The Free Market In Action

[martybegan]

I respectfully disagree. All of your points are based on discrimination that so permeates the economy that it leads to a severe disadvantage to those discriminated against. Again, gays are not blacks, and today's cities are not 1880's to 1950's Birmingham. A baker not wanting to bake a cake for a gay wedding is not forcing someone in public to ride at the back of the bus, eat in a back alley, or use another toilet. There are plenty of other options for the gay couple to partake of.

And if bigotry is to be punished, it should be by the people as individuals, not the people as government. You may hide it in lofty words, or long explanations of what you mean, but in the end, what you are saying is that people who have opinions differing from the group-think have to shut up and take it, or find work of livelihood in a business that allows them to make no moral choices. Both are far more tyrannous when mandated by government then a gay couple feeling bad for 5 minutes before moving on to the next baker.

Your argument amounts to saying it's not like there are as many gays as blacks... so anti-gay discrimination isn't as important as racial discrimination was back in the day.

Yes there are more options, yes this is not as big an issue as racial discrimination was "back in the day". Yes, this is not watts riots.

Do I have your argument right? Your argument amounts to excusing this particular type of public bigotry because gay's don't deserve the same rights as do other minority groups. Do I have that right? If so which other non-violent small groups don't deserve protection from discrimination? Jews? Hispanics? Let's list out the smaller groups that it's ok to discriminate against. Then put together a list of more violent larger groups that it's not ok to discriminate against. Is that your argument?

As for the move on ya homos argument... what if there's only one baker.. what if all the bakers in the county join up to get rid of the homos? If you forgive one baker why not forgive everyone? Hell I'll bet you could easily create entire counties where gays are not welcome, correct?

First, this "bigotry" is, unlike racism, actually a part of the religious texts of the main religions in our society. And its not the 1/2 assed justifications in favor of slavery we got from Southerners before the Civil war, this is clear cut text.

My argument is that at this point the market can and will handle this situation. Government intervention is not needed. We are talking about a cake for a wedding, or photographs for a wedding, or a hall for a wedding. Not the essentials of life, or the ability for ease of transportation, and we are not talking about government ordinances that REQUIRE all businesses to discriminate, which was what Jim Crow was all about.

The negative effects of using government to force businesses to serve people they do not want to serve (in non-essential businesses such as this) outweigh any benefit society gets from either 1)forcing these people to comply, or 2) forcing them out of business.

So that's your justification for discrimination against gays, religious text? Really? Do you eat pork? Do you work on the Sabbath? Do you sell to people who eat pork and/or work on the Sabbath? Do you sell to harlots? Do you sell to fornicators? How about people who wear tattoos and/or jewelry that indicates they are sinners who worship idols?

No you are talking about discriminating against people based on their adherence or not to your religion.

What is the negative effect of using government to force businesses to serve people they do not want to serve (in non-essential businesses such as this)?

The company was not forced out of business. The company chose to fight public accommodation laws and lost. The public voted with their pocket book. This company was not forced out of business. The company lost it's customers because the goods sucked and the owners were bigots to boot.

The government fining them, and threatening to continue to fine them is not "the public talking with their pocketbook". Its the government telling you to "shut up and sell cakes" And now their stuff sucks? why are you searching for rationalizations to fuck people over?

In actuality, it would be far easier to not sell to someone with tattoos,as they are not a "protected class"

and your example of eating pork is apt. Should I be able to force a jewish butcher to sell me pork?

The negative effect of using government is IN the use of government to force people to do these things. Government force should only be used in serious matters, not to placate a vocal litigious minority.

Wrong. You appear to not have the facts of this case in hand. The owner lost their business before the case was even over. Are you actually arguing that you should be able to ignore the law and not pay your fines when you are caught ignoring the law? The baker really did suck. Are you actually saying government should force people to buy baked goods from shitty bakers because they are bigots?

No jewish butchers are not forced to sell pork, so your strawman fails. If however, they do sell pork public accommodation laws would force them to sell to black people and heaven forbid islamics.

Are you actually trying to say that a wedding cake for a gay couple is a "gay cake?"

Are you actually saying our laws should discriminate against gays to adhere to your religious views? FYI I'm a christian, and I disagree with your opinion that the bible tells me to discriminate against and defend discrimination against gays.

Lots of words being put in my mouth here....

if they lost their business before the case was over, why do we need laws that would make it happen then? The only force being applied here is by the government, and you seem to condone it, of course, only as long as it's reasons agree with you politically.

The law should never discriminate, but this isn't the case here. This a is a case of the State being able to dictate to a person choose your morality or your livelihood, when the state shouldn't be able to decide it at all.

 

[RKMBrown]

Your argument amounts to saying it's not like there are as many gays as blacks... so anti-gay discrimination isn't as important as racial discrimination was back in the day.

Yes there are more options, yes this is not as big an issue as racial discrimination was "back in the day". Yes, this is not watts riots.

Do I have your argument right? Your argument amounts to excusing this particular type of public bigotry because gay's don't deserve the same rights as do other minority groups. Do I have that right? If so which other non-violent small groups don't deserve protection from discrimination? Jews? Hispanics? Let's list out the smaller groups that it's ok to discriminate against. Then put together a list of more violent larger groups that it's not ok to discriminate against. Is that your argument?

As for the move on ya homos argument... what if there's only one baker.. what if all the bakers in the county join up to get rid of the homos? If you forgive one baker why not forgive everyone? Hell I'll bet you could easily create entire counties where gays are not welcome, correct?

First, this "bigotry" is, unlike racism, actually a part of the religious texts of the main religions in our society. And its not the 1/2 assed justifications in favor of slavery we got from Southerners before the Civil war, this is clear cut text.

My argument is that at this point the market can and will handle this situation. Government intervention is not needed. We are talking about a cake for a wedding, or photographs for a wedding, or a hall for a wedding. Not the essentials of life, or the ability for ease of transportation, and we are not talking about government ordinances that REQUIRE all businesses to discriminate, which was what Jim Crow was all about.

The negative effects of using government to force businesses to serve people they do not want to serve (in non-essential businesses such as this) outweigh any benefit society gets from either 1)forcing these people to comply, or 2) forcing them out of business.

So that's your justification for discrimination against gays, religious text? Really? Do you eat pork? Do you work on the Sabbath? Do you sell to people who eat pork and/or work on the Sabbath? Do you sell to harlots? Do you sell to fornicators? How about people who wear tattoos and/or jewelry that indicates they are sinners who worship idols?

No you are talking about discriminating against people based on their adherence or not to your religion.

What is the negative effect of using government to force businesses to serve people they do not want to serve (in non-essential businesses such as this)?

The company was not forced out of business. The company chose to fight public accommodation laws and lost. The public voted with their pocket book. This company was not forced out of business. The company lost it's customers because the goods sucked and the owners were bigots to boot.

The government fining them, and threatening to continue to fine them is not "the public talking with their pocketbook". Its the government telling you to "shut up and sell cakes" And now their stuff sucks? why are you searching for rationalizations to fuck people over?

In actuality, it would be far easier to not sell to someone with tattoos,as they are not a "protected class"

and your example of eating pork is apt. Should I be able to force a jewish butcher to sell me pork?

The negative effect of using government is IN the use of government to force people to do these things. Government force should only be used in serious matters, not to placate a vocal litigious minority.

Wrong. You appear to not have the facts of this case in hand. The owner lost their business before the case was even over. Are you actually arguing that you should be able to ignore the law and not pay your fines when you are caught ignoring the law? The baker really did suck. Are you actually saying government should force people to buy baked goods from shitty bakers because they are bigots?

No jewish butchers are not forced to sell pork, so your strawman fails. If however, they do sell pork public accommodation laws would force them to sell to black people and heaven forbid islamics.

Are you actually trying to say that a wedding cake for a gay couple is a "gay cake?"

Are you actually saying our laws should discriminate against gays to adhere to your religious views? FYI I'm a christian, and I disagree with your opinion that the bible tells me to discriminate against and defend discrimination against gays.

Lots of words being put in my mouth here....

if they lost their business before the case was over, why do we need laws that would make it happen then? The only force being applied here is by the government, and you seem to condone it, of course, only as long as it's reasons agree with you politically.

The law should never discriminate, but this isn't the case here. This a is a case of the State being able to dictate to a person choose your morality or your livelihood, when the state shouldn't be able to decide it at all.

I didn't put any words in your mouth I asked you questions, about your statements. You won't have any question of whether I'm citing you or not, you'll see quotes.

We don't have laws that make a business go out of business because they are bigots. What makes you think we do?

Your wrong there was no force by Government it's a regulation. With regard to public accommodation laws you are free to adhere to the regulation or not. If you don't you pay the fine just like any other fine. You also don't have to sell to the public. If you have religious reasons for not selling to the public at large, you are also free to sell privately. Thus you are not in fact FORCED TO SELL TO GAYS. You have tons of choices. Further, these people had already willingly sold baked goods to gays. They decided to make a point of not selling a wedding cake to their customer.

The state is not telling you to FORNICATE AND HAVE GAY SEX. The state is telling you that if you want to sell to the public you can't discriminate against a customer based on race, religion, ... and in this state sexual orientation. Thus if baking a cake for a gay couple is against your religion, sell privately, or find another state, or find a different line of work.

