributions go into the 401b. I'm too close to retirement to recover a catastrophic loss
A potential market loss would be dictated by the type of investment you're holding (risky stock vs. fixed income, etc.), which is not necessarily tied to the vehicle (403(b), IRA, etc.). If your concern is preservation of capital, you could look to move money within your 403(b) to a lower risk investment option within that plan. Granted, you'd have more options within an IRA, but you might also pay higher fees depending on where you park your IRA and which investments you choose.
 

becca

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,252
Ratings
3,088
Again, you did not read what I wrote earlier or you did not comprehend it and thus were unable to understand it. There was indeed a court case where a business owner argued it was his religious expression that made him refuse service to black people. He was not just using his religion to hide his animus against black people. Even if he was, the Court isn't there to second guess whether that person's religious beliefs are real. There are indeed religious people who subscribed to that, especially as remnants of the pre-civil rights act era. There are pockets of communities in this country that subscribe to that, but they know better than to be that blatant about it. Either you feel religious objection can make people selectively discriminate against a protected class (all protected classes) by refusing to provide services that they provide to everyone else to people of that class or you don't. Race and sexual orientation are protected classes in many states and are seen the same.

The reason I was skeptical about whether you read what I wrote earlier because if you had then you would know better than to just make a blanket assumption that "conscience clauses" protected EVERY religious expression. There are tons of religious expressions that are deemed illegal because they harm society. Discrimination is seen as harmful to society.
Once again folks aren’t refusing service to gay people they are refusing service to support a particular event.

Now I would probably bake the cake but people have the right to their own political opinions. Or opinions about marriage.

It’s not the same and many religious people resent the idea that is the same.

Marriage comes with a lot of religious ideas and many religions carry ideas about who should or should not marry.

I’m fine with agreeing to disagree but I resent the idea that my disagreeing with you is the same as racism.

And you saying that is exactly the concerns many religious folks have.

When my Dad remarried and asked me to sing at his wedding, he didn’t call me a bigot when I said while I will happily attend I am sorry I can’t sing because you are not free to marry.

I have treated his wife with kindness and when he recently mentioned the idea of annullment because his wife wants one I encouraged it. It’s his life. He gets to live it and I have similar feelings to people in my life who are gay.

We live in a country with diverse views. We need to learn to live together.
 
Last edited:
Messages
25,941
Ratings
40,975
It's an act of discrimination on the basis that the two people getting married are same-sex. But for the fact that they were the same sex, he would have provided that service. That's explicit discrimination, and this is a classic public accommodation law issue. Yes, you feel strongly about being able to refuse them and giving religious folks the ability to strip away at gay people's dignity for religious reasons, but no matter how much one feels, they are in a state that protects same-sex people from discrimination in this manner. And it is the same as race in that many people strongly believed interracial marriage or intermingling of the races was against their religion. To them, they were serious as serious can be.

The reason why I'm equating race and sexual orientation is because in Colorado and like states, sexual orientation is treated just like race is with regard to discrimination. If a religious objector had a sincere objection to interracial marriage and refused to bake a cake for an interracial couple, the issue would be the same as Masterpiece.

I in no way called you a racist. I don't know where you got that from. I was equating how sexual orientation is protected as race is in those states. However, at least we know you think being racist is worse than being a homophobe and you don't mind discriminating against gay people but you find the idea of discriminating against someone due to their race is horrible. In some places, people don't mind discriminating against someone due to their race. A few decades ago, it was normal. Just like how some think it's normal to refuse service to someone based on their sexual orientation right now.

Honestly, I don't know how many times I have to say the same thing over and over again. For people who are not becca and caseyedwards, do you guys have trouble understanding what I'm writing? Seriously, I'm beginning to woner.
 
Last edited:

overedge

crying in the TSL bathroom
Messages
24,773
Ratings
18,763
@becca refusing to sing at your dad's wedding because you didn't believe that he was entitled to remarry under your religion's beliefs is NOT the same thing as a business that serves the public refusing to provide a service to some customers that it provides to other customers.

The bakery *is* "refusing service to gay people" because the baker is saying "I will not bake your wedding cake because you are two men getting married to each other". If the customers weren't gay they wouldn't be marrying each other :rolleyes:
 
Messages
25,941
Ratings
40,975
I have no trouble understanding what your writing, but I do have trouble understanding why you're writing it. becca ain't never gonna change and she's never going to critically consider what you're writing.
I mostly replied to caseyedwards and becca because I couldn't let posts that were either wrong legally-speaking or incomplete get past. I figured it would be good to provide a clearer picture of where the law actually stands for everyone else reading. They weren't just expressing their opinion, but they were spreading false information about the law and I didn't want people to think what they were saying was correct.
 

oleada

Well-Known Member
Messages
37,795
Ratings
28,219
When my Dad remarried and asked me to sing at his wedding, he didn’t call me a bigot when I said while I will happily attend I am sorry I can’t sing because you are not free to marry.

I have treated his wife with kindness and when he recently mentioned the idea of annullment because his wife wants one I encouraged it. It’s his life. He gets to live it and I have similar feelings to people in my life who are gay.
.
No, but it's a pretty horrible thing to (not) do.
 

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,511
Ratings
12,702
Once again folks aren’t refusing service to gay people they are refusing service to support a particular event.
We don't know what kind of a wedding cake the couple wanted but unless the couple wanted their story to be depicted out of fondant and/or modeling chocolate, or wanted same-sex fondant figurines as decoration, the only thing that would have shown that this cake is for a same-sex couple would have been the cake topper. If the baker was uncomfortable getting such a topper, he could have asked the couple to provide it.

Fact is, he's a baker who refused to provide a service because of a personal belief even though providing the service would not have had an impact on his personal beliefs.


Now I would probably bake the cake but people have the right to their own political opinions. Or opinions about marriage.
The couple didn't ask the baker to change his opinion. They asked him to make a cake, in other words, they asked him to do his job.


When my Dad remarried and asked me to sing at his wedding, he didn’t call me a bigot when I said while I will happily attend I am sorry I can’t sing because you are not free to marry.
And that is between you and your dad and your conscience. If you can live with yourself for having refused your dad his wish then good for you. But, unless I'm mistaken, he did not ask you to do your job and would have compensated you for singing. I'm assuming he asked you because your his daughter and you sing well and he would have liked for you to sing at his wedding.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 8)

Top