Category: protection

Lambda Legal does not approve of the right to not decorate

The cake decorating issue has become so convoluted that the baker at the center of this matter has even been attacked by whackos with a machette trying to kill or seriously harm him all for merely choosing to not artistically express himself on a customer’s cake because God would not allow him to.

I suppose the gay couple or whackos out there would also be offended if he ejaculated on the cake but would of course not be bringing a legal case against him on the bases of alleged inequality as long as he did that to straight couple’s cakes as well.

This entire matter is based in a wildly distorted theme of EQUALITY.

Lambda Legal posted this on their website:

Lambda Legal CEO Rachel B. Tiven released the following statement:

The Court today has offered dangerous encouragement to those who would deny civil rights to LGBT people and people living with HIV.  Religious freedom under our Constitution has always meant the right to believe whatever you wish but not to act on your beliefs in ways that harm others. The Court today alarmingly fails to heed that distinction. Lambda Legal will continue to fight the establishment of evangelical Christianity as the official government religion. We will fiercely resist the coming effort that will seek to turn this ruling into a broad license to discriminate.

There is no “broad license to discriminate” here. Declining to express art on a cake is not harming others and “establishing evangelical Christianity as an official government religion” is even more distorted. Where do they get that?

Why don’t these groups get it? The SUPREME COURT gets it and the only way they could get it is because the liberals in the court ALSO GOT IT.

Why can’t they see how this ruling also protects gay men and women who own cake shops and flower shops from being forced to decorate their products with a Nazi symbol on it. Nazi symbols are protected free speech. In fact, the symbol was around long before it was used by Nazis, having an entirely different meaning.

The US Constitution protects free speech but the gay men and women decorators have the right TO NOT BE FORCED TO DO THINGS CONTRARY TO THEIR BELIEFS. He’s not declining service to them because they are gay as they can buy a non-customized cake equally as anyone else.

How much simpler can one explain this?

And Lambda Legal and others that follow their faulty logic are going to fiercely resist?


They make these faulty arguments comparing this matter to equal rights in housing.

Let’s look at this clearly, the black man and woman want to rent an apartment, it’s apartment 273 in a big building of units. The unit is not being decorated, it’s just the same unit for both the black couple and the white couple. The white man and woman are given unit #273 instead because the owner clearly states he prefers whites. He has discriminated illegally regarding IDENTICAL OFFERINGS by business.

Now let’s look at this another way, the apartment owner is asked by the black couple to paint the unit black, every wall black, because they are black, the apartment owner says “No I will not do that”. The apartment does not belong to the black couple, it belongs to the company that owns the units. Then the white couple says “Will you paint the entire unit white”. He says “It’s already white”. He gives the unit to the white couple as he fears the black couple might, when they are in the unit as renters, start painting the unit black irregardless of the owner’s wishes, and the black couple claims discrimination. That would be absurd to do so. The owner has a right to choose colors for the units same as a cake decorator.

Now in contrast we have a cake that the shop owner will gladly sell to anyone as it is, but he specializes in custom cakes and he is being asked to decorate it in a way he finds abhorrent. He’s not discriminating based on providing the exact same product. Cake decorators routinely refuse to decorate cakes in a way they or their corporate values find abhorrent. It’s perfectly legal as expression is protected.

Get it yet? One thing you should notice here is that the cake business owns the cake. He is being asked by the gay couple to decorate WHAT HE OWNS, NOT THEM the way they want. He objects saying it would violate his religious beliefs. He says “You can decorate it any way you want, here’s the tube of stuff, you can even have it at no charge, decorate it somewhere else, I just cannot do that” but the gay couple has a hissy fit. They are wrong.

Again compare the apartment that is not being decorated differently for each couple and the cake that is the same for any customer until it’s asked to be decorated DIFFERENTLY and NOT EQUALLY. If our “gay representatives” are going to claim they are fighting for equality they need to do so with things that are equal.

It’s not that it’s different that is the problem it’s that it violates the business owner’s religious beliefs. His beliefs are more protected than those of the gay couple because he is not offering just batteries and saying “oh I won’t sell batteries to gay wedding couples for their ceremony because I object to gay marriage” he’s offering services that are specialized in expression. He cannot be forced to express himself in a way that he does not want to anymore than the business owner could force the gay couple to accept a cake that only has an opposite sex couple presented on it.

It’s also not like slavery. These gay groups and liberal sympathizers bring that up as a comparison. How ridiculous.

Same sex marriage wasn’t even legally recognized in Colorado when this case started but still, the fact is that gay couples cannot FORCE ON A BUSINESS OWNER to express their beliefs regardless if it’s now legal for them to be married.

Get it YET?

Lambda Legal also presented the groups that joined their misguided efforts were:

The other organizations joining Lambda Legal and the Family Equality Council on the amicus brief were: American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO; Equality California; Equality Federation; The LGBT Bar Association of Greater New York; Mazzoni Center; National Center for Transgender Equality; National Education Association; PFLAG National; PROMO; The Trevor Project; and, Whitman-Walker Health.

Feature image showing resistance in a circuit party of other resistors who keep claiming they are equal with transistors by Pixabay


Glitter reminds me of HIV, it gets a lot of attention and that it too is a dead particle of matter, and it can spread and get stuck to things and can kill in large enough quantities.

The Human Glitter Virus is known to spread worldwide which is why scientists propose a ban on glitter and encouraging glitter manufacturers to wear condoms when transmitting glitter as viruses attach themselves to these fancy adornments.

So to solve this problem of HGI – Human Glitter Infection – I propose the same methods of dealing with HGV as is done with HIV.

I would expect to see glitter scientists calling for glitter testing. Humans found with a positive glitter result should, in order to get rid of the glitter, be given chemical explosives to blow it up like what is done with HIV.

The Earth and inhabitants need to get routinely tested for human glitter.

The Earth is being infected with G so much that scientists say it should be banned as it’s a carrier of HGV.


Feature image reference from Google News health section dated November 29, 2017 and the article written here is a joke as are most things written elsewhere on HIV, the Human Information Virus

Gender reclusive

The subway system authority of New York City called the Metropolitan Transit Authority – which should be acronymized for ease of speech as SSA/MTA/NYC – is replacing “ladies and gentlemen” announcements on it’s PA (Prince Albert or public addressers not sure which) with so called “gender neutral” statements.

I guess genders are offensive.

“The Metropolitan Transportation Authority wants to nix the phrase “ladies and gentlemen” in New York City subway and bus announcements and replace it with gender-inclusive language.”[1]

This is the stupidest thing I have ever heard.

There are two genders, female, male, how does one include any others by using different terms?

There are not any other genders in the entire world, well maybe one, those who are both male and female, which is one. In that case that rider can be referred to as either appropriately. Even if that rider prefers to be referred to as one of the genders, saying “ladies and gentlemen” is appropriate.

For those who HNG (Have No Gender) let them pick one. Let us be democratic instead of neurotic and go with the majority of how biology works.

So the terms the MTA will “appropriately” use instead are: “passengers”, “riders”, and “everyone”.[1]

Passenger viruses ride on subways.

I am not like everyone. I do not want to be associated with those neutered terms.

I do not consider myself a “passenger” or an “everyone”.

I am offended by neutral language.

Feature image of the initial construction of the London subway system where they would have laughed at such changes in how we refer to ladies and gentlemen is in the public domain is by Percy William Justyne living from 1812 to 1883, and was published February 2 1861.

references: [1]

Wear protection

The Times Square madman driver incident reminds me of HIV, it’s hard to get anyone to look at it closely because I mean like it’s obvious, it’s been reported on TV news and everything on TV news is real, like HIV.

When we dissect (remember doing that in science class or did you pass out) it though we start finding too many oddities, things that don’t add up.

For example, a fat dude is hit, loses a shoe where it’s no where in sight, then we see him wearing it. Oh wait, he lost both shoes, then we see him wearing both again. Now what are the odds?

Ok, maybe some bystander was video taping the event and saw where it or both landed.

But how do we explain the stunt man safety vest he is obviously wearing? Take a look at his t-shirt. There is a definite outline of a protective vest used by stuntmen.

They do say where protection now don’t they.

I’m gay that he was able to retrieve both shoes.

Feature image from Ananconda Malt Liquor critique video