Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge say

[holbritter]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

What are you talking about? Exceptions to law must be cited.

"must" be?

No, they do not.

 

[Middleground]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

I agree. I think that ultimately this will be decided by the Supreme Court as a religious freedom issue. I'm curious to see how it plays out.

Here's the thing, Moon. How far shall we let religious freedom go? Can the business couple who refused to do business with a gay couple also refuse to hire a gay person, not do business with another business because the owner is gay, or not do business with a straight couple because the church also has done gay weddings? Where do you draw the line? Also, by taking business from a gay couple, how does that affect their beliefs? Is it going to make them sinners? is it going to affect their beliefs? Is it going to make them less pious in the eyes of the Lord?

 

[ChezC3]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

A gay wedding is an event. A white applicant is a person.

How this dumb ass became a judge without understanding the difference -- nah, it actually doesn't surprise me anymore...

:roll:

Now, that being said, a gay couple comes in and wants cutsie photos taken by a photographer, or want to share a nice slice of of fruitcake at their local bakery, they should be served under current anti-discrimination laws.

Personally, as a baker I'd say I'll bake your cake but no I'm not putting "Peter and Gab Forever" on it nor am I offering a Man and Man or Woman and Woman piece to place on top. Or anything else that connects your cake in anyway with your homosexuality.

That solves that.

Seeing as a photographer or videographer has to take an active role at the event, they should absolutely have a right to refuse any event they choose.

 

[vegas giants]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

He doesn't typically make cakes celebrating gay marriage, because he doesn't believe such a thing exists. If a gay man married a gay woman, I expect he'd celebrate right along with them.

If a cake celebrating gay marriage looks exactly like other cakes he makes then he has to make it. The couple can put the two little men or women on top themselves.

 

[PraiseKek]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...?hpid=hp_hp-morning-mix_mm-ban:homepage/story



I agree with the Judges decision, and I am sure some will not.

Yes, those people are the ones who support the Constitution, those who support it do not:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

 

[vegas giants]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

Yes, those people are the ones who support the Constitution, those who support it do not:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

You are free to exercise your religion....BUT THERE ARE LIMITS

 

[Athanasius68]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

guessed you missed the obviously glaring point that a neo nazi would KNOW the black guy is black (yes there are a few where its hard to tell)
A gay couple doesnt know some bigot is going to discriminate again them until it happens and then its not a matter of them wanting that person to do the job its a matter of them reporting a crime and or defending their rights.
oooooops LMAO:lamo

It doesnt really matter what the neo-nazi knows, its what the black videographer CANNOT do. And yes, the videographer, under your scenario, cannot legally refuse because he doesnt like neo-nazis (in municipalities where discrimination based upon political affiliation is banned).

 

[Athanasius68]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

If someone is an adulterer will you will bake them a cake?
If someone is a murderer will you bake them a cake?
If someone is a thief will you bake them a cake?
If someone has idols will you bake them a cake?
If someone doesn't keep the sabbath day holy will you bake them a cake?
If someone takes the name of the Lord your God in vain will you bake them a cake?
If someone doesn't Honor their father and their mother will you bake them a cake?


If someone is gay and wishing to get married will you bake them a cake?

Sorry folks. You can't have your gay and eat it too.

Oh-- so now we are encouraging the government to launch an inquisition of a persons religious beliefs.

 

[Serenity]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

Oh-- so now we are encouraging the government to launch an inquisition of a persons religious beliefs.

We? Nope.

 

[Athanasius68]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

We? Nope.

Looks like it, what with the questions you are asking.

 

[Serenity]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

Looks like it, what with the questions you are asking.

Sarcasm being used to point out the selective application of religious beliefs by some folks when it comes to baking someone a cake .

 

[PraiseKek]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

You are free to exercise your religion....BUT THERE ARE LIMITS

Lol, what part of "no law," do you not understand?

 

[vegas giants]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

Lol, what part of "no law," do you not understand?

So FLDS can have 5 wives which they claim is an integral part of their religion? Really?

 

[Athanasius68]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

Sarcasm being used to point out the selective application of religious beliefs by some folks when it comes to baking someone a cake .

Fair enough. But being a hypocrate (maybe) isnt illegal. It becomes a political issue to be decided in legislatures through a democratic process and not as many on this board demand, through the courts.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

Perhaps people who are suing bakers or videographers over the happiest day of their life are trying to make a political point.
And perhaps those people understand that, when their religion is under assault, Christians often ' turn the cheek.' And perhaps they understand that Muslims, when their religion is under attack, fight back.

Or like I said, its just that Muslims make up less than 1% of the population, thus there are not that many Muslim wedding cake makers and wedding photographers.

The "turn the other cheek" conservative evangelicals are why gays and lesbians were treated like second class citizens at best up until the last few years. They are the reason why there was still laws against homosexuality until just 10 years ago when they were finally struck down. They are the reason why gays and lesbians are not part of federal anti-discrimination laws despite the the fact they are historically one of the most discriminated against groups.

 

[Stinger]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

Good grief. It's baking a cake, not entering into a threesome. And your slavery reference couldn't be more over the top. What, had the baker's ancestors been subjected to a couple hundred years of forced homosexuality and show tunes? And please, point to the chapter and verse where God says "Thou shalt not provide ceremonial dessert to the pillow biters". Rhetoric like this has a lot more to do with why people don't take us seriously than any dreamed up attack on our religious freedoms. High moral convictions...you do not want to go down that road, man, seriously. You want to lose a debate about our faith, you lead out with the words "high moral convictions".

No it was creating a special piece of art to celebrate an occasion to which he had high moral objections and my analogy is perfectly fine based on your reasons as to why the bakere should be sued out of business. And as an example in the interviews he gave had it been for an adult swingers party he would have turned them down. Should he be sued and forced to use his talents there?

 

[Media_Truth]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

There are plenty of people who would refuse to work for Trump.

Yeah, but do they go on National TV, and make a big deal of it, saying "I refuse to bake a cake for Donald Trump, because he's a known adulterer, who hasn't repented".

 

[Stinger]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

Of course the judge was right.
These people want special rights and want to be above the law based on their feelings which they claim to be their religious beliefs. Well religious freedom doesn't work like that, it doesn't give you special rights or make you free to break the law or violate the rights of others.

Theres many simple solutions to their problems.
Dont be a photographer
Dont be a photographer with a public access business.
Be a photographer but dont do ANY weddings
Be a photographer but private
be a photographer with a public access business and dont break the law and illegally discriminate.

:shrug:

What does "public access" have to do with someone asking an artist to create something representitive of something to which they have a moral objection or participate in that something? If a venue calls me up and ask me to write some songs and perform them supporting abortion for an upcoming fund raiser and I turn them down are you saying they can sue me and force me to do so?

 

[trouble13]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

homosexuals, like blacks and Christians will NEVER be a protected class . .

but sexual orientation is most places and race and religion is. We are all as individuals protected classes but discrimination must come in that form, not randomly.

Your making an odd distinction that i cant say i agree with or even the point in you making it.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

It doesnt really matter what the neo-nazi knows, its what the black videographer CANNOT do. And yes, the videographer, under your scenario, cannot legally refuse because he doesnt like neo-nazis (in municipalities where discrimination based upon political affiliation is banned).

jumping into a conversation midpoint like this and having no clue what was being discussed and making random meaningless posts that have nothing to do with the context of what was being said only makes your post look very stupid
"i" didnt make any scenario and in the point that was being made it mattered completely. Try to keep up so your posts can avoid mistakes like this in the future LMAO

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

1.) A gay wedding is an event. A white applicant is a person.
2.)How this dumb ass became a judge without understanding the difference -- nah, it actually doesn't surprise me anymore...
3.)Now, that being said, a gay couple comes in and wants cutsie photos taken by a photographer, or want to share a nice slice of of fruitcake at their local bakery, they should be served under current anti-discrimination laws.
4.)Personally, as a baker I'd say I'll bake your cake but no I'm not putting "Peter and Gab Forever" on it nor am I offering a Man and Man or Woman and Woman piece to place on top. Or anything else that connects your cake in anyway with your homosexuality.
5.)That solves that.
6.) Seeing as a photographer or videographer has to take an active role at the event, they should absolutely have a right to refuse any event they choose.

1.) no a WEDDING is an event, not doing the wedding based on the PEOPLE in it is discrimination nice try but that failed lie is one of the most asinine dishonest and factually wrong claims ever.
2.) sweet irony since your #1 is complete false. He actually understands that law
3.) correct
4.) what YOU would do personally dont matter to the law and or peoples rights when they apply. If you would CHOOSE to break the law and or violate the rights of others that would be on you.
5.) No it doesnt solve that if you put "names" on all your other wedding cakes you would be factually discrimination.
you could make ZERO wedding cakes, or you could make wedding cakes all the same with no words and no toppers but once you differentiate in many places you would be choosing to break the law
6.) First off thats factually meaningless for this discussion and secondly what lie of active role are you trying to sale here? the wedding doesn't REQUIRE a photos to complete it or anything like that so again you claim is factually wrong and completely dishonest and stupid. stupid. I took pictures or the steelers last sunday. I had to take pictures of a steeler game one time for a youth project, according to your "logic" i played an active role in the game and their win, wow I never knew that!!!:lol:

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

1.) What does "public access" have to do with someone asking an artist to create something representitive of something to which they have a moral objection or participate in that something?
2.) If a venue calls me up and ask me to write some songs and perform them supporting abortion for an upcoming fund raiser and I turn them down are you saying they can sue me and force me to do so?

1.) Very simple public access laws apply to public access businesses and they apply to ALL BUSINESSES the same way nobody gets special treatment or to break the law.
I'm a christian, if i CHOOSE to open a public access business that business comes with rules and regulations that govern it and im in contract to follow. If I CHOOSE to break those laws and rules well there are consequences to that. Its a very simple common sense concept. If i dont like the laws and rules i can CHOOSE to open a different type of business or find ways that are within the contract to conduct my business, i dont get special treatment.
I would have to be a complete moron to think just because im christian i get to break the law and or violate the rights of others based on my own morals.
2.) Wow? you arent from the US are? Sorry i get it know you dont know how the law and rights work in relationship to this topic. Sorry i didnt know.
To answer your question, NO of course you cant be sued for not doing a particular song, topic doesnt matter its meaningless. And there also is no force for you to do so or force on these photographers.
To get yourself in trouble you have to choose to break the law or violate somebody rights. Your scenario doesnt fit that in any way shape or form.

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

Your making an odd distinction that i cant say i agree with or even the point in you making it.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

its not an odd distinction at all its factual and you agreeing with it or not doesn't change that fact that its accurate.

 

[ludin]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

When you run a public business you are not allowed to discriminate against those that do not have you beliefs. That is religious discrimination. HL was about insurance not about selling. The whole idea that selling a cake to a gay couple is against anybodies religion is a fallacy to facilitate discrimination and ostracization and nothing more. The courts will see thru that the same way they saw thru the claim that any religion says the races should be kept separate and desegregation was "against their religion". Do you also believe it is a religious right to refuse to serve blacks....or Mexicans or ......Is that what you think religion is for? To facilitate bigotry? The fact that you don't see the difference between a hate group like the KKK and a gay couple is quite troubling to say the least.

Show me where a business has to host every event that walksinto their store.
Businesses decline to do event all the time. Otherwise you should have issues with a black business declining to do a kkk event.

It isn't about selling a cake. It is that their cake endorses and agrees with something that they religious beliefs do not allow for. You are forcing them to promote something and agree with something that goes against heir religious views.

No I believe in he first amendment were free speech and religious views are protected from government intrusion.
I believe that businesses have the right to turn down events that they do not agree with.

If you do not believe that. then a black catering service has no choice but to cater a kkk meeting.
It doesn't matter if they are a hate group according to your own argument they have no choice but to do the event or else they are discriminating against white people.

 

[ludin]

Re: Company’s ban against gay weddings is akin to ‘white applicants only’ sign, judge

What does "public access" have to do with someone asking an artist to create something representitive of something to which they have a moral objection or participate in that something? If a venue calls me up and ask me to write some songs and perform them supporting abortion for an upcoming fund raiser and I turn them down are you saying they can sue me and force me to do so?

That is the argument before the Supreme Court right now.
Can you force an artist to do something that they find morally objectionable.

The answer is no you can't. This was proven when a gay baker did not have to bake
A religious cake or decorate said cake. Equal protection applies.