this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2023
84 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
1025 readers
2 users here now
@politics on kbin.social is a magazine to share and discuss current events news, opinion/analysis, videos, or other informative content related to politicians, politics, or policy-making at all levels of governance (federal, state, local), both domestic and international. Members of all political perspectives are welcome here, though we run a tight ship. Community guidelines and submission rules were co-created between the Mod Team and early members of @politics. Please read all community guidelines and submission rules carefully before engaging our magazine.
founded 1 year ago
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You people live in an alternate fucking reality.
Care to elaborate more on that?
I mean this case according to some who have a law background have called into question the standing on which this case was even brought forward. The initial request of the so called web developer does not even seem to exist as stated. It was an intial inquiry by a straight individual who did not even request a web page designed for a homosexual wedding. Nor has the individual who may or may not have made the offending request been a party to the case other than in name. The so called web developer also seems to have a questionable existence as they seem so deeply intermeshed with a religious conservative activist group that they seem part of the same entity. And could at a slightly closer look seen to be just a front entity for such activist group to trigger such a lawsuit.
The court should have passed on this case and it should have gone back down to a lower court and standing should have been better established. This case was just put together to create this type of ruling in a favorable court. Not a pursuit of justice or a clarifying of rights.
I am not a lawyer, and I know next to nothing about the law but this case stinks to high heaven.