Christian Baker WINS: SCOTUS 7:2

Posted June 4th, 2018 by Iron Mike

In July 2012,  Charlie Craig and David Mullins went to Masterpiece Cakeshop owned by Jack Phillips… Then they went to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission.

Per Justice Kennedy,  the Commission seemed “neither tolerant nor respectful of Mr. Phillips’ religious beliefs”.   So we end up with a narrow decision, – but a small victory.
Of course: Ginsberg and Sotomayor dissented.  Ginsberg is wobbly, – will die soon….

4 Responses to “Christian Baker WINS: SCOTUS 7:2”

  1. integrity 1st

    This may sound heartless, but in the cases of Ginsberg, McCain, and similarly situated others in office, I consider their staying in the face of the circumstances self serving, selfish, and against anything relevant to the best interests of OUR COUNTRY. As a result, no one should mourn their deaths since their refusal to retire makes it liberation instead of great loss. These policies and conditions really should be changed and prohibited from happening – – – all too often.

  2. GreenBeretLTC

    Why couldn’t those two characters have just gone to another bakery instead of trying to force their values on someone else…..?


    It seems Bro that there are many kinds of gay / lebian people, – and for some living quietly is enough – so long as they are not being bullied or denied basic rights….

    BUT for many,…being gay is just part of the package; – the rest is a constant need to be the center of attention, so they act out, crash the St. Patty’s Day Parade, or pretend that they’ve been victimized….

    It seems they revel in the spotlight, and need to be celebrated and be the center of attention. They’re like Obama – they need to see themselves on TV.

    So going to another bakery would have ruined their whole wedding….

  3. Vic

    So two of the Supremes would have been totally cool with the Nuremburg Laws….This should have been a 9 – 0 decision.

  4. Sherox

    It is a small victory but the reasoning for the decision is flawed. They only seem to agree because the locals were hostile to religion. That sends the message only to not be hostile to religion. SCOTUS has not agreed that the case is about where the baker’s right begin others’ rights end.