Colorado is after this guy.

[TheGreatGatsby]

This is just total harassment. Period. No other word for it. And it's all being plotted by LGBT folks. Otherwise, why wouldn't this transgender guy go to a LGBT baker that probably WANTS the business?

Or he could just take the money and bake the cake. That always works.

Not sure how he stays in business refusing to take customer's money. Oh, maybe he just collects money from wingnuts for these fake legal battles because his cakes taste like ass.

By getting the business from the 99.999 percent of people who are respectable and not asshats.

Also, it sounds like his business is doing great; and if a liberal like you gave a fuck about his business or business in general, you'd stop filing predatory lawsuits. GFY, you phony p.o.s. joe.

 

[JoeB131]

By getting the business from the 99.999 percent of people who are respectable and not asshats.

Also, it sounds like his business is doing great; and if a liberal like you gave a fuck about his business or business in general, you'd stop filing predatory lawsuits. GFY, you phony p.o.s. joe.

Actually, his business has suffered because decent people don't patronize a homophobe.

 

[westwall]

Yes, they are. They favor the chinese extremely heavily. They are far from even reasonable. They are batshit crazy deals that enrich them, and impoverish us. So, if your goal is to destroy the USA as Spain was destroyed through its trade deals back when it was the wealthiest nation on the planet, then yes, your point is correct. On the other hand, if you want this country to remain strong, then you and your claims are moronic.

Um, no, they aren't.

Americans were losing the trade wars long before the Chinese showed up.

That's what happens when your corporations become more focused on quick profits than quality.

So what's Trumpenfuhrer's solution? Making consumer goods more expensive for Americans!

No, we weren't. Up until the 1970's the USA enjoyed a trade surplus, since then our politicians have engineered us into the largest trade deficit the world has ever seen. Get your money for education back, because you don't know squat.

Holy shit, that’s ignorant!

Watch this and learn something.

When I want to learn something I don't listen to a comedian with a chip on his shoulder and biased sources.


"In 1975, U.S. exports exceeded foreign imports by $12,400 million, but that would be the last trade surplus the United States would see in the 20th century. By 1987, the American trade deficit had swelled to $153,300 million. The trade gap began sinking in subsequent years as the dollar depreciated and economic growth in other countries led to increased demand for U.S. exports. But the American trade deficit swelled again in the late 1990s.


During this period, the U.S. economy was once again growing faster than the economies of America's major trading partners, and Americans consequently were buying foreign goods at a faster pace than people in other countries were buying American goods. What's more, the financial crisis in Asia sent currencies in that part of the world plummeting, making their goods much cheaper in relative terms than American goods. By 1997, the American trade deficit hit $110,000 million, and it was only heading higher."


A Look at the Enduring History of the U.S. Trade Deficit

 

[martybegan]

He doesn't hate them, he still serves them point of sale, he just doesn't want to participate in a SSM wedding.

Anyone willing to piss away this amount of money to not serve gays really hates gays.

A worker isn't a business owner. A worker's right to do certain things is different.

But that's the point. You want privilege for business owners. "I don't have to do this because of my religious beliefs", you'd support firing that person in a heartbeat, and you know it.

he only benefit is people like you get to cum in your pants every time someone you don't like gets fucked over.

Only person fucking over these homophobic bakers are themselves. They were told what the law is... they made a very big deal about breaking it. He could have just as easily lied and said he was booked up that weekend.

The law cannot override 1st amendment protections.

Sure it can. That's why Mormons can't have plural marriages anymore... because plural marriage is illegal.

You being a bigot disqualfies you...not to mention your own posts on this rhread reveals you're clueless on Christianity.

12 years of Catholic stupidity and psycho nuns, I've had more "Christianity" than I can stand.

Nice attempt at argumentum ad abusrdum there. You don't get to decide how the guy free exercises, and in this case neither should government.

But the government decides that laws are more important than religous practice all the time.

