Kentucky Court Rules Christian Print Shop Cannot Be Compelled To Make Gay Pride Shirts – IOTW Report

Kentucky Court Rules Christian Print Shop Cannot Be Compelled To Make Gay Pride Shirts

wsj-

A crucial difference in this case was the expressive nature of the service denied: literally words on a shirt.

In a split vote, a three-judge panel concluded that the store, Hands on Originals, couldn’t be forced to print a message with which the owner disagreed.

The dispute started in 2012 when Gay and Lesbian Services Organization in Kentucky asked Hands on Originals to make T-shirts with the name and logo of a pride festival.

ThinkProgress-

The desired shirt would have been for the fifth anniversary of the Lexington Pride Festival, and would have featured the name of the festival along with a stylized “5” in a rainbow design.

One judge wrote-

A contrary conclusion would result in absurdity under the facts of this case. The Commission’s interpretation of the fairness ordinance would allow any individual to claim any variety of protected class discrimination under the guise of the fairness ordinance merely by requesting a t-shirt espousing support for a protected class and then receiving a value-based refusal. A Buddhist who requested t-shirts from HOO stating, “I support equal treatment for Muslims,” could complain of religious discrimination under the fairness ordinance if HOO opposed equal treatment for Muslims and refused to print the t-shirts on that basis. A 25-year-old who requested t-shirts stating, “I support equal treatment for those over forty” could complain of age discrimination if HOO refused on the basis of its disagreement with that message. A man who requests t-shirts stating, “I support equal treatment for women,” could complain of gender discrimination if HOO refused to print the t-shirts because it disagreed with that message. And so forth. Clearly, this is not the intent of the ordinance.

In his dissent, Judge Jeff Taylor was having none of it. HOO’s conduct “clearly violates” the nondiscrimination ordinance, he wrote, “in that HOO’s conduct was discriminatory against GLSO and its members based upon sexual orientation or gender identity.” The linguistic gymnastics are not necessary because Adamson made clear he refused the order as soon as he learned the festival advocated LGBTQ pride.

And Taylor didn’t hesitate to ridicule Kramer’s reasoning. “One member of the majority upholds circumventing the public accommodation issue by holding that GLSO as an entity, has no sexual orientation and thus is not protected by the ordinance,” he wrote. “This argument fails on its face.”

!snip!

The left – corporations are not people!!!

The left – organizations are gay!!!!!

10 Comments on Kentucky Court Rules Christian Print Shop Cannot Be Compelled To Make Gay Pride Shirts

  1. In Gresham, Oregon Christian bakers told two fags they would not bake a wedding cake for them. The gays could have gone to a dozen different bakers in an hour and ordered their damn cake. But they sued and the state made the Christian bakers pay the offended fags $135,000. Rumors aplenty that bureaucrat who made decision is a bone smoker himself. If muslims refuse to bake a wedding cake for fudge packers, the state would have no problem.

  2. I hope that must might apply to Arlene’s Flowers in Richland, Wa. who is being sued by the State of Wash. for not making flower arrangements for a gay couple. Hopefully it isn’t just localized to Kentucky. Arlene’s Flowers is also one of my customers by the way and I have met her and she is facing a terrible injustice here in Wash. for what should a simple case of being able to refuse service to a customer who she doesn’t agree with. Whatever happened to freedom of association? I know, I know the answer and I hate the left for this, it makes me sick.

  3. Fuck you faggots!… Plenty of places to get your shirt printed. Stop trolling for Christian business owners to bankrupt and destroy, or maybe gay bashing will make a comeback. Maybe shit like this is why it became popular in the first place.

  4. Whatever happened to “We reserve the right to refuse service” signs? They used to be in most business windows. Were they replaced by those shitty gun silhouettes in a red circle with a line through it? The nation has gone crazy with progthink.

  5. “… couldn’t be forced …”
    or
    “… shouldn’t be forced …”

    And leave it at that.

    What kind of Republic is this where the gov’t FORCES businesses to do the business of people whom that business finds morally (or politically, or socially, or whatever) reprehensible?

    This is tyranny. The fags can start their own print shop and print whatever they want – and, of course, the fags, the lawyers, and the “judges” all know this – but the courts want to insist that EVERYONE participate in the latest abomination – until, ultimately, those abominations are deemed “normal” and we, as a civilization, are lost.

    izlamo delenda est …

Comments are closed.