FederalRepublic
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2010
- Messages
- 2,942
- Reaction score
- 711
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
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".
Except that there are munipalities which forbid discrimination based upon political beliefs. Which would indeed mean that in those juristictions
the black caterers could not refuse to cater the Klan.
Some of them do, yes. Ever see news stories about designers who don't want to dress Melania? They are pretty vocal about it.
LOL Boy you must be desperate to make up such ridiculous story...or did you read about it online? No one will EVER be prosecuted for refusing to serve the KKK or the Nazi Party or any other of the despicable hate groups you are trying to compare to GAY COUPLES. They are just 2 people in love and deserve the full protection of their rights as citizens just as much as you do.....maybe even more.
People open a business for the same reason that people get up and go to work for someone else--to make a living. Business owners are private citizens, not public doormats.
Nobody is being "forced" to serve gays :shrug: That lie always fails.
If he typically made cakes like that then no.....he can't discriminate. But a baker has to make the exact same cake for gays as he does straights.
His wedding cakes are ALL custom made for the occasion of which he becomes a part of that celebration. He had sold his off the shelf standard bakery goods to the gay couple in the past and would continue to do so. He was not refusing them into his store because they were gay.
Well what do you call it when either you do or get forced out of business? And BTW in the case kf the baker he had done business with the gay persons in thebpast and said he would do so in the future. It was when they requested he create and artistic creation in celebration of their homosexual behavior that he balked on moral grounds.
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.
LOL Boy you must be desperate to make up such ridiculous story...or did you read about it online? No one will EVER be prosecuted for refusing to serve the KKK or the Nazi Party or any other of the despicable hate groups you are trying to compare to GAY COUPLES. They are just 2 people in love and deserve the full protection of their rights as citizens just as much as you do.....maybe even more.
Unless the art depicts homosexual acts he has to bake the cake. Sorry
Well first you dodged this
Well what do you call it when either you do or get forced out of business?
And then why? He was not refusing do do business with them just that he would not use his artistic talents to create something in celebration of an occasion to which he has moral objections. And yes it is about the homoSEXUAL behavior.
How does a gay cake look different from a straight cake?
This would set a precedent. Soon anyone could deny anyone anything and claim religious exemption. SorryIt is not necessarily about differences in looks.
Did you ever bother to watch or read any of the several interviews which he gave?
What the difference between the gay couple using him or any other baker?
Oh let me answer that. I call that the laws of the public marketplace.
And that is where you do not understand the basis of the request and refusal.He has no right not to bake a cake for them that looks just the same as if they were straight. Sorry. If we did that he could discriminate against anyone and claim it is his religion
Well the laws of a public market place say bith parties have a choice of whom they will ir will not do business. It is government laws we aare talking here an if either you do so or be foreced out of business is not forcing someone to do something else face high penalities I don't knkw what you call it.
And that is where you do not understand the basis of the request and refusal.
This would set a precedent. Soon anyone could deny anyone anything and claim religious exemption. Sorry
And you are setting precident so what's the difference? Should the black baker be forced to make KKK cupcakes for the local KKK chapter for their next rally cwlbrating their right to free speech? The Muslim caterer forced to cook some Boston Butts for the Christian rally?
1.)Well what do you call it when either you do or get forced out of business?
2.) And BTW in the case kf the baker he had done business with the gay persons in thebpast and said he would do so in the future. It was when they requested he create and artistic creation in celebration of their homosexual behavior that he balked on moral grounds.
Without reading his comment...I'm guessing you are probably missing the point. And I'm just making a shot in the dark...that it should be your right as the business owner to decide to refuse service to anyone for whatever reason...regardless of how ****ty it is to do so. Nobody is entitled to your work. Gay, white, black, male, female...whatever. And this particular debate has been most ridiculous on a few fronts.
First and foremost...I personally find it stupid that a business would refuse service for someone. They exist to make money. But that isn't my business. So I can't tell them what to do.
Secondly...if someone refuses service based on their religious convictions...how is forcing them to serve not a violation of the first amendment? It doesn't make sense. If your statement is that they don't have to have their business...ok...well the person demanding service doesn't have to use that business. Which leads to the third point of contention.
Why the hell would you demand service from someone who you know does not support your lifestyle? Your race, sexuality, or whatever? Are you ****ing stupid? I personally refuse to spend money at dick's sporting goods because they are a hypocritical sporting goods store. They won't sell handguns and ars...but for some reason it is ok to sell the ammo? Piss off. I vote with my wallet. And I would rather go buy a gun or bullets from a local shop that respects the second amendment.!
So. Digressing. Why are we not demanding that the person demanding service do the reasonable thing and vote with their wallet?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Without reading his comment...I'm guessing you are probably missing the point. And I'm just making a shot in the dark...that it should be your right as the business owner to decide to refuse service to anyone for whatever reason...regardless of how ****ty it is to do so. Nobody is entitled to your work. Gay, white, black, male, female...whatever. And this particular debate has been most ridiculous on a few fronts.
First and foremost...I personally find it stupid that a business would refuse service for someone. They exist to make money. But that isn't my business. So I can't tell them what to do.
Secondly...if someone refuses service based on their religious convictions...how is forcing them to serve not a violation of the first amendment? It doesn't make sense. If your statement is that they don't have to have their business...ok...well the person demanding service doesn't have to use that business. Which leads to the third point of contention.
Why the hell would you demand service from someone who you know does not support your lifestyle? Your race, sexuality, or whatever? Are you ****ing stupid? I personally refuse to spend money at dick's sporting goods because they are a hypocritical sporting goods store. They won't sell handguns and ars...but for some reason it is ok to sell the ammo? Piss off. I vote with my wallet. And I would rather go buy a gun or bullets from a local shop that respects the second amendment.!
So. Digressing. Why are we not demanding that the person demanding service do the reasonable thing and vote with their wallet?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You said a public business........what is a not public business? If yiu are going to offer your purchasing in the public marketplace should you not be allowed to choose with whom you do business? And again the baker did not refuse to sell his normal display merchandise to anyone. He was asked to use his artistic talents to create a special custom cake and become a part of a celebration to which he had high moral objections. Can you at least aknowledge tbe facts here?
The gay couple can choose another videographer.
And I have never fully understood the principle that in a business transaction the buyer can choose with whom they will do business but the seller cannot.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?