It's why the Rastafarians can't smoke pot.
Why the Mormons can't have polygamy
Why the Branch Davidians can't diddle their kids.

We decided - get this - that laws protecting the rest of us were more important.

Just because you don't have any actual principles doesn't mean others can't have them.

A business is an extension of a person. You don't lose your rights simply because you want to sell something. On the other hand when you work for someone else you are trading your labor for their $$. They get to decide the views of their business, the employee doesn't.

Why do people have to lie to exercise their rights?

The pot thing is going to go away soon, and they should be able to do it.
If a State wants to allow polgamy let them do it as long as the legislature votes it in. Plus people can be in plural relationships, they just can't get a marriage license for it.
Child molestation is an actual crime against another person. that you use it as an example just shows how much of a twat you are.

 

[martybegan]

That would constitute involuntary servitude, which is explicitly prohibited by the Thirteenth Amendment.

Um, no, everyone who signs a contract is obligated to do what they promised.

Kind of like if I say, 'Apples, $1.00/lb" I can't change it to $2.00/lb because I don't like you.

It's the same principle. But I know that word is foreign to you. Party allegiance is all that matters. If a business is discriminating against someone you don't like you cheer. If they're picking on a friend, you pass a law. It's the political philosophy of an arbitrary bully.

Yawn, buddy, Facebook is on solid legal ground. They have terms of service clearly defined, and Jones violated them by saying hte Sandy Hook Families were crisis actors. If they didn't dump him, they'd probably be liable for damages.

That's the entire purpose of these laws. That's all they do. They don't stop discrimination. They merely suppress the expression of opinions that the law has targeted for extinction.

OH MY GOD! What kind of a world would we live in if racism, misogyny and homophobia became extinct?

Oh. Wait. A pretty good one, actually.

Carry on.

It was never meant to go into individual contracted transactions.

Why do I feel we are arguing about a faucet leak while on a sinking Titanic?

Because only you think the ship is sinking, or that there's anything wrong with the faucet..

The thing is, you guys had no problem with PA Laws until they started applying them to the ka-weers!

No, when they were used against non PA transactions is when I have an issue with it.

PA laws were to fight systemic discrimination in actual point of sale transactions and things like hotel rooms.

 

[Cellblock2429]

He is a small businessman and should have the right to serve who he wants. Don’t like him...don’t do business with him.

The leftists disagree -- except when they agree.

The harassing state needs to be PUNISHED. This has been settled. The state needs to pay huge punitive damages.

/——/ Who says the cake has to taste good or it can’t have an additional message on it?

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

He is a small businessman and should have the right to serve who he wants. Don’t like him...don’t do business with him.

The leftists disagree -- except when they agree.

The harassing state needs to be PUNISHED. This has been settled. The state needs to pay huge punitive damages.

/——/ Who says the cake has to taste good or it can’t have an additional message on it?

Any person knows it's not worth it to piss off or offend someone handling your food. No telling what this tranny might be eating when he/it bites into that cake.

 

[JoeB131]

A business is an extension of a person. You don't lose your rights simply because you want to sell something. On the other hand when you work for someone else you are trading your labor for their $$. They get to decide the views of their business, the employee doesn't.

So you give up your rights if you go to work, but not if you own a business? That's... um... crazy.

The pot thing is going to go away soon, and they should be able to do it.
If a State wants to allow polgamy let them do it as long as the legislature votes it in. Plus people can be in plural relationships, they just can't get a marriage license for it.

And you can hate on the homos all you want... you just can't do it at work.

Child molestation is an actual crime against another person. that you use it as an example just shows how much of a twat you are.

But you are arguing that laws shouldn't apply as long as you have a sincere religious belief. Well, I'd say the Davidians were pretty sincere, wouldn't you?

No, when they were used against non PA transactions is when I have an issue with it.

PA laws were to fight systemic discrimination in actual point of sale transactions and things like hotel rooms.

PA laws were meant to keep businesses from discriminating against people. They are doing a fine job of it.

