Author Topic: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case  (Read 44223 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #300 on: January 03, 2018, 02:45:52 pm »
So allowing an entity like BOLI to enact a ruling outside its legal jurisdiction in your mind is 'Justice'?

@IsailedawayfromFR

It is "justice" to a select few as long as it supports their particular favorite protected group.

Had the same board ruled in favor of the baker we'd have heard shrieks of judicial overreach and griping about legislating from the bench.
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline sneakypete

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 52,845
  • Twitter is for Twits
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #301 on: January 03, 2018, 02:47:22 pm »


Quote
The specter of discrimination with respect to public accommodations has its genesis, of course, in the Jim Crow south,  where white-only lunch counters were in some places the norm - and defended on religious grounds!
   

It was wrong then,it is wrong now. Other than for life-threatening emergencies,NO business is legally or morally required to provide services the owner objects to,or serve people the owner doesn't want to serve.

Quote
The community has determined that if you open yourself to the general public and post a menu of services, then you cannot arbitrarily discriminate on the basis of race, religion or - in Oregon - sexual orientation.


"The Community" can kiss my big red ass,comrade! This is supposed to be a FREE STATE,not a freaking commune!

Quote
so the baker clearly violated the law and the victims of his discrimination are entitled to justice. 

Once again,you,"The Commune",and the so-called "victums" can kiss my big red ass. Please leave the US immediately afterwards,and move to some place like North Korea or Venezuela,where there are no free people,only puppets of the government.

Quote
But - again - I strongly believe the monetary damages were excessive, especially in the context where the law's application has heretofore been unclear.   Justice does not demand the ruination of this business.

JUSTICE would demand the alleged victims pay HIM monetary damages to his business,his reputation,and compensation for all the money he has had to spend to fight their damn-fool claim.
Anyone who isn't paranoid in 2021 just isn't thinking clearly!

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #302 on: January 03, 2018, 02:51:58 pm »
Quote
Gay citizens have the same rights, as members of the general public, as anyone else, including the right under the law to request advertised services from a public accommodation without arbitrary humiliation.


Their rights weren't violated.  Having a cake baked...or not baked is not a violation of any right Constitutional or otherwise.


Quote
(You'll recall that, in addition to refusing service,  the baker told his customer that the reason therefore was that her lesbian relationship was an abomination.)

And he was right...their relationship IS an abomination in the eyes of God.

But then that couple knew that the backer felt that way before they went in their now didn't they?

And gay businesses refuse to serve straight customers...to the point of verbally harassing them and embarrassing them in a loud and threatening manner.

Should they be able to sue that business owner as well?
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline Jazzhead

  • Blue lives matter
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,593
  • Gender: Male
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #303 on: January 03, 2018, 02:52:04 pm »
Glad you feel so strongly about bigotry, CL.  Now the task is getting you to recognize it.

My view is that the fine is so excessive as to be punitive, and the facts of the case do not justify a punitive sanction.  The debate on this thread alone proves that the legal positions of the baker and customer, as applied to these facts, is hardly clear.    Those legal positions will eventually become clear, and when they do, it may be appropriate to punish a scofflaw.  But this baker isn't, IMO,  a scofflaw - I assume he thought his declination of service was lawful (and the issue is still in doubt, pending the resolution of the Masterpiece Cakeshop case). 

So justice demands that he change his practices and pay the plaintiffs' counsel fees.  Not that he also pay a monetary penalty in excess of $100,000 for his customer's "emotional distress".    That's a shakedown, and wholly divorced from the morality of justice.  IMO.     
It's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #304 on: January 03, 2018, 02:54:58 pm »
Glad you feel so strongly about bigotry, CL.  Now the task is getting you to recognize it.

My view is that the fine is so excessive as to be punitive, and the facts of the case do not justify a punitive sanction.  The debate on this thread alone proves that the legal positions of the baker and customer, as applied to these facts, is hardly clear.    Those legal positions will eventually become clear, and when they do, it may be appropriate to punish a scofflaw.  But this baker isn't, IMO,  a scofflaw - I assume he thought his declination of service was lawful (and the issue is still in doubt, pending the resolution of the Masterpiece Cakeshop case). 

So justice demands that he change his practices and pay the plaintiffs' counsel fees.  Not that he also pay a monetary penalty in excess of $100,000 for his customer's "emotional distress".    That's a shakedown, and wholly divorced from the morality of justice.  IMO.   

Definition of bigotry

plural bigotries
1 : obstinate or intolerant devotion to one's own opinions and prejudices : the state of mind of a bigot overcoming his own bigotry

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigotry


Hmmm seems you fit the dictionary definition of that which you accuse everyone here of when they don't agree with your Liberal world view.

 :whistle:
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline Cyber Liberty

  • Coffee! Donuts! Kittens!
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 79,867
  • Gender: Male
  • 🌵🌵🌵
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #305 on: January 03, 2018, 02:55:15 pm »
Glad you feel so strongly about bigotry, CL.  Now the task is getting you to recognize it.

My view is that the fine is so excessive as to be punitive, and the facts of the case do not justify a punitive sanction.  The debate on this thread alone proves that the legal positions of the baker and customer, as applied to these facts, is hardly clear.    Those legal positions will eventually become clear, and when they do, it may be appropriate to punish a scofflaw.  But this baker isn't, IMO,  a scofflaw - I assume he thought his declination of service was lawful (and the issue is still in doubt, pending the resolution of the Masterpiece Cakeshop case). 

So justice demands that he change his practices and pay the plaintiffs' counsel fees.  Not that he also pay a monetary penalty in excess of $100,000 for his customer's "emotional distress".    That's a shakedown, and wholly divorced from the morality of justice.  IMO.   

Considering how tiny you think the punishment should be, we don't agree on the definition, not even a little bit.  It makes sense you would accuse me of not recognizing it.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2018, 02:55:53 pm by Cyber Liberty »
For unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death — if you’re unvaccinated — for themselves, their families, and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm. Sloe Joe Biteme 12/16
I will NOT comply.
 
Castillo del Cyber Autonomous Zone ~~~~~>                          :dontfeed:

Offline Jazzhead

  • Blue lives matter
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,593
  • Gender: Male
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #306 on: January 03, 2018, 02:55:20 pm »
   

It was wrong then,it is wrong now. Other than for life-threatening emergencies,NO business is legally or morally required to provide services the owner objects to,or serve people the owner doesn't want to serve.
 

"The Community" can kiss my big red ass,comrade! This is supposed to be a FREE STATE,not a freaking commune!

Once again,you,"The Commune",and the so-called "victums" can kiss my big red ass. Please leave the US immediately afterwards,and move to some place like North Korea or Venezuela,where there are no free people,only puppets of the government.

JUSTICE would demand the alleged victims pay HIM monetary damages to his business,his reputation,and compensation for all the money he has had to spend to fight their damn-fool claim.

Thanks for your opinion,  SP.   It bears, of course, absolutely no relationship with the law.   
It's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide

Offline Restored

  • TBR Advisory Committee
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,659
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #307 on: January 03, 2018, 03:02:03 pm »
One problem I see is that all these cases were deliberately targeting Christian businesses which implies bigotry on the part of the people suing the businesses. If they had thrown in a Muslim bakery, that could show some proof of fairness. But we all know why they didn't target a Muslim bakery.
The War on Christianity continues.
Countdown to Resignation

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #308 on: January 03, 2018, 03:06:11 pm »
One problem I see is that all these cases were deliberately targeting Christian businesses which implies bigotry on the part of the people suing the businesses. If they had thrown in a Muslim bakery, that could show some proof of fairness. But we all know why they didn't target a Muslim bakery.
The War on Christianity continues.

And unless you do some serious digging...the bolded part will never be known to most people in any of the media reports.

Can't do anything to disrupt the narrative.
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline INVAR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,961
  • Gender: Male
  • Dread To Tread
    • Sword At The Ready
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #309 on: January 03, 2018, 03:23:15 pm »
Gay citizens have the same rights, as members of the general public, as anyone else, including the right under the law to request advertised services from a public accommodation without arbitrary humiliation. 

Bullshit.  Self-admitted bleep have exercised the right to publicly humiliate and kick people out of their coffee shops and refuse to serve them for being nothing more than Christians that they despise.  Homosexuals do not have the same rights the rest of us do. They have SPECIAL, ARBITRARY RIGHTS granted to flaunt their behavior and force acceptance of it by the courts.

Unlike tyranny advocates such as yourself - I'm perfectly fine with a private owner refusing service to anyone for any reason they want.

There are plenty of other establishments that are happy to take my money and I am not so helpless that I cannot seek them out myself.

Using government to force a private owner to cater to behaviors abhorrent to their person is the highest form of meddlesome tyranny and deserves nothing but resistance and refusal to comply.
Fart for freedom, fart for liberty and fart proudly.  - Benjamin Franklin

...Obsta principiis—Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people. When the people give way, their deceivers, betrayers and destroyers press upon them so fast that there is no resisting afterwards. The nature of the encroachment upon [the] American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer, it eats faster and faster every hour." - John Adams, February 6, 1775

Online DCPatriot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 45,792
  • Gender: Male
  • "...and the winning number is...not yours!
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #310 on: January 03, 2018, 03:31:32 pm »

Bullshit.  Self-admitted bleep have exercised the right to publicly humiliate and kick people out of their coffee shops and refuse to serve them for being nothing more than Christians that they despise.  Homosexuals do not have the same rights the rest of us do. They have SPECIAL, ARBITRARY RIGHTS granted to flaunt their behavior and force acceptance of it by the courts.


Hmmm...I've read where Trump voters wearing MAGA hats were thrown out.   Never, Christians...for their religion.

Please provide a link.

And "homosexuals" are currently a protected class....and will remain so until little Johnny, in Montessori school becomes a daddy himself.

It's necessary...because people with 'your' thinking need to die off.


Quote

Unlike tyranny advocates such as yourself - I'm perfectly fine with a private owner refusing service to anyone for any reason they want.

There are plenty of other establishments that are happy to take my money and I am not so helpless that I cannot seek them out myself.

Using government to force a private owner to cater to behaviors abhorrent to their person is the highest form of meddlesome tyranny and deserves nothing but resistance and refusal to comply.


I agree with your premise..., there's always another baker down the street, etc..

Why don't you hire an ambulance chaser on a contingency basis, and find a Muslim bakery?  'Force' them to decorate a cake in the shape of a sex toy to include figurines of the same sex doing 'unnatural' acts.

...then get back to us.    *****rollingeyes*****

"It aint what you don't know that kills you.  It's what you know that aint so!" ...Theodore Sturgeon

"Journalism is about covering the news.  With a pillow.  Until it stops moving."    - David Burge (Iowahawk)

"It was only a sunny smile, and little it cost in the giving, but like morning light it scattered the night and made the day worth living" F. Scott Fitzgerald

Offline IsailedawayfromFR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,746
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #311 on: January 03, 2018, 03:40:19 pm »
Glad you feel so strongly about bigotry, CL.  Now the task is getting you to recognize it.

My view is that the fine is so excessive as to be punitive, and the facts of the case do not justify a punitive sanction.  The debate on this thread alone proves that the legal positions of the baker and customer, as applied to these facts, is hardly clear.    Those legal positions will eventually become clear, and when they do, it may be appropriate to punish a scofflaw.  But this baker isn't, IMO,  a scofflaw - I assume he thought his declination of service was lawful (and the issue is still in doubt, pending the resolution of the Masterpiece Cakeshop case). 

So justice demands that he change his practices and pay the plaintiffs' counsel fees.  Not that he also pay a monetary penalty in excess of $100,000 for his customer's "emotional distress".    That's a shakedown, and wholly divorced from the morality of justice.  IMO.   
What irony you twist into those words, linking 'morality' with the 'justice' of being gay and driving home challenges to those who disagree.

