Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Its agreeing to make a cake for something you don't believe in which is a homosexual "marriage".I'm not quite sure how baking a cake "caters" to anyone's lifestyle. Its just a cake.
They weren't making cakes for things they believe in. They were making cakes for money. They also did not interview straight couples to see what kind of marriage they planned on having, did they? How do they know a straight couple isn't a couple of swingers who will laugh at God's law every time they go to a swinger's club? Why are they just picking on the gays? Because they hate them?
Also, where the fuck in the Bible does it say you can't bake cakes for gays?
Here's another moron who thinks he speaks for all bakers.
I don't recall speaking for all bakers. You really just made that up.
You were just telling us why bakers bake cakes. If you don't speak for all bakers, then shut the fuck up.
Liberals are so stupid that they can't figure out the simplest things. Even a 5-year-old understands why someone wouldn't want to bake a cake with a couple of dykes on top and deliver it to a wedding where two dykes are getting married.Faggots should stop suing people who refuse to cater to their "lifestyle" and laws like this wouldn't be needed but of course the people in the right are blamed as usual. Indiana will survive and faggots will get over it.
I'm not quite sure how baking a cake "caters" to anyone's lifestyle. Its just a cake.
yeah. because they hate gays. duh.
They would probably all go EWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!
If they were raised by bigots like yourself, maybe so.
It doesn't matter what their reason is. If they don't want to bake a wedding cake for a couple of dykes, that's their right.
Not if they are open to the public, it is not. They are free to close to the public and continue their business of hating gays. Plenty of people sell cakes without public storefronts. We bought ours from a Catholic who sold the cakes out of her home and advertised by word of mouth only. If she had wanted to deny us the cake because we were planning on doing lots of banging with birth control - she could of. The topic didn't seem to come up.
Homosexuality is nauseating to every well adjusted person.
I wouldn't really consider you to be "well adjusted" if you consider yourself straight yet still think about gay sex enough to be "nauseated" by it.
Obviously not. The baker in Oregon was harassed,attacked and forced out of business for following her first amendment rights.What someone who bakes cakes for a living believes in is getting paid, on time, for said cake.Its agreeing to make a cake for something you don't believe in which is a homosexual "marriage".I'm not quite sure how baking a cake "caters" to anyone's lifestyle. Its just a cake.
There's nothing in the 1st amendment that gives anyone the right to deny public accommodation based on sexual orientation.
In the first place, a cake isn't a public accommodation.
In the second, a business has the right to deny service for any reason it wants. No one has a right to be served.
Its agreeing to make a cake for something you don't believe in which is a homosexual "marriage".
They weren't making cakes for things they believe in. They were making cakes for money. They also did not interview straight couples to see what kind of marriage they planned on having, did they? How do they know a straight couple isn't a couple of swingers who will laugh at God's law every time they go to a swinger's club? Why are they just picking on the gays? Because they hate them?
Also, where the fuck in the Bible does it say you can't bake cakes for gays?
Here's another moron who thinks he speaks for all bakers.
I don't recall speaking for all bakers. You really just made that up.
You were just telling us why bakers bake cakes. If you don't speak for all bakers, then shut the fuck up.
No. I was telling you why the particular bakers in question bake cakes. You have severe reading comprehension problems. They are (were) a for-profit business. The paperwork they file with the state to become a for-profit business is a statement they are in the business for profit. Are you saying they lied?
Obviously not. The baker in Oregon was harassed,attacked and forced out of business for following her first amendment rights.What someone who bakes cakes for a living believes in is getting paid, on time, for said cake.Its agreeing to make a cake for something you don't believe in which is a homosexual "marriage".
There's nothing in the 1st amendment that gives anyone the right to deny public accommodation based on sexual orientation.
In the first place, a cake isn't a public accommodation.
It is if you are selling it from a business open to the public. Do you understand what words mean?
In the second, a business has the right to deny service for any reason it wants. No one has a right to be served.
That isn't actually true. You have some severe misunderstandings about how the law works.
No. I was telling you why the particular bakers in question bake cakes. You have severe reading comprehension problems. They are (were) a for-profit business. The paperwork they file with the state to become a for-profit business is a statement they are in the business for profit. Are you saying they lied?
No. I was telling you why the particular bakers in question bake cakes. You have severe reading comprehension problems. They are (were) a for-profit business. The paperwork they file with the state to become a for-profit business is a statement they are in the business for profit. Are you saying they lied?
That pretty much goes to the meat of the matter.
The grievance was settled in the manner it was because both the baker and the same sex couple wanted it to go to court.
The baker could have charged them a million dollars for the custom cake.
If they were stupid to pay it ... The baker could always donate the proceeds to the religious charity of their choice if they didn't feel comfortable keeping the money from the sale.
.
Obviously not. The baker in Oregon was harassed,attacked and forced out of business for following her first amendment rights.What someone who bakes cakes for a living believes in is getting paid, on time, for said cake.Its agreeing to make a cake for something you don't believe in which is a homosexual "marriage".
There's nothing in the 1st amendment that gives anyone the right to deny public accommodation based on sexual orientation.
In the first place, a cake isn't a public accommodation.
It is if you are selling it from a business open to the public. Do you understand what words mean?