 

[JoeB131]

/——/ Who says the cake has to taste good or it can’t have an additional message on it?

That's a great way to get sued for breach of contract.

Half these Bridezillas are willing to sue at the drop of a hat to start with.

 

[dblack]

PA laws were meant to keep businesses from discriminating against people. They are doing a fine job of it.

Nope. They can discriminate all they want, as long as they don't say why.

 

[Cellblock2429]

/——/ Who says the cake has to taste good or it can’t have an additional message on it?

That's a great way to get sued for breach of contract.

Half these Bridezillas are willing to sue at the drop of a hat to start with.

/—-/ He gets sued anyway and who is to judge how the cake tastes? Ooooooops a tad too much salt (1/2 pound)

 

[westwall]

PA laws were meant to keep businesses from discriminating against people. They are doing a fine job of it.

Nope. They can discriminate all they want, as long as they don't say why.

Correctomundo. My wife actually helped write some of the policy's for Boeing that deals with that very issue.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

…decent people don't patronize a homophobe.

Decent people don't pander to mentally- and morally-defective sexual perverts.

 

[Cecilie1200]

He is a small businessman and should have the right to serve who he wants. Don’t like him...don’t do business with him.

The leftists disagree -- except when they agree.

The harassing state needs to be PUNISHED. This has been settled. The state needs to pay huge punitive damages.

/——/ Who says the cake has to taste good or it can’t have an additional message on it?

Any person knows it's not worth it to piss off or offend someone handling your food. No telling what this tranny might be eating when he/it bites into that cake.

The ironic thing is that they count on Christians being good enough people not to retaliate when leftists vilify them for being terrible people.

 

[martybegan]

A business is an extension of a person. You don't lose your rights simply because you want to sell something. On the other hand when you work for someone else you are trading your labor for their $$. They get to decide the views of their business, the employee doesn't.

So you give up your rights if you go to work, but not if you own a business? That's... um... crazy.

The pot thing is going to go away soon, and they should be able to do it.
If a State wants to allow polgamy let them do it as long as the legislature votes it in. Plus people can be in plural relationships, they just can't get a marriage license for it.

And you can hate on the homos all you want... you just can't do it at work.

Child molestation is an actual crime against another person. that you use it as an example just shows how much of a twat you are.

But you are arguing that laws shouldn't apply as long as you have a sincere religious belief. Well, I'd say the Davidians were pretty sincere, wouldn't you?

No, when they were used against non PA transactions is when I have an issue with it.

PA laws were to fight systemic discrimination in actual point of sale transactions and things like hotel rooms.

PA laws were meant to keep businesses from discriminating against people. They are doing a fine job of it.

No, you don't give up your rights, but you don't have to keep working there either. a business takes far more investment, and is an extension of oneself.

I don't hate anyone because of who or what they are, I despise people for the best reason, because of what they do and how they act.

I am not arguing in absolutes, so don't try that shit.

 

[JoeB131]

Decent people don't pander to mentally- and morally-defective sexual perverts.

Again, guy, please go into your job tomorrow and rant about how evil the gays are... My guess is HR won't share your views on how morally defective gay folks are.

No, you don't give up your rights, but you don't have to keep working there either. a business takes far more investment, and is an extension of oneself.

And if you are a business, and you don't want to have gay customers, you can get out of that business. See how that works?

Either you have a first Amendment right to be an asshole or you don't.

I don't hate anyone because of who or what they are, I despise people for the best reason, because of what they do and how they act.

Uh-huh... and you've spent the last few pages defending a homophobic asshole...

I am not arguing in absolutes, so don't try that shit.

Okay... so we are both in agreement that there are laws that override the right to believe in whatever bizarre superstitions demanded by an imaginary friend in the sky. So now the only real question here is, where do you draw the line between one's right to grovel before an imaginary sky pixie and what point there is a greater societal good to be protected.

Awesome. Progress.

I think stomping out homophobia is a greater good.

See how that works?

 

[martybegan]

Decent people don't pander to mentally- and morally-defective sexual perverts.

Again, guy, please go into your job tomorrow and rant about how evil the gays are... My guess is HR won't share your views on how morally defective gay folks are.

No, you don't give up your rights, but you don't have to keep working there either. a business takes far more investment, and is an extension of oneself.

And if you are a business, and you don't want to have gay customers, you can get out of that business. See how that works?

Either you have a first Amendment right to be an asshole or you don't.

I don't hate anyone because of who or what they are, I despise people for the best reason, because of what they do and how they act.

Uh-huh... and you've spent the last few pages defending a homophobic asshole...

I am not arguing in absolutes, so don't try that shit.

Okay... so we are both in agreement that there are laws that override the right to believe in whatever bizarre superstitions demanded by an imaginary friend in the sky. So now the only real question here is, where do you draw the line between one's right to grovel before an imaginary sky pixie and what point there is a greater societal good to be protected.

Awesome. Progress.

I think stomping out homophobia is a greater good.

See how that works?

He's OK with gay customers, he just doesn't want to make a cake specifically for their wedding.

Unlike you I believe people have rights with regards to things I disagree with, i.e. I am not the narcissistic twat that you are.

Sorry, but a single baker not wanting to bake a cake for single event doesn't qualify as needing brute government force to create a "greater societal good"

Now if a whole localites bakers decided they didn't want to do it, then the government would have a case to get involved.

 

[Cecilie1200]

A business is an extension of a person. You don't lose your rights simply because you want to sell something. On the other hand when you work for someone else you are trading your labor for their $$. They get to decide the views of their business, the employee doesn't.

So you give up your rights if you go to work, but not if you own a business? That's... um... crazy.

The pot thing is going to go away soon, and they should be able to do it.
If a State wants to allow polgamy let them do it as long as the legislature votes it in. Plus people can be in plural relationships, they just can't get a marriage license for it.

And you can hate on the homos all you want... you just can't do it at work.

Child molestation is an actual crime against another person. that you use it as an example just shows how much of a twat you are.

But you are arguing that laws shouldn't apply as long as you have a sincere religious belief. Well, I'd say the Davidians were pretty sincere, wouldn't you?

No, when they were used against non PA transactions is when I have an issue with it.

PA laws were to fight systemic discrimination in actual point of sale transactions and things like hotel rooms.

PA laws were meant to keep businesses from discriminating against people. They are doing a fine job of it.

No, you don't give up your rights, but you don't have to keep working there either. a business takes far more investment, and is an extension of oneself.

I don't hate anyone because of who or what they are, I despise people for the best reason, because of what they do and how they act.

I am not arguing in absolutes, so don't try that shit.

Accepting a job at another person's business is a trade. You are voluntarily trading a certain amount of your autonomy in service to someone else's goals in exchange for their money. People don't usually think about it in those terms, but that's what's happening. When you are weighing the decision to accept the job, asking yourself if the money you're being offered is worth enough for what you're going to be asked to do, that is exactly what you are weighing.

One of the chief reasons people give for starting their own business is that they want to be their own boss, and they want the freedom to make their own decisions without someone else telling them what to do. Now we've got a bunch of control freak chuckleheads wanting to come in and say, "Nope. You're not in charge, you're not making the decisions, WE are going to be your boss and tell you who you have to be and how you have to do things."

 

[Cecilie1200]

Decent people don't pander to mentally- and morally-defective sexual perverts.

Again, guy, please go into your job tomorrow and rant about how evil the gays are... My guess is HR won't share your views on how morally defective gay folks are.

No, you don't give up your rights, but you don't have to keep working there either. a business takes far more investment, and is an extension of oneself.

And if you are a business, and you don't want to have gay customers, you can get out of that business. See how that works?

Either you have a first Amendment right to be an asshole or you don't.

I don't hate anyone because of who or what they are, I despise people for the best reason, because of what they do and how they act.