No punishment, in my opinion, is too great, for the man who can build his greatness upon his country's ruin~  George Washington

Offline Jazzhead

  • Blue lives matter
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,593
  • Gender: Male
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #312 on: January 03, 2018, 03:56:30 pm »
What irony you twist into those words, linking 'morality' with the 'justice' of being gay and driving home challenges to those who disagree.

Why shouldn't religious bigots be challenged?   Why should bigots be able to hide behind their Bibles?   

The rules for public accommodations are simple - if you choose to advertise a service, provide it to your customers without regard to race, religion, gender or sexual orientation.   That's what the community requires -  and it is hardly unreasonable.   
It's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide

Offline driftdiver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,897
  • Gender: Male
  • I could eat it raw but why when I have fire
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #313 on: January 03, 2018, 03:59:17 pm »
Why shouldn't religious bigots be challenged?   Why should bigots be able to hide behind their Bibles?   

The rules for public accommodations are simple - if you choose to advertise a service, provide it to your customers without regard to race, religion, gender or sexual orientation.   That's what the community requires -  and it is hardly unreasonable.

@Jazzhead
Why do you only target Christians?

Muslims are throwing gays off rooftops and yet you focus on a cake.   Its almost like you have a hidden agenda.

hmmmmmm
Fools mock, tongues wag, babies cry and goats bleat.

Offline IsailedawayfromFR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,746
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #314 on: January 03, 2018, 04:00:48 pm »
Why shouldn't religious bigots be challenged?   Why should bigots be able to hide behind their Bibles?   

The rules for public accommodations are simple - if you choose to advertise a service, provide it to your customers without regard to race, religion, gender or sexual orientation.   That's what the community requires -  and it is hardly unreasonable.
Dredging 'rules for public accommodations' from where?
No punishment, in my opinion, is too great, for the man who can build his greatness upon his country's ruin~  George Washington

Offline thackney

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,267
  • Gender: Male
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #315 on: January 03, 2018, 04:06:13 pm »
Dredging 'rules for public accommodations' from where?

Discrimination in place of public accommodation prohibited
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/659A.403

The question can be whether the public accommodation is limited to the items for sale in the store only, or special orders created on demand.

I wonder if making custom orders by appointment only would resolve the issue?
« Last Edit: January 03, 2018, 04:07:13 pm by thackney »
Life is fragile, handle with prayer

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #316 on: January 03, 2018, 04:09:50 pm »
@Jazzhead
Why do you only target Christians?

Muslims are throwing gays off rooftops and yet you focus on a cake.   Its almost like you have a hidden agenda.

hmmmmmm

@driftdiver

IIRC he's admitted to having gay neighbors and Muslim friends.

You do the math LOL!
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline INVAR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,961
  • Gender: Male
  • Dread To Tread
    • Sword At The Ready
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #317 on: January 03, 2018, 04:10:26 pm »
Why shouldn't religious bigots be challenged?   Why should bigots be able to hide behind their Bibles?   

Why shouldn't tyranny advocates be challenged?  Why should SJW Tyrants hide behind bogus assertions of 'fairness' and 'equality'?

Wars have been started for far less.
Fart for freedom, fart for liberty and fart proudly.  - Benjamin Franklin

...Obsta principiis—Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people. When the people give way, their deceivers, betrayers and destroyers press upon them so fast that there is no resisting afterwards. The nature of the encroachment upon [the] American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer, it eats faster and faster every hour." - John Adams, February 6, 1775

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #318 on: January 03, 2018, 04:14:33 pm »
From the Justice Department amicus brief in the Colorado case:

Quote
“Forcing Phillips to create expression for and participate in a ceremony that violates his sincerely held religious beliefs invades his First Amendment rights."

Something tells me that this quote will be used when this stupid appeals court ruling in Oregon goes to the next level in the judicial food chain.

As well it should. 
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline Restored

  • TBR Advisory Committee
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,659
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #319 on: January 03, 2018, 04:18:38 pm »
Why should it be against the law to dislike people for their behavior?
Countdown to Resignation

Offline thackney

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,267
  • Gender: Male
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #320 on: January 03, 2018, 04:21:53 pm »
I wonder if making custom orders by appointment only would resolve the issue?

@Jazzhead

What would be your opinion of a baker or other service provider who supplied custom work only for those that first joined their private "club", signing a statement of beliefs?

It would obviously be limiting in the custom work that would be provided, which seems to be the intent of the bakers of these cases.

Reference:
Place of public accommodation defined
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/659A.400

(2) A place of public accommodation does not include:
...(e) An institution, bona fide club or place of accommodation that is in its nature distinctly private.

In some dry counties, I've seen restaurants able to serve alcohol by asking guest to first join their club, paying a dollar membership fee and sign their form.  This seems to be a similar idea.
Life is fragile, handle with prayer

Oceander

  • Guest
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #321 on: January 03, 2018, 04:36:08 pm »
Dredging 'rules for public accommodations' from where?

The Oregon statutes.  ORS 659A.400 defines “place of public accommodation” broadly enough to include the bakery.  A point the bakery never disputed in court.

Offline HoustonSam

  • "That'll be the day......"
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,982
  • Gender: Male
  • old times there are not forgotten
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #322 on: January 03, 2018, 04:37:32 pm »
Second, the facts are that the refusal of service had nothing to do with the customization or artistry required.   The baker wouldn't do any custom cake for any gay wedding.

Your statements here contradict each other.  It is exactly the case that the baker would not do any custom cake for any gay wedding, so the refusal of service was exactly due to the request for customization.  He was willing to sell them anything else, non custom, in his shop.  It doesn't matter whether the specifics of the customization had been discussed; that they would not buy what he had already prepared means they wanted customization, whether in the form of decoration, ingredients, flavor, color of icing, etc.

Quote
Gay citizens have the same rights, as members of the general public, as anyone else, including the right under the law to request advertised services from a public accommodation without arbitrary humiliation.    (You'll recall that, in addition to refusing service,  the baker told his customer that the reason therefore was that her lesbian relationship was an abomination.)

There simply is no such right.  One can reasonably argue that the baker was unnecessarily provocative and rude, and I would agree, but no one has the right to be free from offense.
James 1:20

Offline Right_in_Virginia

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 79,320
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #323 on: January 03, 2018, 04:39:54 pm »
Why shouldn't religious bigots be challenged?   Why should bigots be able to hide behind their Bibles?   


Or their Koran.

Offline Cyber Liberty

  • Coffee! Donuts! Kittens!
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 79,867
  • Gender: Male
  • 🌵🌵🌵
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #324 on: January 03, 2018, 04:45:35 pm »
Hmmm...I've read where Trump voters wearing MAGA hats were thrown out.   Never, Christians...for their religion.

Please provide a link.

And "homosexuals" are currently a protected class....and will remain so until little Johnny, in Montessori school becomes a daddy himself.

It's necessary...because people with 'your' thinking need to die off.


I agree with your premise..., there's always another baker down the street, etc..

Why don't you hire an ambulance chaser on a contingency basis, and find a Muslim bakery?  'Force' them to decorate a cake in the shape of a sex toy to include figurines of the same sex doing 'unnatural' acts.

...then get back to us.    *****rollingeyes*****

I'll have to go looking for it.  There was a VERY long TBR thread about the gay coffee shop owner who went on a pissy fit and kicked some horrible Christians out of his place of business.  The thread was long because Jazz was on his jazz throughout the thread after having redirected it onto the cake-baker story.  I'll post it up if I can find it.  I think there was a link to the video there.
For unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death — if you’re unvaccinated — for themselves, their families, and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm. Sloe Joe Biteme 12/16
I will NOT comply.
 
Castillo del Cyber Autonomous Zone ~~~~~>                          :dontfeed: