Indeed “…this case was not pointless.” However your conclusion, Svetlana Voreskova is based on what you think is right, and how you are stretching freedom of choice to the absolute limit.
Take freedom of choice to the extremes, as you are advocating in your many statements and justifications, then why not allow me the freedom to take someone’s life. Where do you draw the line?
Lines are drawn, and lines are being challenged when it comes to who has rights and who doesn’t.
There was no “deliberate targeting”. This is the kind of language that is used in fake news. It alters the original message or intent.
The case was taken to court because the lesbian couple was seeking justice.
The justice they were seeking was not to be prejudiced against for who they are as human beings.
Which is why this is an issue of humanity.
The challenge is indeed that many of us have beliefs, usually religious or dogmatic, that blind us to the freedom of others.
But all ideas come with constraints. Freedom comes with constraints. Because without certain constraints, freedoms would be taken too far.
Not too long ago, you as a woman, had no freedom. You were property of your father first, then husband second. You had no right to vote.
Is it freedom to discriminate against a human being based on their skin-colour, their race, their gender, or their sexuality? I do not include religion but THAT is a choice, NOT who you are. Relgion is a “what” you choose to believe in.
THIS last question is the ONLY question you need respond to. I am no longer interested in your hyperbolic replies and would kindly ask you respond, if you want to, to this last question only.
To repeat the question for your benefit:
“Do you believe we should have the freedom of choice to discriminate against a human being based on their skin-colour, their race, their gender, or their sexuality?”
PS, have you noticed that I have not name-called, that I have not diminished you as person in my response? Be respectful! Note how you have responded, first to me, and then to James Finn. The number of times you condescended, or spoke in a holier than thou fashion was not only impolite, but a sign of disrespect and a lack of morals.