Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.
This article wasn't approved by the admins, so it would normally only be available to TotalFark subscribers. However, this link is so good that we're letting you see it. Posting new comments is still only available to TotalFark subscribers.

If you are a paid TotalFark subscriber, you must have cookies enabled in your browser. You can reset your cookie by logging in.

(Fox News)   Supreme Court refuses to see gay-marriage photo case on the grounds that they would be forced to look through the whole album even though no one really wants to sit through every single one of them, but you have to just to be nice   (foxnews.com) divider line 25
    More: Spiffy, New Mexico Supreme Court, Human Rights Act, artistic expression  
•       •       •

160 clicks; Favorite

25 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-04-07 11:30:35 AM  
This is sad- what happened to business owners who said "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone?"  Instead these two lesbians forced their belief's on a Christian company who didn't believe the way they did.

Talk about intolerance!
 
2014-04-07 12:06:14 PM  
Exactly.  Any business should be able to refuse to do business with anyone.  Just be prepared for the backlash once it gets out.  But legally there should be no coercion there at all.
 
2014-04-07 12:24:35 PM  
The state has a legitimate interest in preventing the wholesale discrimination against a class of persons.  The only way to enforce such provisions on a broad scale - to, in effect, say that *someone* has to be willing to serve a population - the state must have the ability to enforce the provision on an individual level.  Otherwise, everyone just says, "Well, someone else will do it - I don't have to."

As part of obtaining and maintaining a license to sell goods in the public market, every businessperson agrees to these conditions.  They don't get to back out on a specific one just because they feel like it.
 
2014-04-07 12:44:11 PM  
And they would need to hear the story about every one of them, particularly after Stephen lost his sarong on the beach.  This was before he lost all that weight, so his thighs looked like smoked hams.  Even then, those full-body shots were nice.  And it was Frisco, so the sunsets were to die for.

Anywhoo....
 
2014-04-07 01:01:03 PM  
Public accommodation. Don't like it? Don't start a business that caters to the public. It's so not complicated.
 
2014-04-07 01:13:31 PM  

jwa007: Exactly.  Any business should be able to refuse to do business with anyone.  Just be prepared for the backlash once it gets out.  But legally there should be no coercion there at all.


There's massive massive empirical evidence to suggest that the size of the backlash is insufficient to close the businesses of bigoted farks that stretches over a  thousand or more years.

"serfdom will just be solved by the free market - Wat Tyler is oppressing us" and so on.
 
2014-04-07 01:19:17 PM  

jwa007: Exactly.  Any business should be able to refuse to do business with anyone.  Just be prepared for the backlash once it gets out.  But legally there should be no coercion there at all.


img.fark.net
 
2014-04-07 01:20:48 PM  
Because there are currently 5 conservative justices on the court, but none of them want to be known as the one who wrote the majority opinion on the next Plessy v. Ferguson.
 
2014-04-07 01:23:08 PM  

jwa007: Exactly.  Any business should be able to refuse to do business with anyone.  Just be prepared for the backlash once it gets out.  But legally there should be no coercion there at all.

Your Dream Vote:
President: RAND PAUL
Vice President: Jim Crow
 
2014-04-07 01:23:15 PM  
Trailltrader:  Instead these two lesbians forced their belief's on a Christian company who didn't believe the way they did.

Talk about intolerance!


Is the photographer being forced to have gay sex? Y/N
 
2014-04-07 01:23:55 PM  

jwa007: Exactly.  Any business should be able to refuse to do business with anyone.  Just be prepared for the backlash once it gets out.  But legally there should be no coercion there at all.


Yeah. The point of America is that you should be able to pick on unpopular groups with no repercussions at all.
 
2014-04-07 01:24:26 PM  
But they made sure to hear a case allowing further corruption of politics by money.  So it's all good.

Priorities, people.  Same goes for that fluff case about domestic spying.
 
2014-04-07 01:24:33 PM  
Businesses can refuse service to anyone they want- once they move to an unincorporated area without sewer, water, public utilities, roads, police and fire departments.

By all means, once you are off the grid, you can serve who you want. Until then, you are part of a larger society and you need to folllow that society's laws.
 
