|
CowOnCrack posted:Denying performing a service because the service itself violates religious creed versus denying an ordinary service that violates no creed to specific persons for some unchangeable characteristic they possess. The first is lawful under the first ammendment as freedom of religious expression which is a civil right, the second is an infringement on the civil liberties of citizens. Indeed, that's why the bakery got hosed
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 02:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 00:53 |
|
|
Aren't fines like these more based on how much the offenders can pay than how much the victims deserve? Its hard to put a pricetag on emotional suffering but its pretty easy to look at some person or company's tax info and go "yup this much of a fine will hurt you enough to think twice about what you did but not ruin your business"
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 03:28
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:Aren't fines like these more based on how much the offenders can pay than how much the victims deserve? Its hard to put a pricetag on emotional suffering but its pretty easy to look at some person or company's tax info and go "yup this much of a fine will hurt you enough to think twice about what you did but not ruin your business" Usually you have to demonstrate some actual numbers... if I remember right the way they do emotional damages is there's this big list of effects (insomnia, loss of appetite, etc. basically all the effects of a super traumatic or stressful event) and then for every one of those they award money
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 05:01
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Usually you have to demonstrate some actual numbers... if I remember right the way they do emotional damages is there's this big list of effects (insomnia, loss of appetite, etc. basically all the effects of a super traumatic or stressful event) and then for every one of those they award money
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Usually you have to demonstrate some actual numbers... if I remember right the way they do emotional damages is there's this big list of effects (insomnia, loss of appetite, etc. basically all the effects of a super traumatic or stressful event) and then for every one of those they award money Emotional damages is some gay poo poo. I wish I could afford to file lawsuits against people who hurt my feelings.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
TontoCorazon posted:I took a nap earlier and had some pretty weird dreams. I at least deserve a nice night on the town. Dude. No av, no posting. We've been over this. Emotional suffering COULD be at play here because if the bakers are getting $500K for their "fight" it isn't a stretch to imagine those same donors were making the lesbian couples life hell on social media or even personal attacks/insults. I mean it sounds like a lot of money, but if everyone kept harassing my family over a period of time for filing a law suit or complaint, compensation could totally be in order.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 16:00
|
|
|
BottledBodhisvata posted:Emotional damages is some gay poo poo. Agreed. Additionally, more people should learn the language of Louisville Slugger. It speaks in a very harsh, forceful language that everyone seems to understand very quickly
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 16:58
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:Right but like you could get more money suing walmart than some local mom and pop store this way right. No the determining of emotional damages doesn't have anything to do with how much money the party being sued has. You could pursue punitive damages but usually you have to prove they acted with malice or something like that. Emotional damages are compensatory; they're only there to make the victim whole again as best as possible. if i recall correctly
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 17:04
|
|
|
TEAH SYAG posted:Agreed. Additionally, more people should learn the language of Louisville Slugger. It speaks in a very harsh, forceful language that everyone seems to understand very quickly What? Woah now I am not advocating for anyone to get assaulted with a baseball bat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
BottledBodhisvata posted:What? Woah now Woah? We're talking linguistics here!
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
why would you sue a kosher deli for not selling you a product they don't carry in the first place
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 17:19
|
|
|
You know real churches like the Vatican debated the whole 'can you be a loyal subject and a Christian' thing centuries ago, but I'm sure the world can't wait to hear what a bunch of part time lawyers and full time conmen who have probably never even read the Bible outside well known Republican talking points have to say.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:No the determining of emotional damages doesn't have anything to do with how much money the party being sued has. You could pursue punitive damages but usually you have to prove they acted with malice or something like that. Emotional damages are compensatory; they're only there to make the victim whole again as best as possible.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
Strategic Tea posted:You know real churches like the Vatican debated the whole 'can you be a loyal subject and a Christian' thing centuries ago, but I'm sure the world can't wait to hear what a bunch of part time lawyers and full time conmen who have probably never even read the Bible outside well known Republican talking points have to say. Its more a criticism that holding to Christian values tends to be undemocratic and violate a lot of the Bill of Rights like thought crime, cruel punishment, and slavery.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
Americans have forgotten their own history.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
BottledBodhisvata posted:Emotional damages is some gay poo poo. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
The assumption of bigotry in this case is actually bigotry.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2016 02:21
|
|
|
Ork of Fiction posted:The assumption of bigotry in this case is actually bigotry. Dude all you have to do is ask the white, straight dudes who post here and they'll tell you that bigotry can't hurt. So if you claim to have been the target of bigotry you should be subjected to slurs attacking your sexuality. It's perfectly simple.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
My sexuality is a fortress. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2016 02:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 00:53 |
|
|
BTW, I tried to imagine a scenario where the cake people went in and explained that they want a special W4W cake and the bakers politely declined saying that they couldn't do so and still feel comfortable knowing that they would be helping someone down the path toward eternal torment and wished them a good day or whatever, but I just started laughin a little and shaking my head, because no.. that probably is not how it occurred.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2016 02:31
|
|