Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Sarah Huckabee Sanders: Trump OK With Businesses Hanging Antigay Signs

President Trump's press secretary said her boss would have no problem with businesses hanging antigay signs that explicitly state they don't serve LGBT customers.

Hours after oral arguments concluded in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case — where a Colorado baker argued to the Supreme Court that his religion allows him to refuse service to gay people — Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was confronted on legalized discrmination during today's White House press briefing.

"The lawyer for the solicitor general's office for the administration said today in the Supreme Court if it would be legal, possible for a baker to put a sign in his window saying we don't bake cakes for gay weddings," The New York Times's Michael Shear asked. "Does the president agree that that would be ok?"

"The president certainly supports religious liberty and that's something he talked about during the campaign and has upheld since taking office," Sanders replied.

When pressed on whether that included support for signs that deny service to gay people, Sanders responded: "I believe that would include that."

Watch below:

by Anonymousreply 6212/07/2017

From a rainbow-coloured White House to... this. In a year. This will never stop being shocking to me.

by Anonymousreply 112/07/2017

Coming soon, separate drinking fountains.

by Anonymousreply 212/07/2017

And so it starts!

Everyone better get up off your asses and vote these horrible people out of the majority in 18.

by Anonymousreply 312/07/2017

This woman is ugly as sin.

by Anonymousreply 412/07/2017

R4 beat me to it. Love how they always manage to snag the most unflattering picture of her.

by Anonymousreply 512/07/2017

Get over the fact that she’s ugly! Of course she’s hideous! Inside and out! GET THEM OUT OF OFFICE!

by Anonymousreply 612/07/2017

Hell, I think businesses that don't serve gays should be mandated to install signs saying so. The social media onslaughts against them will cripple the vast majority of them.

by Anonymousreply 712/07/2017

Sanders is awesome. For the GOP that is. Pity the Dems don't have a fighter like her - - even remotely - like her on their side.

by Anonymousreply 812/07/2017

Remember all those assholes who insisted that Trump loved the gays and gay-discrimination had been eliminated and gay rights were settled law, so we should all vote for Trump?

by Anonymousreply 912/07/2017

Ugly white trash cunt! I fucking hate this nasty whore!

by Anonymousreply 1012/07/2017

Amen, r1. I think back to all the Bernie Bros on this site (many of whom voted for the Orange Asshole out of spite) trying to calm the blatantly obvious fears that gay rights would be fine under a Trump presidency. "He's a New Yorker! And he's not even a Republican!" Blah..blah...BLAH. Votes and elections have consequences, sometimes dire.

by Anonymousreply 1112/07/2017

Trump likes his bigotry out in the open.

by Anonymousreply 1212/07/2017

Beat me by a minute, r9. Kudos.

by Anonymousreply 1312/07/2017

R9, I was just posting nearly the same thing. It was sad to hear younger gay people saying we had no worries because gay marriage was legal now, and things would never regress. No one listens to old people of 40 anymore.

by Anonymousreply 1412/07/2017

So .. it'd be OK for gay-owned businesses to discriminate against evangelical conservative crackpot Christians?

by Anonymousreply 1512/07/2017

Me too! I don't wanna give my money to any cunts. If they could politely hang a sign in their window letting me know they are cunty, I'll happily shop at their competitors.

Any gay or lesbian bent out of shape about this is a fascist.

How come we never see anybody making a fuss at Muslim owned bakeries? They wanna throw us off the roof!

by Anonymousreply 1612/07/2017

Only if the discrimination is fueled by a deeply held religious belief, R15.

by Anonymousreply 1712/07/2017

I won't make wedding dresses for bigoted botches. I've returned 2 deposits after finding out they were homophobes. No, you do not get to call us names and expect us to do your bidding. I wish all hairdressers, florists, pastry chefs, etc. who are gay to refuse to help the evangelicals. I realize $ is money, but I like to imagine them all in David's bridal monstrosities with self done hair, and make up by a frau who hates the brides.

by Anonymousreply 1812/07/2017


by Anonymousreply 1912/07/2017

r17 -- We don't have a religious test in tis country -- you don't have to belong or ascribe to ANY religion if you don't want to. Equal protection under the law, and all that jazz.

