#CCOT #CHRISTIAN Baker on #QUEER Cake“BEFORE #GOD - WE COULDN’T DO THIS!” @Breirbart

by A.B. SANDERSON3 Apr 2015

The Ulster baker who has been taken to court for refusing to make a cake celebrating gay marriage said that his religion was too important to him to go against his beliefs, the Daily Expressreports.

Daniel McArthur, general manager of family run Ashers Bakery, told Belfast County Court, “Before God, this is something we couldn’t make.”

The business refused to undertake an order by a gay activist who wanted it decorated with Sesame Street characters Bert and Ernie, arm-in-arm under the words “Support Gay Marriage”.

Same Sex marriage is still illegal in Northern Ireland; a country where only 10 per cent of people described themselves as atheist in the last census, compared to 41 per cent who were Roman Catholic, 20 per cent Presbyterian and 13 per cent Anglican.

Instead of tolerating other people’s religious beliefs, Northern Ireland’s Equality Commission took action against Ashers on behalf of gay rights activist Gareth Lee.

Giving evidence on the second day of the trial, which has divided opinion in Ulster, Mr McArthur said  “The reason for the decision was that, as Christians, we could not put that message on a cake.

“Gay marriage is clearly in contradiction of the Bible; Our Christian faith is of utmost importance to us,” he said.

--------------------------------------------------

GOD spoke to the #EVIL of #HOMOSEXUALITY centuries AGO:

1. The HOLY Law of God

Leviticus 18:22, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” An abomination is anything that is disgusting to God.

Leviticus 20:13, “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.”

Deuteronomy 23:17,28 “There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel. Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a dog, into the house of the LORD thy God for any vow: for even both these are abomination unto the LORD thy God.”

http://goo.gl/B7Ws0H

Please RT - THANKS!

Comments?

Indiana: Muslim imprisoned for aiding al Qaeda says he is a resistance fighter, not a terrorist

Robert Spencer Feb 10, 2014 at 4:20pm Al-Qaeda 15 Comments

There is always a great deal of discussion in the mainstream media of what exactly constitutes a “terrorist.” Slyly dishonest Islamic supremacists in the U.S. such as Hamas-linked CAIR’s Hussam Ayloush reassure credulous audiences by proclaiming, “I condemn all terrorism, including state terrorism” — without bothering to explain that they don’t consider Islamic jihadists to be terrorists, but do consider Israeli forces and American troops in Afghanistan to be terrorists. Ultimately, the question of who and what constitutes a “terrorist” is subjective and useless. The still-unanswered and much more important question is whether or not the West is going to defend itself against Islamic jihad and the attempt to bring Sharia to free nations.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/02/indiana-muslim-imprisoned-for-aiding-al-qaeda-says-he-is-a-resistance-fighter-not-a-terrorist

7th Circuit Court of Appeals - #criminal, #health, #immigration Law

Netherlands Ins.. Co. v. Phusion Projects, Inc. Docket: 12-1355 Opinion Date: December 16, 2013 Judge: Bauer Areas of Law: Contracts, Injury Law, Insurance Law Phusion manufactures and distributes an alcoholic beverage called “Four Loko.” Its original formula contained energy stimulants, such as caffeine, guarana, taurine, and wormwood. Phusion purchased a commercial general liability insurance policy and a umbrella policy from members of the Liberty Mutual Group. The policies include identical provisions, excluding coverage for bodily injury or property damage when the insured may be held liable by reason of causing or contributing to intoxication. Plaintiffs sued Phusion in separate state court actions, alleging injuries caused by consumption of Four Loko. Two cases involved traffic accidents, one involved a shooting, another involved paranoid behavior resulting in accidental death, and a fifth claim involved a death from heart trouble. Phusion notified Liberty, which sought a declaratory judgment regarding the scope of coverage. The district court examined the underlying cases in the context of comparable automobile exclusions and ruled that four of the five cases fell within the Liquor Liability Exclusion. The Seventh Circuit affirmed. The Liquor Liability Exclusions in the policies are unambiguous and apply to Phusion. The allegations of simple negligence raised by the plaintiffs in the underlying complaints are not sufficiently independent from the allegations that Phusion caused or contributed to the intoxication of any person. http://j.st/FVM View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

Kim v. Holder Docket: 12-1626 Opinion Date: December 16, 2013 Areas of Law: Immigration Law Kim, his wife Ko, and their children are citizens of South Korea who were admitted to the U.S. in 2003, as nonimmigrant visitors for pleasure. Before an extension expired, Ko, obtained an F-1 visa, changing her status to that of a nonimmigrant student. As beneficiary of his wife’s application, Kim’s status was changed to that of spouse of a nonimmigrant student. In 2006, Ko’s F-1 status and, consequently, Kim’s F-2 status, were terminated. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services stated that Ko was ineligible for reinstatement because she had stopped attending classes without informing the school of an illness that she later claimed. While Ko’s motion to reopen or reconsider was pending, Kim became the beneficiary of an approved immigrant visa as an alien worker and moved to adjust his status to that of lawful permanent resident. USCIS denied the application, finding that he was ineligible because he had failed to maintain continuous lawful status since entering the U.S. In 2009, DHS charged Kim removable under 8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(1)(B). Kim argued that his failure to maintain legal status was due to circumstances beyond his control. The IJ found Kim removable. The BIA dismissed an appeal. The Seventh Circuit denied a petition for appeal. http://j.st/FVY View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

Gogos v. AMS-Mech. Sys., Inc. Docket: 13-2571 Opinion Date: December 16, 2013 Judge: per curiam Areas of Law: Health Law, Labor & Employment Law Gogos, a pipe welder for 45 years, has taken blood pressure medication for more than eight years. He began working for AMS in December 2012 as a welder and pipe-fitter. The next month, his blood pressure spiked and he experienced intermittent vision loss and a red eye. His supervisor agreed that he could leave to seek immediate medical treatment. As Gogos left work, he saw his general foreman and stated that he was going to the hospital because “my health is not very good lately.” The foreman immediately fired him. After pursuing a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Gogos sued. He applied to proceed in forma pauperis and requested that the court recruit counsel, stating that he cannot afford an attorney; that he has only a grammar-school education; and that English is not his primary language. The district court dismissed, reasoning that Gogos’s medical conditions were “transitory” and “suspect.” The Seventh Circuit vacated, reasoning that Gogos stated a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. 12112. http://j.st/FVq View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

United States v. Gonzalez Docket: 13-1832 Opinion Date: December 16, 2013 Judge: Bauer Areas of Law: Criminal Law In November 2010, law enforcement intercepted six railcars that crossed from Mexico into the U.S. and discovered that the railcars contained large amounts of marijuana, which had been packed into bricks. The marijuana bricks were encased in colored clay shells and hidden inside bags called “super sacks.” The officials followed the railcars to their final destination, a warehouse in Chicago Heights, and conducted surveillance of the warehouse to identify the intended recipients. A jury found Gonzalez, who assisted in unloading the cargo, guilty of conspiring to possess with intent to distribute 1,000 kg or more of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. 846, but acquitted him of possession with intent to distribute more than 1,000 kg of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1). The court subsequently entered a judgment of acquittal on the conspiracy charge. The Seventh Circuit reversed and remanded. The evidence was sufficient for a jury to reasonably conclude that Gonzalez knew, or at least strongly suspected that the super sacks contained illegal drugs and yet continued to participate in the operation. http://j.st/FV4 View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

United States v. Seidling Docket: 13-1854 Opinion Date: December 16, 2013 Judge: Bauer Areas of Law: Criminal Law, White Collar Crime Seidling admitted to knowingly mailing documents containing false information about service of process or publication of notice to small claims courts in Wisconsin and hiding the filings of the actions from named defendants. Seidling argued that the elements of the mail fraud statute could not be met because he never intended the false statements and misrepresentations to be communicated to the victims. The combined total intended loss amount was calculated as $370,220. None of the defendants suffered immediate pecuniary harm, but many experienced challenges in reopening the lawsuits, getting them dismissed, clearing their credit, and removing the fraudulent lawsuits from the system. The district court found him guilty of 50 counts of mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1341. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, rejecting an argument that there was no convergence between the victims’ losses and the fraudulent statements. Although his false statements and misrepresentations were not made directly to the victims, they still satisfied the requisite materiality element of mail fraud. The court noted Seidling’s history of fraudulent behavior, his lack of remorse, and the extensive details of his scheme, and held that the district court did not err in denying a reduction in sentencing for acceptance of responsibility. http://j.st/FVk View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar