The dreaded gay-wedding-cake saga ends: bakers must pay 135 K

[ChrisL]

Defacto slavery? Involuntary servitude?
I think if you offer your services to the public then your servitude is quite voluntary.

The baker is forced to work by law for those who the baker does not want to work.

That is involuntary servitude - service against the will of the servant.

Again you are a loyal leftist, you seek the end of liberty.

Take that one to court and see how it works for you.

He would be laughed out of court for not understanding how the law works. Lol.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

What you have here is separation of church and state, unless the state gets enough people to ignore that, then they can cross the line.

Your church is not affected and neither are you unless you assert your faith inappropriately.

Which you define secularly and apply it to me and the Church. Normally idiots like you would term that discrimination.

I define seculary as does the law.

 

[The Rabbi]

No, the baker is placed in involuntary servitude.

You are a leftist, thus dedicated to the eradication of civil rights, so the act of placing enemies of the party in defacto slavery pleases you.

Defacto slavery? Involuntary servitude?
I think if you offer your services to the public then your servitude is quite voluntary.

Another word you people don't understand, apparently.

I'm beginning to think the whole problem with totalitarians is that they just don't know what the words they use, mean.

Really?
Selling goods to people in the business that you built to sell goods to people is involuntary servitude?

Yes, it is, if one is not free to choose one's customers.

The PA laws address why you cannot "choose" your customers in the manner you wish to. Grow up.

Does this mean the feds are going to start raiding marijuana sellers in Colorado?

 

[saveliberty]

What you have here is separation of church and state, unless the state gets enough people to ignore that, then they can cross the line.

Your church is not affected and neither are you unless you assert your faith inappropriately.

Which you define secularly and apply it to me and the Church. Normally idiots like you would term that discrimination.

Unless you are a religious organization, the Church has nothing to do with how the states make rules and regulations regarding civil rights and anti-discrimination laws. We are a secular country and not a theocracy. Our laws do not reflect your religious beliefs. Our laws treat everyone the same.

Our laws and Constitution were based on Judeo-Christian beliefs. Somehow liberals corrupted it into a fairness doctrine which they use to politically damage their enemies.

 

[saveliberty]

He would be laughed out of court for not understanding how the law works. Lol.

Oh, so now you're a lawyer?

 

[Misty]

And as liberals crow with pride about this they miss the fact that these people are being denied two constitutional rights.

Freedom to practice religion and freedom of speech.

Good job. Idiots.

 

[ChrisL]

What you have here is separation of church and state, unless the state gets enough people to ignore that, then they can cross the line.

Your church is not affected and neither are you unless you assert your faith inappropriately.

Which you define secularly and apply it to me and the Church. Normally idiots like you would term that discrimination.

Unless you are a religious organization, the Church has nothing to do with how the states make rules and regulations regarding civil rights and anti-discrimination laws. We are a secular country and not a theocracy. Our laws do not reflect your religious beliefs. Our laws treat everyone the same.

Our laws and Constitution were based on Judeo-Christian beliefs. Somehow liberals corrupted it into a fairness doctrine which they use to politically damage their enemies.

These laws damage you and your business in what way?

 

[ChrisL]

And as liberals crow with pride about this they miss the fact that these people are being denied two constitutional rights.

Freedom to practice religion and freedom of speech.

Good job. Idiots.

Nope, neither one of those things are denied. You are free to speak your mind and you are free to practice your religion in any way you choose. You, however, cannot deny access to your product to specific groups of people because then you are breaking the law.

 

[ChrisL]

He would be laughed out of court for not understanding how the law works. Lol.

Oh, so now you're a lawyer?

I've taken some paralegal courses, so I am familiar with laws and how they are applied.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Really?
Selling goods to people in the business that you built to sell goods to people is involuntary servitude?

I set up a landscape business to be a creative outlet for myself. It so happens people will pay you for that. Now a bunch of well intentioned people feel compelled to tell me how I can use that creative energy. If I refuse their point of view, I am a hater who should withdraw all my rights to create, speak or associate.

Or not offer your services to the general public. Work off of referrals.

You realize that the government has all sorts of laws you need to comply with regardless right?

Your point is?

 

[saveliberty]

These laws damage you and your business in what way?

It restricts my right to express my beliefs through my vocation. It is like you think people are robots during work hours and their life starts after the work day. It is repression and slavery.

 

[ChrisL]

These laws damage you and your business in what way?

It restricts my right to express my beliefs through my vocation. It is like you think people are robots during work hours and their life starts after the work day. It is repression and slavery.

You don't have that right. As a business owner, you are required to follow the law like anyone else unless you are a religious organization.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Defacto slavery? Involuntary servitude?
I think if you offer your services to the public then your servitude is quite voluntary.

Another word you people don't understand, apparently.

I'm beginning to think the whole problem with totalitarians is that they just don't know what the words they use, mean.

Really?
Selling goods to people in the business that you built to sell goods to people is involuntary servitude?

Yes, it is, if one is not free to choose one's customers.

The PA laws address why you cannot "choose" your customers in the manner you wish to. Grow up.

Does this mean the feds are going to start raiding marijuana sellers in Colorado?

What does that have to do with state PA laws?

 

[The Rabbi]

Another word you people don't understand, apparently.

I'm beginning to think the whole problem with totalitarians is that they just don't know what the words they use, mean.

Really?
Selling goods to people in the business that you built to sell goods to people is involuntary servitude?

Yes, it is, if one is not free to choose one's customers.

The PA laws address why you cannot "choose" your customers in the manner you wish to. Grow up.

Does this mean the feds are going to start raiding marijuana sellers in Colorado?

What does that have to do with state PA laws?

If you're going to argue that breaking the law is wrong then the feds ought to be shutting down CO's pot industry, which is contrary to federal law.
Or is that somehow different?

 

[Faun]

Sweet Cakes, which was in Oregon, discriminated against gays.

Wrong. They simply opted not to participate in sacrilege. The state can't force them to participate in sacrilege, nor can they tell them what does, and what doesn't, constitute sacrilege.

Haven't you heard of separation of church and state, statist?

No, of course you haven't, lol.

What sacrilege? There is nothing in the Bible prohibiting baking a wedding cake. You fundi's are fucking insane.

Gads you people are so easy. That's what being stupid gets you, I suppose.

Again. You don't dictate what is, and what isn't, sacrilege. Nor does the state.

Moron, I've already given you an example where a state did exactly what you idiotically think they cannot do. Religion is not a shield from the law. Damn, are you idiots idiotic.

Again. In our country, the state cannot dictate what is, and what isn't sacrilege. And that is not what happened in any state in the US. You really need to look these words up, lol.

You remain a moron as I've shown you where the state has done just that...

The leader of a church was sentenced to 35 years in jail for possession of marijuana despite his defense on religious grounds.

Coptic Priest Given 35-Year Sentence For Conspiring To Smuggle Marijuana

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Really?
Selling goods to people in the business that you built to sell goods to people is involuntary servitude?

Yes, it is, if one is not free to choose one's customers.

The PA laws address why you cannot "choose" your customers in the manner you wish to. Grow up.

Does this mean the feds are going to start raiding marijuana sellers in Colorado?

What does that have to do with state PA laws?

If you're going to argue that breaking the law is wrong then the feds ought to be shutting down CO's pot industry, which is contrary to federal law.
Or is that somehow different?

I would say that is a wholly different issue.
The feds aren't coming to shut you down for not baking a cake.

 

[ChrisL]

Lol. This is hilarious. Sorry, you don't get special privileges to discriminate because you are a religious person. You just don't.

 

[saveliberty]

Really?
Selling goods to people in the business that you built to sell goods to people is involuntary servitude?

I set up a landscape business to be a creative outlet for myself. It so happens people will pay you for that. Now a bunch of well intentioned people feel compelled to tell me how I can use that creative energy. If I refuse their point of view, I am a hater who should withdraw all my rights to create, speak or associate.

Or not offer your services to the general public. Work off of referrals.

You realize that the government has all sorts of laws you need to comply with regardless right?

Your point is?

I gave up making points to idiots a long time ago. Run along and play.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Waaa???

You said: "No, it was the reversal of a law very similar to that which you celebrate."
When asked: Was Brown v Board of Education the Defiance of Segregation by the SCOTUS?

You think the Court cited Title II of the Civil Rights act as their foundation for Brown v Board of Education???

OMG, that's hilarious.BvB was in 1954 - before the CRA of 64. It had nothing to do with Public Accommodation, either.

And she calls *me* a moron.

lol

I don't know if you are just astoundingly stupid, or you think you're being clever. The SCOTUS based their federalizing of marriage law on Title II of the Civil Rights act. That was law created in 2015 - moron.

That was tried as it regards to upholding the CRA PA laws.

Heart of Atlanta v US.

Look it up. That silly claim lost - with SCOTUS ruling 9-0 against the dude who claimed him having the accommodate black people was "involuntary servitude."

I'm aware of this, and I am aware that Dred Scott was denied relief in arguing that living in a state where slavery was illegal rendered himself and his family free. A decision that crushes rights eventually falls, as will the PA laws. Extending "Inn Keepers" duties to bakers is an extreme stretch.

 

[koshergrl]

What you have here is separation of church and state, unless the state gets enough people to ignore that, then they can cross the line.

Your church is not affected and neither are you unless you assert your faith inappropriately.

These laws damage you and your business in what way?

It restricts my right to express my beliefs through my vocation. It is like you think people are robots during work hours and their life starts after the work day. It is repression and slavery.

Well that is the progressive mob's bread and butter.

We need to stop arguing with them, and just cull them.