That said, I religiously shun Conserva-Crank™ Christian assholes.

by Anonymousreply 2012/07/2017

R17 But who will decide what constitutes a "deeply-held religious belief"? Will we have panels of theologians for every denomination possible who will decide what belief is deep enough? And how will they measure this? Will it be expressed in percentages? What's the cutoff point between a "deep" and "shallow" belief?

by Anonymousreply 2112/07/2017

R21, In the Trump White House and Supreme Court a "deeply-held religious belief" will be whatever the bigots say it is. They won't even have to explain it, just claim it, for their right to discriminate against us.

by Anonymousreply 2212/07/2017

Wasn't Trump going be the greatest friend of the gays ever??

Peter Thiel, what's your take on this?

by Anonymousreply 2312/07/2017

Slavery being moral was a deeply-held religious belief too.

by Anonymousreply 2412/07/2017

Shorter Sanders: More cake for me!

by Anonymousreply 2512/07/2017

Those businesses are owned by some very fine people.

by Anonymousreply 2612/07/2017

I’m no constitutional scholar, and I can certainly look this up, but can anyone here say where religious liberty guaranteed in the Constitution? Is this language meant to undermine the supposed separation of church and state so broadly?

by Anonymousreply 2712/07/2017

[quote]But who will decide what constitutes a "deeply-held religious belief"?

Therein lies the dilemma for the S.C. justices. I suspect that they'll try to keep this decision as narrow as possible, but I still think it's still bound to have far-reaching implication.

by Anonymousreply 2812/07/2017

I want an anti-pig sign whenever a photo of Sarah Hogcallabee Swineders comes up.

by Anonymousreply 2912/07/2017

Also OK:


by Anonymousreply 3012/07/2017

But I thought Masterpiece was arguing from a First Amendment, free speech position --that they are "artists," their cakes are "art,"and as such are protected under the freedom of speech clause?

by Anonymousreply 3112/07/2017

R18, why is it okay for you to deny service to these people but not for bakeries to deny service to the gays?

by Anonymousreply 3212/07/2017

I am an artist not a shop keeper, R32. I am protected by the 1rst Amendment.

by Anonymousreply 3312/07/2017

And i refuse to serve bloated, bigoted, side-mouth-talkin’ cows. so no full-fat tofutti for you, toots!

by Anonymousreply 3412/07/2017


by Anonymousreply 3512/07/2017

So, is there any response from the “Log Cabin” nitwits?

by Anonymousreply 3612/07/2017

Can a business owner refuse to provide a service because the customer is straight? I guess we don't have a constitutional right to a wedding cake lol. What if someone asked a baker to make a birthday cake for someone's first birthday, and learns that the child's mother is an unwed mother? Or make a birthday cake for a 90-year-old woman who is an atheist?

by Anonymousreply 3712/07/2017

I wonder if her face hurts

by Anonymousreply 3812/07/2017

[quote] So, is there any response from the “Log Cabin” nitwits?

Yes, just the usual...

by Anonymousreply 3912/07/2017

Sadly, every one of these set-backs opens the door for the crazies to be openly hostile and violent towards Gay people. This is a frightening benchmark.

by Anonymousreply 4012/07/2017

I like my homophobes out in the open. Please post signs in your window so I know not too give you my business.

by Anonymousreply 4112/07/2017

So by that logic, atheists can hang "We don't serve Christians" signs?

by Anonymousreply 4212/07/2017

R42 Yes, they will have to address that one eventually.

by Anonymousreply 4312/07/2017

The problem with the "We don't serve Christians" signs is that the bigots are quite happy to have a business owner do that, because they know damn well that the business owner will be out of business in very short order.

by Anonymousreply 4412/07/2017

Part of me would be in favor of businesses being mandated to hand signs in their windows, but that also makes it look like I'm OK with the idea that they can discriminate. Also, in any small town with limited options, where does a gay couple go then?

"The social media onslaughts against them will cripple the vast majority of them."

True, but only in areas where a large % of the populace is liberal enough to boycott. And even then, I would guess heteros would only boycott if there's a similarly or lower-priced alternative. They're not going to pay more just on our account. In predominantly conservative areas, the signs will be applauded - don't forget Chik Fil-A didn't exactly suffer financially from their anti-gay stance. Quite the opposite.

by Anonymousreply 4512/07/2017

We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.

"Any gay or lesbian bent out of shape about this is a fascist. "


Enough already with the self-righteous fascism. If a private business doesn't want you, good riddance. Grow up and grow a thick skin, and move on. And do you want the government to force US to let anyone into our spaces that we don't want?

by Anonymousreply 4612/07/2017

Nice try, r46. This isn't about spaces. This is about equal treatment.

by Anonymousreply 4712/07/2017

R47 = totally senseless reply. But "nice try".

by Anonymousreply 4812/07/2017

I won't spend my money at a business who thinks that my mere existence is an affront to nature...why should I?? The law says you have to serve/sell or rent to me, so in other words, you hate me and you get to take my money too? No.

by Anonymousreply 4912/07/2017

R46 Then don't start a public business, go be an ant-gay bible thumper and move on.

by Anonymousreply 5012/07/2017

Why senseless? You make no argument and you call me senseless?

When you open a business, you serve everyone. There are no such thing as businesses that are our personal "spaces." The nature of businesses is to be open to the general public.

by Anonymousreply 5112/07/2017

I don't know if anybody has asked what I think is an obvious question: Why would any person want to take a bite from a cake that was made by somebody that person knows hates them? To the bakery owners' defense, (though I do think they are reprehensible), at least they refused to make the cake and admitted their prejudice. They could have said nothing, held their hatred and views to themselves, made the cake, and spit in it.

If I were a member of the company, I would have dismissed it and gone to another bakery. Or the local Ralphs supermarket for Christ sake.

by Anonymousreply 5212/07/2017

And black people should have been happy with their own bathrooms and diners and schools, right, r52?

by Anonymousreply 5312/07/2017

R52 Admitting your bigotry doesn't make the bigotry right or legal. They are not suing to have that cake baked much less eat it, but because of the illegal discrimination.

by Anonymousreply 5412/07/2017

What many of the righteous ghetto dwellers above are missing is that this is about the ability of THE MAJORITY to use an avowal of deeply held religious beliefs to discriminate against minorities.

In real life lesbians, unmarried mothers, gay men and the like, generally don't get to call the shots. We're only a few percentage points. Still business owners generally follow the law.

If you're exhausted and far from home on the Interstate, what good is your "hear me roar" bravado, when the only hotel for miles legitimately refuses to rent their room with a single double bed to two men, due to the owners' deeply held religious beliefs? The owners might never have dreamed they could get away with that crap, if courts hadn't "blessed" it.

by Anonymousreply 5512/07/2017

R55 If these people want to sue, you think your "logic" will convince them not to. Bigots will always put up road blocks to defeat the spirit of nondiscrimination laws. Gay people will always need to keep pushing because of that. Never get comfortable in having just enough to live under the thumb of the majority.

by Anonymousreply 5612/07/2017

[quote]go be an ant-gay

Ok, but I'm gonna need some help with that thorax part.

by Anonymousreply 5712/07/2017

Hell, why don’t we make it easier for the bigots? Let’s wear pink triangles.

by Anonymousreply 5812/07/2017

Of course, R56, genuine bigots will use any pretext to discriminate against gays. But most people aren't that rank.

They may be prejudiced, perhaps because that's how they were taught or because "that's the way it's always been," but history shows most will follow the law rather than act on their prejudices in public business settings without your having to litigate.

Thousands of local restaurants, that routinely refused to serve food to black people, changed their tune when the law changed. Sure, some did (and a few still do) need to be sued. But the overwhelming majority got with the program. That change in behavior would less likely have occurred if the courts had given them a ready made excuse to justify their Prejudiced behavior.

by Anonymousreply 5912/07/2017

If it's a controversial topic she usually says something like, "I have not had that conversation with the President". Apparently they talked about this in depth.

by Anonymousreply 6012/07/2017

"Love how they always manage to snag the most unflattering picture of her."

If an administration called you and your profession 'lying liars who say fake things' on a daily basis- are you going to be one of her fans?

by Anonymousreply 6112/07/2017

Is there a way to get a flattering picture of her?

by Anonymousreply 6212/07/2017
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Don't you just LOVE clicking on these things on every single site you visit? I know we do! You can thank the EU parliament for making everyone in the world click on these pointless things while changing absolutely nothing. If you are interested you can take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT and we'll set a dreaded cookie to make it go away. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.


Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!