Question for the lawyers here.
- Thread starter woodchuck
- Start date
Gay couple cited by web designer in Supreme Court case doesn’t exist
DENVER >> A Colorado web designer who the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today could refuse to make wedding websites for gay couples cited a request from a man who says he never asked to work with her.
www.staradvertiser.com
One thing that worries me about this law is being around ignorant people who will assume you are gay because of how you look, dress, and your lack of spouse and/or children and use that to refuse you service or just give you a hard time.
To clarify the issue of how a person dresses, Billy Porter is obviously gay because he wears dresses and high heels but we once had a female member who said that men who stripped polo shirts are gay, and as ignorant as that sounds, in this world we live, this could be an issue.
To clarify the issue of how a person dresses, Billy Porter is obviously gay because he wears dresses and high heels but we once had a female member who said that men who stripped polo shirts are gay, and as ignorant as that sounds, in this world we live, this could be an issue.
Last edited:
It violates Article III of the Constitution...the Court overreached its authority. But who decides whether or not the Court overreaches it's authority?
The Supreme Court.
Marbury v. Madison essentially set the precedent of what and how the Court decides constitutionality. The Federalist Papers No. 78 (Hamilton) discusses the role of the Court and the limits of its powers. No doubt they overstepped their bounds.
The Supreme Court.
Marbury v. Madison essentially set the precedent of what and how the Court decides constitutionality. The Federalist Papers No. 78 (Hamilton) discusses the role of the Court and the limits of its powers. No doubt they overstepped their bounds.
Similar threads
