Court Rules Kentucky Print Shop Has Right to Avoid Making Gay Pride T-shirts

Where does it say you are allowed to discriminate between customers at will. Please refrain from sophmoric arguments.

How many times do I have to repeat my argument, this where we differ.

 

Yes, any business that discrimates, should have their license revoked/reviewed, et al.

 

These type cases ultimately show how old the truly wealthy and political/action type organizations have any rights in regards to civil lawsuits. No ordinary Jack or Jill could ever afford to ask a court to decide this. Both sides will be billed hundreds of thousands of dollars - meaning only wealthy groups or big funds organizations can even go to court. If the T-shirt shop ends up losing the court would like rule they owe the other side $250,000, $500,000, $800,000 in legal fees, though they didn't bring any lawsuit. However, courts almost never require the Plaintiffs to pay the Defendant's legal fees even if the Plaintiff loses - so either way the Defendant loses even if winning the case.
If a wealthy person, company or organization wants to wipe someone out? Just sue and push the lawsuit thru the appeals process. The Defendant has to pay tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees to defend and even if winning still lost all the legal fees. This is probably the greatest single flaw and injustice in the civil law side of lawsuits and courts - no matter what, the Defendant will lose 95% of the time, even if winning the case, due to legal fees and court costs.

 

But it is not a 2-way street. If a person says "I won't shop there because they are Christians," they can not be sued for discrimination, can they?

In many of these cases the issue is not just "discrimination," but also required support and participation. The KKK can call itself a religious organization. If you as an employee or small business are required to attend their "religious service" to facilitate that event as either an employee or business then you per se are in real terms both a supporter of and participant of that KKK ritual. A contractor refusing to build the cross they are going to burn and refusing to light it, a seamstress refusing to sew their costumes and be hired to be present to resize or repair any, printer required to print their literature, all are being required to support the KKK in real, facilitating terms. So would a person who has an events facility if forced to rent the facility to the KKK.

This, then, also identifies that person, employee and business with the KKK. Protesters could gain so much publicity that no one else would hire that person, company or location again as it is perceived as a KKK supporter. Any employee required could be present forever could see hundreds of postings on websites, facebook and blogs at a KKK event, literally leading to death threats.

For a real life example, I know someone who many years ago found his home had been broken into and extreme racist slogans sprayed all over the walls along with other vandalism. He took them to a copy shop for copies for insurance and the police. The employee at the copy shop who copied them was black and thought the white customer is who made the racist vandalism, showed other blacks who were there, and the customer found himself surrounded by black men who literally violently attacked him. The person attacked was a white judge who had ruled an employee with a civil service job with a desk full of extreme racist materials including a "running n..ger target" of a black many running with a gun sight X on him could be fired. In addition, the pictures were circulated in that exact opposite context of the judge as a racist, which it was exactly the opposite from the truth - and the growing retaliations and threats so great - his wife hit in the head in the yard by something thrown from a car and growing death threats - he had to leave the bench and move hundreds of miles away.

The pictures were being used falsely by racists to falsely portray the judge as the racist to drive him off. The judge elected to take his place was such a white racist that ultimately he was impeached, but not until after a lot of damage. If you participate in any event you ARE identified with that event and there is no way to stop anyone from using it against you, particularly now with the Internet.
If someone got a photos of you at a Westboro Baptist Church - though you were there only because required to be under anti-discrimination rulings - via the Internet any adversary could permanently label you as the most rabid homophobe with NOTHING you could do to stop being so labeled the rest of your life for anyone who looked up your name online.

If you are required to attend or service any activity, you inherently are a supporter of that activity and group - even if you 100% disagree - and are subject to any backlash this may cause - accurately or not. In the instance of gay marriage ceremonies or events such an employee or business could find itself ostracized socially, in terms of future employment or professionally.

In my opinion, ANY event, material or service that any business should be able to refuse any service or participation in anything that has any political or religious/philosophical implication. So while a business should not be able to refuse services to gays in general, it should be able to refuse services to a gay wedding as it is only a religious/ideological ritual, given it is a marriage license, not a marriage ritual, that makes a couple married - just the same as I believe it could refuse services to ANY marriage ceremony as inherently it is a religion/ideological ritual. Same for materials for political events or political support, including advocacy of any agenda whatever it is.

 

The notion that a person requires a license from the government or the person and family should starve to death is one of the greatest contradictions of the core concept of the USA.

 

That black employee should have been fired, if true. Do you have a link to support this, I mean a news outlet link only.

 

"What a silly question" said the (old spirit) to me "everyone knows we didn't have that kind of behavior when we wrote the Constitution. Now we did drink a lot and danced a lot and people wondered why we were so gay"

 

Yep, as others have said.
Everyone would be denied the printing of those shirts with those words. This was not a case of discrimination.
They didn't refuse service to gays because they are gay. A hetero could ask for the same message to be printed and they should be denied as well if this owner truly believes what they preach. And are not discriminators.

 

as they should be allowed, what they can't do is deny selling any t-shirts to gays

anything they would print for one, they have to print for another

though I think it's a bad business decision and I would not shop there

 

Businesses have the right to refuse service for any reason, unless they are publicly funded.

Left judges have perverted the Constitution to serve their agendas.

 

Which is how it's supposed to work.

 

Why? They have the same 1st Amendment protections as everyone else. The LGBT has become accustomed to SPECIAL PRIVILEGES, and it's hopefully ending now.

 

It absolutely forbids prohibiting the Free Practice of Religion, which makes most public accommodation laws In-Constitutional.

 

= how the Constitution intended it work.

 

Taxwise. Period.

 

Ridiculous false analogy. They can buy t-shirts from someone else. Blacks couldn't go vote "somewhere else", thanks to the democrats.

 

Many already do.

 

Baloney. We do not have the "right" to a t-shirt we want.

 

Great points.

 

From a typical source.

 

Bull. They have the same 1st Amendment rights as any other religion, and citizens.

 

please provide the legal codification of what you claim= total madeup nonsense.

 

Certainly you'd make the same argument against a Jewish-owned shop that refused to make a tshirt honoring Hitler.

 

You call having a t-shirt printed the way you like a "special privilege"?

omg lol

 

But why should a person or business be compelled to perform a service they do not wish to perform for whatever reason they see fit? The worst you could accuse them of is bad business.