In the second, a business has the right to deny service for any reason it wants. No one has a right to be served.
That isn't actually true. You have some severe misunderstandings about how the law works.
Just like a little boy, forced by mommy to take a bath. And you'd be pissed, pun intended, when they sued and took over your shop in the judgment. What a fuckin' infant you are.I would just agree to make the cake and then pee in the cake batter.
No. I was telling you why the particular bakers in question bake cakes. You have severe reading comprehension problems. They are (were) a for-profit business. The paperwork they file with the state to become a for-profit business is a statement they are in the business for profit. Are you saying they lied?
That pretty much goes to the meat of the matter.
The grievance was settled in the manner it was because both the baker and the same sex couple wanted it to go to court.
The baker could have charged them a million dollars for the custom cake.
If they were stupid to pay it ... The baker could always donate the proceeds to the religious charity of their choice if they didn't feel comfortable keeping the money from the sale.
.
I would just agree to make the cake and then pee in the cake batter.
Just like a little boy, forced by mommy to take a bath. And you'd be pissed, pun intended, when they sued and took over your shop in the judgment. What a fuckin' infant you are.I would just agree to make the cake and then pee in the cake batter.
The basis is Capitalism is regulated here, Now you know.Obviously not. The baker in Oregon was harassed,attacked and forced out of business for following her first amendment rights.What someone who bakes cakes for a living believes in is getting paid, on time, for said cake.
There's nothing in the 1st amendment that gives anyone the right to deny public accommodation based on sexual orientation.
In the first place, a cake isn't a public accommodation.
It is if you are selling it from a business open to the public. Do you understand what words mean?
In the second, a business has the right to deny service for any reason it wants. No one has a right to be served.
That isn't actually true. You have some severe misunderstandings about how the law works.
By what basis do people lose their constitutional rights when they sell to the public?
No. I was telling you why the particular bakers in question bake cakes. You have severe reading comprehension problems. They are (were) a for-profit business. The paperwork they file with the state to become a for-profit business is a statement they are in the business for profit. Are you saying they lied?
That pretty much goes to the meat of the matter.
The grievance was settled in the manner it was because both the baker and the same sex couple wanted it to go to court.
The baker could have charged them a million dollars for the custom cake.
If they were stupid to pay it ... The baker could always donate the proceeds to the religious charity of their choice if they didn't feel comfortable keeping the money from the sale.
.
I would just agree to make the cake and then pee in the cake batter.
Now that could get you in legal trouble ... But it wouldn't really address the religious objection stance anyway.
Unless of course your religion believes that peeing in someone's cake is appropriate.
.
Yep. Tampering with food will get your ass thrown in jail, dumbass.Just like a little boy, forced by mommy to take a bath. And you'd be pissed, pun intended, when they sued and took over your shop in the judgment. What a fuckin' infant you are.I would just agree to make the cake and then pee in the cake batter.
What would they sue for, a cake that tastes bad?
The basis is Capitalism is regulated here, Now you know.Obviously not. The baker in Oregon was harassed,attacked and forced out of business for following her first amendment rights.
There's nothing in the 1st amendment that gives anyone the right to deny public accommodation based on sexual orientation.
In the first place, a cake isn't a public accommodation.
It is if you are selling it from a business open to the public. Do you understand what words mean?
In the second, a business has the right to deny service for any reason it wants. No one has a right to be served.
That isn't actually true. You have some severe misunderstandings about how the law works.
By what basis do people lose their constitutional rights when they sell to the public?
Yep. Tampering with food will get your ass thrown in jail, dumbass.Just like a little boy, forced by mommy to take a bath. And you'd be pissed, pun intended, when they sued and took over your shop in the judgment. What a fuckin' infant you are.I would just agree to make the cake and then pee in the cake batter.
What would they sue for, a cake that tastes bad?
His religions does, it's that of an infant. He pees on life, and mommy cleans it up.No. I was telling you why the particular bakers in question bake cakes. You have severe reading comprehension problems. They are (were) a for-profit business. The paperwork they file with the state to become a for-profit business is a statement they are in the business for profit. Are you saying they lied?
That pretty much goes to the meat of the matter.
The grievance was settled in the manner it was because both the baker and the same sex couple wanted it to go to court.
The baker could have charged them a million dollars for the custom cake.
If they were stupid to pay it ... The baker could always donate the proceeds to the religious charity of their choice if they didn't feel comfortable keeping the money from the sale.
.
I would just agree to make the cake and then pee in the cake batter.
Now that could get you in legal trouble ... But it wouldn't really address the religious objection stance anyway.
Unless of course your religion believes that peeing in someone's cake is appropriate.
.
Utter B.S. The regulation of economic activity is clearly acknowledged in the Constitution.The basis is Capitalism is regulated here, Now you know.There's nothing in the 1st amendment that gives anyone the right to deny public accommodation based on sexual orientation.
In the first place, a cake isn't a public accommodation.
It is if you are selling it from a business open to the public. Do you understand what words mean?
In the second, a business has the right to deny service for any reason it wants. No one has a right to be served.
That isn't actually true. You have some severe misunderstandings about how the law works.
By what basis do people lose their constitutional rights when they sell to the public?
It's regulated in violation of the Constitution.