Uh-huh... and you've spent the last few pages defending a homophobic asshole...

I am not arguing in absolutes, so don't try that shit.

Okay... so we are both in agreement that there are laws that override the right to believe in whatever bizarre superstitions demanded by an imaginary friend in the sky. So now the only real question here is, where do you draw the line between one's right to grovel before an imaginary sky pixie and what point there is a greater societal good to be protected.

Awesome. Progress.

I think stomping out homophobia is a greater good.

See how that works?

He's OK with gay customers, he just doesn't want to make a cake specifically for their wedding.

Unlike you I believe people have rights with regards to things I disagree with, i.e. I am not the narcissistic twat that you are.

Sorry, but a single baker not wanting to bake a cake for single event doesn't qualify as needing brute government force to create a "greater societal good"

Now if a whole localites bakers decided they didn't want to do it, then the government would have a case to get involved.

I still don't think the government would need to get involved. I think if every baker currently in town suddenly decided they didn't want to bake custom cakes for homosexuals, there would be someone in that town who would say, "Wow, there's a whole bunch of people out there with money to spend and no one serving them. What a great business opportunity", and open a bakery for that purpose. That actually happened in a lot of areas with "adult" novelty cakes for bachelorette parties and the like. People started thinking that would be cool and funny, and traditional bakers said, "I don't want to make crude, raunchy cake designs". Next thing you know, there were bakeries specializing in doing that sort of thing.

 

[martybegan]

A business is an extension of a person. You don't lose your rights simply because you want to sell something. On the other hand when you work for someone else you are trading your labor for their $$. They get to decide the views of their business, the employee doesn't.

So you give up your rights if you go to work, but not if you own a business? That's... um... crazy.

The pot thing is going to go away soon, and they should be able to do it.
If a State wants to allow polgamy let them do it as long as the legislature votes it in. Plus people can be in plural relationships, they just can't get a marriage license for it.

And you can hate on the homos all you want... you just can't do it at work.

Child molestation is an actual crime against another person. that you use it as an example just shows how much of a twat you are.

But you are arguing that laws shouldn't apply as long as you have a sincere religious belief. Well, I'd say the Davidians were pretty sincere, wouldn't you?

No, when they were used against non PA transactions is when I have an issue with it.

PA laws were to fight systemic discrimination in actual point of sale transactions and things like hotel rooms.

PA laws were meant to keep businesses from discriminating against people. They are doing a fine job of it.

No, you don't give up your rights, but you don't have to keep working there either. a business takes far more investment, and is an extension of oneself.

I don't hate anyone because of who or what they are, I despise people for the best reason, because of what they do and how they act.

I am not arguing in absolutes, so don't try that shit.

Accepting a job at another person's business is a trade. You are voluntarily trading a certain amount of your autonomy in service to someone else's goals in exchange for their money. People don't usually think about it in those terms, but that's what's happening. When you are weighing the decision to accept the job, asking yourself if the money you're being offered is worth enough for what you're going to be asked to do, that is exactly what you are weighing.

One of the chief reasons people give for starting their own business is that they want to be their own boss, and they want the freedom to make their own decisions without someone else telling them what to do. Now we've got a bunch of control freak chuckleheads wanting to come in and say, "Nope. You're not in charge, you're not making the decisions, WE are going to be your boss and tell you who you have to be and how you have to do things."

The worst thing about it is they don't realize how extreme of a position they are taking.

I won't talk for anyone else, but I do see a use for PA laws when it comes to actual PA's. when you allow a person onto your property for point of sale transactions you open yourself to regulation of your commerce by the government. However contracted services that are not critical, not time sensitive, and easily obtainable elsewhere should not be held to the PA standard.

The example I often use is that of a hotel. The owner should not be able to deny a paying customer a room based on them being black, gay, muslim, purple, whatever.

However they should be able to deny the use of one of their ballrooms or conference rooms to a SSM wedding, or a Satanist conference, or even a Bible thumper conference.