Key Doc In Supreme Court LGBTQ Case Is Likely Fake

The SCOTUS ruled for the bigots!  The religiously driven seriously old haters of the newer culture ruled it is OK to discriminate against the gays, if you have a sincerely held belief.   I am hurting so bad seeing the US revert to a religiously driven theocracy that denies any progress in society since the 1950s.  We fought these battles, we in the US are now going so far backward from the rest of the world.   Hell even Nepal just approved same-sex marriage.   The fundamentalist won’t stop even as they age out and become more of a minority until they rule us all with their hateful church doctrines based on words of people who did not even understand germ theory written 2,500 years ago.   I am so upset at a country that claims all people are created equal that says because I am gay I have less or no rights if someone has a belief against my existence.   On a prior case one of the Justices wrote that discrimination against religion is the worst kind of discrimination.   Well you can choose your religion, you can change it or stop believing in any of them.  I was born gay.  I don’t have a choice in that.   I am gay.  But someone who can choose what myths they believe in that day can deny me services or rights due to that belief.    Sad hugs.  

The Guardian reports:

The suit centers on Lorie Smith, a website designer who does not want to provide her services for gay weddings because of her religious objections. In 2016, she says, a gay man named Stewart requested her services for help with his upcoming wedding. “We are getting married early next year and would love some design work done for our invites, place, names etc. We might also stretch to a website,” reads a message he apparently sent her through a message on her website.

In court filings, her lawyers produced a copy of the inquiry. But Stewart, who requested his last name be withheld for privacy, said in an interview with the Guardian that he never sent the message, even though it correctly lists his email address and telephone number. He has also been happily married to a woman for the last 15 years, he said. In fact, until he received a call this week from a reporter from the magazine, Stewart says had no idea he was somehow tied up in a case that had made it to the Supreme Court.

The New Republic reports:

“I’m not really sure where that came from,” he told me of the mysterious 2016 inquiry that used his name, email address, and cell phone number to request a wedding website for a same-sex marriage nearly a decade after he married a woman. He is a designer himself, something of a known quantity in design circles—he’s spoken at conferences and on podcasts, and has a “decent Twitter following,” he said.

The design world is small. But not small enough, he said, that he had heard of Lorie Smith—not until her case was already before the Supreme Court, and the design community began discussing its potential fallout. It didn’t make sense to him. Why would a web designer—as the website the inquiry referenced as his own made clear that he was—living in San Francisco, seek to hire someone in another state who has never built a wedding website, let alone a website for a same-sex wedding, to build his wedding website?

Photo: Alliance Defending Freedom president Michael Farris.

Hit the New Republic link for a very in-depth accounting of this story. As I’ve said many times, the ADF invents these businesses with sole intention of challenging local LGBTQ rights ordinances. The ruling in the case is expected tomorrow morning.

 

 

So seven years of court cases, and how many lawyers… But it takes a journalist to expose the ADF as fraudsters who lie to the judges?

The ADF were always fraudsters and they file these lawsuits to fraudster judges. It’s the grifting that keeps on giving.

They will have written their opinion based on the assumption that the plaintiff’s filing was true and correct. They won’t abandon it because the filing is being challenged now. Unlike in the case involving the athletic coach proselytizing on the field on school time, where the conservative justices MADE UP “facts,” or at best completely mischaracterized them, here no one could ask if the plaintiff’s “facts” were correct. There just was not enough information to argue with them. The real argument should have been over the plaintiff’s standing to pursue a case that had no real-world consequences since she was only contemplating entering the wedding web-design business.

There’s a good bit of perjury that happened along the way to SCOTUS. Ignoring the crime of perjury should concern CJ Roberts a good bit.

Well, you know how the saying goes:
Love the sinner. Hate the phony-sin-I-had-to-fabricate-because-I-have-never-really-experienced-discomfort-by-being-asked-to-do-anything-and-I’m-a-big-fat-liar.

I defend their right to live their lives according to a 2,000 year old book of myths and fairy tales (even though they fail to live according to it), but I object to them legislating my civil rights according to their 2,000 year old book of myths and fairy tales.

(Written, incidentally, by misogynistic men who owned other humans, and were puzzled by where the sun went at night.)

Tomorrow is the last day of the term; the Court convenes at 10 am, and this is one of only two argued cases remaining. This case was pretextual and flouted anything I was taught about standing and before-the-fact irreparable harm. Nonetheless, it got through the appellate process without being thrown out, and here it is.

It doesn’t augur well.

SCOTUSblog materials on the case are at

https://www.scotusblog.com/…

Journalism is now officially dead if a case made it all the way to the Supreme Court and will have a the ruling tomorrow and this is just now being uncovered, how much other shit has gone to SCOTUS and nobody checked.

I also blame the Defense Attorneys for not doing their due diligence

Wouldn’t have mattered, these bigots were looking for an excuse to gut LGBT discrimination laws.

 

3 thoughts on “Key Doc In Supreme Court LGBTQ Case Is Likely Fake

  1. SMH. I’m sad, too. It’s been sad for at least a year, now, with this SCOTUS, except for the addition of Justice Brown Jackson, which is only bittersweet yet.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a reply to OIKOS™- Art, Books & more Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.