• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:699]

Peter King

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
29,951
Reaction score
14,636
Location
Netherlands
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

Lol, what is with you guys and brothels? I dealt with this exact same argument last week on this very same topic from a different poster.

Who am I harming by opening a brothel? If everyone that I do business with and all ladies I hire are there on their own free will I'm not harming anyone.

I don't see why not.

I don't see why not.

Again, I don't see why not.

Indeed.

Sure it does. In none of the examples you have listed the use of the property violated the rights of someone else and therefore the state has no reason to act if I do.

The first one is up to the government because it breaks the law. The rest are racist or discriminatory offenses and thus the government has a reason to act except the last one who will most likely violate zoning laws.

People do not have the right to choose which laws they keep, everyone has to follow the rules and laws and if you violate them you get punished.

So if you open a company/business and if you fail to comply with the rules you agreed to follow at the moment you started your company/business, you will have to face the music and risk being punished accordingly.
 

Henrin

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
60,458
Reaction score
12,357
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

The first one is up to the government because it breaks the law. The rest are racist or discriminatory offenses and thus the government has a reason to act except the last one who will most likely violate zoning laws.

So why is it that women can't sell themselves for sex? Do they not have the right to sell themselves for sex? If not, why?

Is being a racist somehow violating the rights of someone else? If so, how?

People do not have the right to choose which laws they keep, everyone has to follow the rules and laws and if you violate them you get punished.

We both know that is not the conversion being had here.
 

Peter King

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
29,951
Reaction score
14,636
Location
Netherlands
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

So why is it that women can't sell themselves for sex? Do they not have the right to sell themselves for sex? If not, why?

Is being a racist somehow violating the rights of someone else? If so, how?

If you violate the rights of someone on racial/racist ground, that is kinda the exact meaning of the word racist. For example, refusing a black person lodging in your public accommodation/motel/hotel purely for the reason for him being black is violating his rights. Pure and simple.
cm
And women not being allowed to sell their bodies? Again, rules and laws.

We both know that is not the conversion being had here.

But that is exactly the conversion being had here, some discriminating bakery is closing his doors because it refuses to comply with the rules and laws he has to comply to.
 

Henrin

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
60,458
Reaction score
12,357
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

If you violate the rights of someone on racial/racist ground, that is kinda the exact meaning of the word racist. For example, refusing a black person lodging in your public accommodation/motel/hotel purely for the reason for him being black is violating his rights. Pure and simple.
cm

Again, they don't have the right to enter or use the property, don't have the right to force people to associate with them, don't have the right to someone else's labor, and don't have the right to make people use resources towards them. Simply refusing someone entry or use of your property, your labor, your resources, and refusing to associate with them is not violating any of their rights.


And women not being allowed to sell their bodies? Again, rules and laws.

Do you agree or disagree that they have the right to sell themselves for sex?

But that is exactly the conversion being had here, some discriminating bakery is closing his doors because it refuses to comply with the rules and laws he has to comply to.

He never agreed to serve them obviously. :2razz:
 

Peter King

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
29,951
Reaction score
14,636
Location
Netherlands
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

Again, they don't have the right to enter or use the property, don't have the right to force people to associate with them, don't have the right to someone else's labor, and don't have the right to make people use resources towards them. Simply refusing someone entry or use of your property, your labor, your resources, and refusing to associate with them is not violating any of their rights.

You are stating your personal opinion as fact and guess what, the supreme court has already ruled

The Supreme Court ruled that Congress had the power under the Commerce Clause to enact the prohibitions on discrimination contained in the public accommodations section of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Justice Thomas Clark wrote the opinion for a unanimous Court. He reviewed testimony presented at congressional hearings showing that Americans had become increasingly mobile, but that African Americans were discriminated against by hotels and motels, and often had to travel longer distances to get lodging or had to call on friends to put them up overnight.

Justice Clark noted that under the Interstate Commerce Act, “…the power of Congress to promote interstate commerce also includes the power to regulate the local incidents thereof, including local activities in both the States of origin and destination, which might have a substantial and harmful effect upon that commerce. One need only examine the evidence which we have discussed above to see that Congress may—as it has—prohibit racial discrimination by motels serving travelers, however 'local' their operations may appear.”

Justice Clark also found that the Act did not deprive the motel owner of liberty or property under the Fifth Amendment. Because Congress has the right to prohibit discrimination in accommodations under the Interstate Commerce Act, the motel “has no 'right' to select its guests as it sees fit, free from governmental regulation.

The government has the right to decide things like that, and as said, if someone doesn't like it than that is tough luck for him.

Just as the motel did not have the right to select it's guests as it sees fit, the bakery or any other company/place that is open to the public and not a private club, has to follow the law that makes it illegal to discriminate.

Do you agree or disagree that they have the right to sell themselves for sex?

In the Netherlands it is legal and as long as it is safe, legal, voluntary and not done on streets and to fill the pockets of pimps and criminals I do not have an issue with it. But as you live in the US, it is illegal until the people in the US change that law.

He never agreed to serve them obviously. :2razz:

Hence he committed a crime and has to face the punishment that this brings.
 

maquiscat

Maquis Admiral
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
16,736
Reaction score
5,544
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests | Fox News

The question is, can a bakery refuse to make a wedding cake because they do not like the fact that 2 men or 2 women get married to one another. Religious freedom is all nice and dandy, but they are in the business of baking cakes and if someone comes to a baker to order a cake for a wedding cake the baker should not be allowed to discriminate. Just imagine that a black baker would refuse to bake a cake for a mixed couple, or a white baker refusing to bake for a black couple. What if a muslim baker refused to bake a cake for a jewish couple.

All those kinds of things would be discriminatory and this case is discrimination too. Nobody should be refused business because of their sexual preferences.

I think I remember something about this when it was all going down. Didn't the wife just go on a mega tirade on FB about it? Anyway, I support their right to refuse business for any reason and I support and encourage the right of others to boycott and protest the business. Any actual threats of physical harm to the property or people is over the line and those making the threats need to be brought to justice. However, threats of not doing business with other companies the bakery does business with is perfectly in line. That is how a discriminating business should be dealt with, not by the removal of freedoms of association, religion and free speech.
 

Peter King

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
29,951
Reaction score
14,636
Location
Netherlands
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

I think I remember something about this when it was all going down. Didn't the wife just go on a mega tirade on FB about it? Anyway, I support their right to refuse business for any reason and I support and encourage the right of others to boycott and protest the business. Any actual threats of physical harm to the property or people is over the line and those making the threats need to be brought to justice. However, threats of not doing business with other companies the bakery does business with is perfectly in line. That is how a discriminating business should be dealt with, not by the removal of freedoms of association, religion and free speech.

I am going to disagree with you on that one (about being allowed or in their right to deny service) but I do agree with you about the threats of violence. In a civilized society we do not things like that.
 
Top Bottom