Kentucky Supreme Court Rules
in Favor of Christian T-Shirt Shop,
Rejects LGBT Claim
Cybercast News,
by
Kharen Martinez Murcia
Original Article
Posted By: M2,
11/9/2019 6:23:17 AM
On Nov. 1, the Kentucky Supreme Court ruled in favor of Christian print-shop owner Blaine Adamson, who was sued for refusing to print “gay-pride” T-shirts for the Lexington Pride Festival.
According to the opinion of the court, written by Justice Laurance B. VanMeter, “[T]his matter must be dismissed because the Gay and Lesbian Services Organization (GLSO,) the original party to bring this action before the Lexington Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission, lacked statutory standing to assert a claim against Hands On Originals under the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government.”
The next time someone scoffs at your assertion that gays want special rights not equal rights, cite them the case of (deep breath) The Gay & Lesbian Services Organization vs Hands On Originals before The Lexington Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission.
We are so far gone into an Orwellian galaxy we can't even pick up the Constitution's radio waves.
44 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
rfr46 11/9/2019 8:17:12 AM (No. 230647)
This idiocy will not stop until the people bringing these malicious lawsuits have to pay for the damages they are causing. That goes also for the members of the governmental groups (e.g., "human rights" commissions) who are persecuting citizens for some imagined offense against LGBT provocateurs. The alleged offenses are imaginary. There are no damages suffered, and the motive of the plaintiffs is not to get compensation for legal injury, but rather to harass and intimidate.
Good on the Kentucky Supreme Court for this decision, but it was basically a decision for the defense. We need to go on offense and make these gangsters pay.
30 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
Strike3 11/9/2019 10:27:58 AM (No. 230770)
A short while back I heard that there was a glut of lawyers in America and that people were leaving school with law degrees and no jobs. Could there be a legal parasite organization out there, perhaps the schools themselves, creating all of these stupid, frivolous lawsuits to provide employment for the incompetents who need the income? When somebody comes at you with a lawyer for any reason, it usually requires you to hire your own, thus employing two of the bloodsuckers for every suit. Stranger things go on in the business world, law and medicine.
12 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
bigfatslob 11/9/2019 10:39:47 AM (No. 230776)
Those leftist mutant liberals sure do like their 'letter' group designations don't they? There's a letter title for everything on the mutated left.
11 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
Rumblehog 11/9/2019 10:57:25 AM (No. 230795)
The Homo-Nazis won't stop, because their degeneracy is all they've got to live for.
15 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
mean Gene 11/9/2019 12:11:21 PM (No. 230851)
The only reason this case went this way was that the GLSO is an ORGANIZATION, not a person!
As soon as a person walks into that shop and insists on the same T-shirt printing job, the court will go the other way.
6 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
DVC 11/9/2019 12:18:50 PM (No. 230854)
Only on a technicality. If an individual brings the same lawsuit, they will hear it, and the homosexuals probably will win, sad to say.
3 people like this.
#7 - That precedent was already set when the SCOTUS ruled that the baker in Colorado could not be compelled to create a themed wedding cake (the operative word being "create") for the g couple. That ruling would extend to protect a T-shirt designer from being compelled to create a design with which he disagreed. If he had shirts with rainbows and ponies already on the shelves and a customer said he wanted to buy them for a pride event, different story.
3 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
Vincent Vega 11/9/2019 12:40:04 PM (No. 230872)
Sometimes I think these groups purposely choose a business they know will refuse them so they can file a lawsuit and bring notice to their disgusting cause. Good for this business owner for sticking to his guns and refusing to compromise his values.
6 people like this.
Shame a shop keeper can’t refuse anyone fir any reason. There’s always another place to take your business.
3 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
DVC 11/9/2019 2:03:50 PM (No. 230922)
#8, what you say is correct, but it all seems to hang on "artistic".....
I wonder if the homosexuals bring a design that they have created for printing, whether the problem may arise again. OTOH, the T-shirt company should set a policy of never printing "someone else's design". That would lock in their artistry as an integral part of all of their T-shirts, and may protect them from the hateful homosexuals.
4 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
legalart 11/9/2019 4:41:51 PM (No. 230982)
It's worrisome that some of these bogus cases that are being won against the gay lobby mob, tackle the issue of standing only and are not being won on the merits. It may be that the courts don't want to get into the weeds about a business owner's Constitutional rights to refuse to do certain work (even though this court did consider Adamson's previous consistent track record); the lest thorny issue is standing and that is what they are ruling on. It's just an observation. Of course, I will take the win any way it comes.
0 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
XCenturion 11/9/2019 9:36:34 PM (No. 231090)
Who in the hell opened the closet in the first place?
0 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "M2"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)