2014-04-07 01:25:53 PM  

Jaymark108: Because there are currently 5 conservative justices on the court, but none of them want to be known as the one who wrote the majority opinion on the next Plessy v. Ferguson.


Actually, Scalia very well might be. Luckily, Roberts and Kennedy seem to be hinged enough prevent him from ever trying it.
 
2014-04-07 01:26:50 PM  

Trailltrader: This is sad- what happened to business owners who said "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone?"  Instead these two lesbians forced their belief's on a Christian company who didn't believe the way they did.

Talk about intolerance!


This actually is what Conservatives believe.
 
2014-04-07 01:27:16 PM  

jwa007: Exactly.  Any business should be able to refuse to do business with anyone.  Just be prepared for the backlash once it gets out.  But legally there should be no coercion there at all.


The idea is similar to that of hiring and equal opportunity employment.

You can refuse to hire anyone, but it can't be because of race, religion, etc.

This would be similar to adding sexual orientation to that list.
 
2014-04-07 01:29:39 PM  
So, Conservatives don't like State's Rights in this case?  Why, because the gays are icky?
 
2014-04-07 01:57:30 PM  
Yeah, duplicate, but in this case the headline on the red lighted one is a lot better.

+1
 
2014-04-07 02:50:08 PM  

Speaker2Animals: Yeah, duplicate, but in this case the headline on the red lighted one is a lot better.

+1


First to green keeps it. I'm just glad to be on the green side for once, I've lost plenty of greens too.
 
2014-04-07 03:01:44 PM  
Nah!  I understand the arguments of all who have disagreed with me in here, but I still think in a free society a business should be able to turn down customers for whatever reasons they choose.  I wonder if hypothetically a gay wedding planner who refused the business of a heterosexual couple because he has a profound belief against breeder weddings would receive similar treatments from the court.

Also if this is law that you cannot refuse people a service you offer because you don't like some aspect of their lives why can a business post a sign saying "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone."
 
2014-04-07 03:04:50 PM  

R.A.Danny: Speaker2Animals: Yeah, duplicate, but in this case the headline on the red lighted one is a lot better.

+1

First to green keeps it. I'm just glad to be on the green side for once, I've lost plenty of greens too.


It's rare, but I have seen changes a few times.
 
2014-04-07 03:07:33 PM  

Trailltrader: This is sad- what happened to business owners who said "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone?"  Instead these two lesbians forced their belief's on a Christian company who didn't believe the way they did.

Talk about intolerance!


Given your cramped thinking on this issue, I'm not surprised at your stupid apostrophe fail.
 
2014-04-07 03:12:18 PM  

Speaker2Animals: R.A.Danny: Speaker2Animals: Yeah, duplicate, but in this case the headline on the red lighted one is a lot better.

+1

First to green keeps it. I'm just glad to be on the green side for once, I've lost plenty of greens too.

It's rare, but I have seen changes a few times.


SHHHH!
 
2014-04-07 05:11:49 PM  

jwa007: Nah!  I understand the arguments of all who have disagreed with me in here, but I still think in a free society a business should be able to turn down customers for whatever reasons they choose.  I wonder if hypothetically a gay wedding planner who refused the business of a heterosexual couple because he has a profound belief against breeder weddings would receive similar treatments from the court.

Also if this is law that you cannot refuse people a service you offer because you don't like some aspect of their lives why can a business post a sign saying "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone."


You are allowed to refuse service to anyone, but not for specific reasons.  Really, the problem here is that the photogs were too egotistical and self-assured to bother faking a reason for not doing the wedding; if they'd come up with some half-cocked excuse, they would have been fine.

It's the reason that matters, not the nature of the party being refused.
 
2014-04-08 11:24:46 PM  

jwa007: Nah!  I understand the arguments of all who have disagreed with me in here, but I still think in a free society a business should be able to turn down customers for whatever reasons they choose.  I wonder if hypothetically a gay wedding planner who refused the business of a heterosexual couple because he has a profound belief against breeder weddings would receive similar treatments from the court.

Also if this is law that you cannot refuse people a service you offer because you don't like some aspect of their lives why can a business post a sign saying "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone."


i.imgur.com
 
Displayed 25 of 25 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report