 

[martybegan]

First, this "bigotry" is, unlike racism, actually a part of the religious texts of the main religions in our society. And its not the 1/2 assed justifications in favor of slavery we got from Southerners before the Civil war, this is clear cut text.

My argument is that at this point the market can and will handle this situation. Government intervention is not needed. We are talking about a cake for a wedding, or photographs for a wedding, or a hall for a wedding. Not the essentials of life, or the ability for ease of transportation, and we are not talking about government ordinances that REQUIRE all businesses to discriminate, which was what Jim Crow was all about.

The negative effects of using government to force businesses to serve people they do not want to serve (in non-essential businesses such as this) outweigh any benefit society gets from either 1)forcing these people to comply, or 2) forcing them out of business.

So that's your justification for discrimination against gays, religious text? Really? Do you eat pork? Do you work on the Sabbath? Do you sell to people who eat pork and/or work on the Sabbath? Do you sell to harlots? Do you sell to fornicators? How about people who wear tattoos and/or jewelry that indicates they are sinners who worship idols?

No you are talking about discriminating against people based on their adherence or not to your religion.

What is the negative effect of using government to force businesses to serve people they do not want to serve (in non-essential businesses such as this)?

The company was not forced out of business. The company chose to fight public accommodation laws and lost. The public voted with their pocket book. This company was not forced out of business. The company lost it's customers because the goods sucked and the owners were bigots to boot.

The government fining them, and threatening to continue to fine them is not "the public talking with their pocketbook". Its the government telling you to "shut up and sell cakes" And now their stuff sucks? why are you searching for rationalizations to fuck people over?

In actuality, it would be far easier to not sell to someone with tattoos,as they are not a "protected class"

and your example of eating pork is apt. Should I be able to force a jewish butcher to sell me pork?

The negative effect of using government is IN the use of government to force people to do these things. Government force should only be used in serious matters, not to placate a vocal litigious minority.

Wrong. You appear to not have the facts of this case in hand. The owner lost their business before the case was even over. Are you actually arguing that you should be able to ignore the law and not pay your fines when you are caught ignoring the law? The baker really did suck. Are you actually saying government should force people to buy baked goods from shitty bakers because they are bigots?

No jewish butchers are not forced to sell pork, so your strawman fails. If however, they do sell pork public accommodation laws would force them to sell to black people and heaven forbid islamics.

Are you actually trying to say that a wedding cake for a gay couple is a "gay cake?"

Are you actually saying our laws should discriminate against gays to adhere to your religious views? FYI I'm a christian, and I disagree with your opinion that the bible tells me to discriminate against and defend discrimination against gays.

Lots of words being put in my mouth here....

if they lost their business before the case was over, why do we need laws that would make it happen then? The only force being applied here is by the government, and you seem to condone it, of course, only as long as it's reasons agree with you politically.

The law should never discriminate, but this isn't the case here. This a is a case of the State being able to dictate to a person choose your morality or your livelihood, when the state shouldn't be able to decide it at all.

I didn't put any words in your mouth I asked you questions, about your statements. You won't have any question of whether I'm citing you or not, you'll see quotes.

We don't have laws that make a business go out of business because they are bigots. What makes you think we do?

Your wrong there was no force by Government it's a regulation. With regard to public accommodation laws you are free to adhere to the regulation or not. If you don't you pay the fine just like any other fine. You also don't have to sell to the public. If you have religious reasons for not selling to the public at large, you are also free to sell privately. Thus you are not in fact FORCED TO SELL TO GAYS. You have tons of choices. Further, these people had already willingly sold baked goods to gays. They decided to make a point of not selling a wedding cake to their customer.

The state is not telling you to FORNICATE AND HAVE GAY SEX. The state is telling you that if you want to sell to the public you can't discriminate against a customer based on race, religion, ... and in this state sexual orientation. Thus if baking a cake for a gay couple is against your religion, sell privately, or find another state, or find a different line of work.

That right there is force. Do as we say, or you can't pursue a livelihood the way you want it. I guess life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness doesn't apply to people when you disagree with their moral structure. But making sure some protected class doesn't get their Feeewwwings hurt, THAT requires the force of the almighty state.

So again, basically, BAKE THE FUCKING CAKE YOU PEON.

I keep trying to say, the State really has no reason to worry about things as small as this. How about concentrating on important shit and not trying to make people live the way YOU want them to live?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Melissa Klein Anti-Gay Baker Cries At Values Voter Summit Over Business Closing

Anti-gay baker Melissa Klein cried at the Values Voter Summit last week over the closing of her business after she and her husband, Aaron, faced severe backlash from their refusal to make a cake for a lesbian couple's wedding.

In January 2013, Sweet Cakes By Melissa, located in Gresham, Ore., refused service to a lesbian couple looking for a wedding cake. The subsequent fallout included national media attention and a state investigation for anti-gay discrimination, which may be supported by the Kleins' agreeing to bake cakes for an "ex-gay" group.

The couple is now reportedly fighting a $150,000 lawsuit from the state, a reality that made Klein break into tears while discussing her passion for the process of baking wedding cakes during the Values Voter Summit.

"For me personally, when I would sit down with them, I just would want to know everything about her wedding," an emotional Klein told the audience. "I'd want to know about the flowers, her dress, the centerpieces, her colors, the way her hair is going to be. I would even want to talk about 'where are you going on your honeymoon?'"

Following outrage over the business's anti-gay actions, Sweet Cakes By Melissa eventually chose to shut down their storefront rather than serve gay clients but the bakery is currently operating out of a home kitchen and is still taking orders online.

Video at the link.

What a lot of to-do over nothing. These people made a choice and it cost them dearly. Sad.

The thing is, she could have done all that with a homosexual couple just the same as she does a heterosexual couple.

I have no sympathy for her. She chose to break the law. If you break the law you deserve whatever consequences that are imposed.

People don't want to give their money to bigots who use religion as an excuse to break the law.

.

That's a bald faced lie. If people didn't want to give money to bigots, they wouldn't be trying to force them to do business with them. I go in a place and they say "we don't want your business" I go somewhere else. Why? Because I TRULY don't want them making money off me

 

[RKMBrown]

So that's your justification for discrimination against gays, religious text? Really? Do you eat pork? Do you work on the Sabbath? Do you sell to people who eat pork and/or work on the Sabbath? Do you sell to harlots? Do you sell to fornicators? How about people who wear tattoos and/or jewelry that indicates they are sinners who worship idols?

No you are talking about discriminating against people based on their adherence or not to your religion.

What is the negative effect of using government to force businesses to serve people they do not want to serve (in non-essential businesses such as this)?

The company was not forced out of business. The company chose to fight public accommodation laws and lost. The public voted with their pocket book. This company was not forced out of business. The company lost it's customers because the goods sucked and the owners were bigots to boot.

The government fining them, and threatening to continue to fine them is not "the public talking with their pocketbook". Its the government telling you to "shut up and sell cakes" And now their stuff sucks? why are you searching for rationalizations to fuck people over?

In actuality, it would be far easier to not sell to someone with tattoos,as they are not a "protected class"

and your example of eating pork is apt. Should I be able to force a jewish butcher to sell me pork?

The negative effect of using government is IN the use of government to force people to do these things. Government force should only be used in serious matters, not to placate a vocal litigious minority.

Wrong. You appear to not have the facts of this case in hand. The owner lost their business before the case was even over. Are you actually arguing that you should be able to ignore the law and not pay your fines when you are caught ignoring the law? The baker really did suck. Are you actually saying government should force people to buy baked goods from shitty bakers because they are bigots?

No jewish butchers are not forced to sell pork, so your strawman fails. If however, they do sell pork public accommodation laws would force them to sell to black people and heaven forbid islamics.

Are you actually trying to say that a wedding cake for a gay couple is a "gay cake?"

Are you actually saying our laws should discriminate against gays to adhere to your religious views? FYI I'm a christian, and I disagree with your opinion that the bible tells me to discriminate against and defend discrimination against gays.

Lots of words being put in my mouth here....

if they lost their business before the case was over, why do we need laws that would make it happen then? The only force being applied here is by the government, and you seem to condone it, of course, only as long as it's reasons agree with you politically.

The law should never discriminate, but this isn't the case here. This a is a case of the State being able to dictate to a person choose your morality or your livelihood, when the state shouldn't be able to decide it at all.

I didn't put any words in your mouth I asked you questions, about your statements. You won't have any question of whether I'm citing you or not, you'll see quotes.

We don't have laws that make a business go out of business because they are bigots. What makes you think we do?

Your wrong there was no force by Government it's a regulation. With regard to public accommodation laws you are free to adhere to the regulation or not. If you don't you pay the fine just like any other fine. You also don't have to sell to the public. If you have religious reasons for not selling to the public at large, you are also free to sell privately. Thus you are not in fact FORCED TO SELL TO GAYS. You have tons of choices. Further, these people had already willingly sold baked goods to gays. They decided to make a point of not selling a wedding cake to their customer.

The state is not telling you to FORNICATE AND HAVE GAY SEX. The state is telling you that if you want to sell to the public you can't discriminate against a customer based on race, religion, ... and in this state sexual orientation. Thus if baking a cake for a gay couple is against your religion, sell privately, or find another state, or find a different line of work.

That right there is force. Do as we say, or you can't pursue a livelihood the way you want it. I guess life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness doesn't apply to people when you disagree with their moral structure. But making sure some protected class doesn't get their Feeewwwings hurt, THAT requires the force of the almighty state.

So again, basically, BAKE THE FUCKING CAKE YOU PEON.

I keep trying to say, the State really has no reason to worry about things as small as this. How about concentrating on important shit and not trying to make people live the way YOU want them to live?

You are very very very confused. Liberty does not mean the liberty to SCREW GAYS OVER THE COALS BECAUSE GOD TELLS YOU TO.

If you get pleasure from SCREWING GAYS OVER THE COALS BECAUSE SOMEONE TOLD YOU THAT GOD TELLS YOU TO, then you need to go PRIVATE WITH THAT. You want to sell to the PUBLIC you can't discriminate wrt to who in the public you want to serve and who in the public you want to SCREW OVER THE COALS BECAUSE SOMEONE TOLD YOU THAT GOD TELLS YOU TO.

 

[RKMBrown]

Melissa Klein Anti-Gay Baker Cries At Values Voter Summit Over Business Closing

Anti-gay baker Melissa Klein cried at the Values Voter Summit last week over the closing of her business after she and her husband, Aaron, faced severe backlash from their refusal to make a cake for a lesbian couple's wedding.

In January 2013, Sweet Cakes By Melissa, located in Gresham, Ore., refused service to a lesbian couple looking for a wedding cake. The subsequent fallout included national media attention and a state investigation for anti-gay discrimination, which may be supported by the Kleins' agreeing to bake cakes for an "ex-gay" group.

The couple is now reportedly fighting a $150,000 lawsuit from the state, a reality that made Klein break into tears while discussing her passion for the process of baking wedding cakes during the Values Voter Summit.

"For me personally, when I would sit down with them, I just would want to know everything about her wedding," an emotional Klein told the audience. "I'd want to know about the flowers, her dress, the centerpieces, her colors, the way her hair is going to be. I would even want to talk about 'where are you going on your honeymoon?'"

Following outrage over the business's anti-gay actions, Sweet Cakes By Melissa eventually chose to shut down their storefront rather than serve gay clients but the bakery is currently operating out of a home kitchen and is still taking orders online.

Video at the link.

What a lot of to-do over nothing. These people made a choice and it cost them dearly. Sad.

The thing is, she could have done all that with a homosexual couple just the same as she does a heterosexual couple.

I have no sympathy for her. She chose to break the law. If you break the law you deserve whatever consequences that are imposed.

People don't want to give their money to bigots who use religion as an excuse to break the law.

.

That's a bald faced lie. If people didn't want to give money to bigots, they wouldn't be trying to force them to do business with them. I go in a place and they say "we don't want your business" I go somewhere else. Why? Because I TRULY don't want them making money off me

And... when everyone in town and everyone in the county and everyone in the state doesn't want your business?

 

[RKMBrown]

So that's your justification for discrimination against gays, religious text? Really? Do you eat pork? Do you work on the Sabbath? Do you sell to people who eat pork and/or work on the Sabbath? Do you sell to harlots? Do you sell to fornicators? How about people who wear tattoos and/or jewelry that indicates they are sinners who worship idols?

No you are talking about discriminating against people based on their adherence or not to your religion.

What is the negative effect of using government to force businesses to serve people they do not want to serve (in non-essential businesses such as this)?

The company was not forced out of business. The company chose to fight public accommodation laws and lost. The public voted with their pocket book. This company was not forced out of business. The company lost it's customers because the goods sucked and the owners were bigots to boot.

The government fining them, and threatening to continue to fine them is not "the public talking with their pocketbook". Its the government telling you to "shut up and sell cakes" And now their stuff sucks? why are you searching for rationalizations to fuck people over?

In actuality, it would be far easier to not sell to someone with tattoos,as they are not a "protected class"

and your example of eating pork is apt. Should I be able to force a jewish butcher to sell me pork?

The negative effect of using government is IN the use of government to force people to do these things. Government force should only be used in serious matters, not to placate a vocal litigious minority.

Wrong. You appear to not have the facts of this case in hand. The owner lost their business before the case was even over. Are you actually arguing that you should be able to ignore the law and not pay your fines when you are caught ignoring the law? The baker really did suck. Are you actually saying government should force people to buy baked goods from shitty bakers because they are bigots?

No jewish butchers are not forced to sell pork, so your strawman fails. If however, they do sell pork public accommodation laws would force them to sell to black people and heaven forbid islamics.

Are you actually trying to say that a wedding cake for a gay couple is a "gay cake?"

Are you actually saying our laws should discriminate against gays to adhere to your religious views? FYI I'm a christian, and I disagree with your opinion that the bible tells me to discriminate against and defend discrimination against gays.

Lots of words being put in my mouth here....

if they lost their business before the case was over, why do we need laws that would make it happen then? The only force being applied here is by the government, and you seem to condone it, of course, only as long as it's reasons agree with you politically.

The law should never discriminate, but this isn't the case here. This a is a case of the State being able to dictate to a person choose your morality or your livelihood, when the state shouldn't be able to decide it at all.

I didn't put any words in your mouth I asked you questions, about your statements. You won't have any question of whether I'm citing you or not, you'll see quotes.

We don't have laws that make a business go out of business because they are bigots. What makes you think we do?

Your wrong there was no force by Government it's a regulation. With regard to public accommodation laws you are free to adhere to the regulation or not. If you don't you pay the fine just like any other fine. You also don't have to sell to the public. If you have religious reasons for not selling to the public at large, you are also free to sell privately. Thus you are not in fact FORCED TO SELL TO GAYS. You have tons of choices. Further, these people had already willingly sold baked goods to gays. They decided to make a point of not selling a wedding cake to their customer.

The state is not telling you to FORNICATE AND HAVE GAY SEX. The state is telling you that if you want to sell to the public you can't discriminate against a customer based on race, religion, ... and in this state sexual orientation. Thus if baking a cake for a gay couple is against your religion, sell privately, or find another state, or find a different line of work.

That right there is force. Do as we say, or you can't pursue a livelihood the way you want it. I guess life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness doesn't apply to people when you disagree with their moral structure. But making sure some protected class doesn't get their Feeewwwings hurt, THAT requires the force of the almighty state.

So again, basically, BAKE THE FUCKING CAKE YOU PEON.

I keep trying to say, the State really has no reason to worry about things as small as this. How about concentrating on important shit and not trying to make people live the way YOU want them to live?

Your selling cakes why the EFFING HELL DO YOU GIVE A SHIT ABOUT THE FACT THAT YOUR CUSTOMER HAS BLACK SKIN OR YOUR CUSTOMER IS HAVING AN AFFAIR OR YOUR CUSTOMER IS GAY OR YOUR CUSTOMER WORKS ON THE SABBATH OR YOUR CUSTOMER EATS PORK OR YOUR CUSTOMER IS A DANCER FOR HIRE? Or are you a hypocrite too?

 

[martybegan]

The government fining them, and threatening to continue to fine them is not "the public talking with their pocketbook". Its the government telling you to "shut up and sell cakes" And now their stuff sucks? why are you searching for rationalizations to fuck people over?

In actuality, it would be far easier to not sell to someone with tattoos,as they are not a "protected class"

and your example of eating pork is apt. Should I be able to force a jewish butcher to sell me pork?

The negative effect of using government is IN the use of government to force people to do these things. Government force should only be used in serious matters, not to placate a vocal litigious minority.

Wrong. You appear to not have the facts of this case in hand. The owner lost their business before the case was even over. Are you actually arguing that you should be able to ignore the law and not pay your fines when you are caught ignoring the law? The baker really did suck. Are you actually saying government should force people to buy baked goods from shitty bakers because they are bigots?

No jewish butchers are not forced to sell pork, so your strawman fails. If however, they do sell pork public accommodation laws would force them to sell to black people and heaven forbid islamics.

Are you actually trying to say that a wedding cake for a gay couple is a "gay cake?"

Are you actually saying our laws should discriminate against gays to adhere to your religious views? FYI I'm a christian, and I disagree with your opinion that the bible tells me to discriminate against and defend discrimination against gays.

Lots of words being put in my mouth here....

if they lost their business before the case was over, why do we need laws that would make it happen then? The only force being applied here is by the government, and you seem to condone it, of course, only as long as it's reasons agree with you politically.

The law should never discriminate, but this isn't the case here. This a is a case of the State being able to dictate to a person choose your morality or your livelihood, when the state shouldn't be able to decide it at all.

I didn't put any words in your mouth I asked you questions, about your statements. You won't have any question of whether I'm citing you or not, you'll see quotes.

We don't have laws that make a business go out of business because they are bigots. What makes you think we do?

Your wrong there was no force by Government it's a regulation. With regard to public accommodation laws you are free to adhere to the regulation or not. If you don't you pay the fine just like any other fine. You also don't have to sell to the public. If you have religious reasons for not selling to the public at large, you are also free to sell privately. Thus you are not in fact FORCED TO SELL TO GAYS. You have tons of choices. Further, these people had already willingly sold baked goods to gays. They decided to make a point of not selling a wedding cake to their customer.

The state is not telling you to FORNICATE AND HAVE GAY SEX. The state is telling you that if you want to sell to the public you can't discriminate against a customer based on race, religion, ... and in this state sexual orientation. Thus if baking a cake for a gay couple is against your religion, sell privately, or find another state, or find a different line of work.

That right there is force. Do as we say, or you can't pursue a livelihood the way you want it. I guess life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness doesn't apply to people when you disagree with their moral structure. But making sure some protected class doesn't get their Feeewwwings hurt, THAT requires the force of the almighty state.

So again, basically, BAKE THE FUCKING CAKE YOU PEON.

I keep trying to say, the State really has no reason to worry about things as small as this. How about concentrating on important shit and not trying to make people live the way YOU want them to live?

Your selling cakes why the EFFING HELL DO YOU GIVE A SHIT ABOUT THE FACT THAT YOUR CUSTOMER HAS BLACK SKIN OR YOUR CUSTOMER IS HAVING AN AFFAIR OR YOUR CUSTOMER IS GAY OR YOUR CUSTOMER WORKS ON THE SABBATH OR YOUR CUSTOMER EATS PORK OR YOUR CUSTOMER IS A DANCER FOR HIRE? Or are you a hypocrite too?

I don't care at all. What I care about is the ability of my fellow citizen to be able to live their moral lives without government interference. I wouldn't discriminate against gay people in this regard, however a person should be able to do it, and to choose who they associate with, without governmental intervention, except of course if they are government actors.

 

[martybegan]

The government fining them, and threatening to continue to fine them is not "the public talking with their pocketbook". Its the government telling you to "shut up and sell cakes" And now their stuff sucks? why are you searching for rationalizations to fuck people over?

In actuality, it would be far easier to not sell to someone with tattoos,as they are not a "protected class"

and your example of eating pork is apt. Should I be able to force a jewish butcher to sell me pork?

The negative effect of using government is IN the use of government to force people to do these things. Government force should only be used in serious matters, not to placate a vocal litigious minority.

Wrong. You appear to not have the facts of this case in hand. The owner lost their business before the case was even over. Are you actually arguing that you should be able to ignore the law and not pay your fines when you are caught ignoring the law? The baker really did suck. Are you actually saying government should force people to buy baked goods from shitty bakers because they are bigots?

No jewish butchers are not forced to sell pork, so your strawman fails. If however, they do sell pork public accommodation laws would force them to sell to black people and heaven forbid islamics.

Are you actually trying to say that a wedding cake for a gay couple is a "gay cake?"

Are you actually saying our laws should discriminate against gays to adhere to your religious views? FYI I'm a christian, and I disagree with your opinion that the bible tells me to discriminate against and defend discrimination against gays.

Lots of words being put in my mouth here....

if they lost their business before the case was over, why do we need laws that would make it happen then? The only force being applied here is by the government, and you seem to condone it, of course, only as long as it's reasons agree with you politically.

The law should never discriminate, but this isn't the case here. This a is a case of the State being able to dictate to a person choose your morality or your livelihood, when the state shouldn't be able to decide it at all.

I didn't put any words in your mouth I asked you questions, about your statements. You won't have any question of whether I'm citing you or not, you'll see quotes.

We don't have laws that make a business go out of business because they are bigots. What makes you think we do?

Your wrong there was no force by Government it's a regulation. With regard to public accommodation laws you are free to adhere to the regulation or not. If you don't you pay the fine just like any other fine. You also don't have to sell to the public. If you have religious reasons for not selling to the public at large, you are also free to sell privately. Thus you are not in fact FORCED TO SELL TO GAYS. You have tons of choices. Further, these people had already willingly sold baked goods to gays. They decided to make a point of not selling a wedding cake to their customer.

The state is not telling you to FORNICATE AND HAVE GAY SEX. The state is telling you that if you want to sell to the public you can't discriminate against a customer based on race, religion, ... and in this state sexual orientation. Thus if baking a cake for a gay couple is against your religion, sell privately, or find another state, or find a different line of work.

That right there is force. Do as we say, or you can't pursue a livelihood the way you want it. I guess life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness doesn't apply to people when you disagree with their moral structure. But making sure some protected class doesn't get their Feeewwwings hurt, THAT requires the force of the almighty state.

So again, basically, BAKE THE FUCKING CAKE YOU PEON.

I keep trying to say, the State really has no reason to worry about things as small as this. How about concentrating on important shit and not trying to make people live the way YOU want them to live?

You are very very very confused. Liberty does not mean the liberty to SCREW GAYS OVER THE COALS BECAUSE GOD TELLS YOU TO.

If you get pleasure from SCREWING GAYS OVER THE COALS BECAUSE SOMEONE TOLD YOU THAT GOD TELLS YOU TO, then you need to go PRIVATE WITH THAT. You want to sell to the PUBLIC you can't discriminate wrt to who in the public you want to serve and who in the public you want to SCREW OVER THE COALS BECAUSE SOMEONE TOLD YOU THAT GOD TELLS YOU TO.

Yes, it does, as long as the government doesn't do it.

All this boils down to is some citizen's need to make others live their lives they way they do. It's nothing more than governmental compulsion where governmental compulsion is not needed.

Next you people are going to go after churches and such, (they are public accommodations after all) despite the 1st amendment, because deep down, when it comes to getting what you want, all the constitution is is something to wipe your ass with.

 

[RKMBrown]

Wrong. You appear to not have the facts of this case in hand. The owner lost their business before the case was even over. Are you actually arguing that you should be able to ignore the law and not pay your fines when you are caught ignoring the law? The baker really did suck. Are you actually saying government should force people to buy baked goods from shitty bakers because they are bigots?

No jewish butchers are not forced to sell pork, so your strawman fails. If however, they do sell pork public accommodation laws would force them to sell to black people and heaven forbid islamics.

Are you actually trying to say that a wedding cake for a gay couple is a "gay cake?"

Are you actually saying our laws should discriminate against gays to adhere to your religious views? FYI I'm a christian, and I disagree with your opinion that the bible tells me to discriminate against and defend discrimination against gays.

Lots of words being put in my mouth here....

if they lost their business before the case was over, why do we need laws that would make it happen then? The only force being applied here is by the government, and you seem to condone it, of course, only as long as it's reasons agree with you politically.

The law should never discriminate, but this isn't the case here. This a is a case of the State being able to dictate to a person choose your morality or your livelihood, when the state shouldn't be able to decide it at all.

I didn't put any words in your mouth I asked you questions, about your statements. You won't have any question of whether I'm citing you or not, you'll see quotes.

We don't have laws that make a business go out of business because they are bigots. What makes you think we do?

Your wrong there was no force by Government it's a regulation. With regard to public accommodation laws you are free to adhere to the regulation or not. If you don't you pay the fine just like any other fine. You also don't have to sell to the public. If you have religious reasons for not selling to the public at large, you are also free to sell privately. Thus you are not in fact FORCED TO SELL TO GAYS. You have tons of choices. Further, these people had already willingly sold baked goods to gays. They decided to make a point of not selling a wedding cake to their customer.

The state is not telling you to FORNICATE AND HAVE GAY SEX. The state is telling you that if you want to sell to the public you can't discriminate against a customer based on race, religion, ... and in this state sexual orientation. Thus if baking a cake for a gay couple is against your religion, sell privately, or find another state, or find a different line of work.

That right there is force. Do as we say, or you can't pursue a livelihood the way you want it. I guess life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness doesn't apply to people when you disagree with their moral structure. But making sure some protected class doesn't get their Feeewwwings hurt, THAT requires the force of the almighty state.

So again, basically, BAKE THE FUCKING CAKE YOU PEON.

I keep trying to say, the State really has no reason to worry about things as small as this. How about concentrating on important shit and not trying to make people live the way YOU want them to live?

You are very very very confused. Liberty does not mean the liberty to SCREW GAYS OVER THE COALS BECAUSE GOD TELLS YOU TO.

If you get pleasure from SCREWING GAYS OVER THE COALS BECAUSE SOMEONE TOLD YOU THAT GOD TELLS YOU TO, then you need to go PRIVATE WITH THAT. You want to sell to the PUBLIC you can't discriminate wrt to who in the public you want to serve and who in the public you want to SCREW OVER THE COALS BECAUSE SOMEONE TOLD YOU THAT GOD TELLS YOU TO.

Yes, it does, as long as the government doesn't do it.

All this boils down to is some citizen's need to make others live their lives they way they do. It's nothing more than governmental compulsion where governmental compulsion is not needed.

Next you people are going to go after churches and such, (they are public accommodations after all) despite the 1st amendment, because deep down, when it comes to getting what you want, all the constitution is is something to wipe your ass with.

Complete nonsense. Churches are private. I'll repeat because you seem to not know the difference between public commerce and private relationships. EVERYONE in this country has the right to purchase for sale products in this country free from discrimination. EVEN GAYS IN SOME STATES. Everyone in this country has the right to sell to the public or not to sell to the public. EVEN GAYS. Further, EVERYONE in this country has the right to sell only to who the hell they want to sell to by going PRIVATE WITH SAID SALES IN EVERY STATE. What you can't do iS decide PUBLIC SALES DON'T INCLUDE SALES TO GAYS in STATES THAT HAVE MADE A LAW FOR PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION IRREGARDLESS OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION. For the moment, gay bashers may move to states where GAY BASHING IS LEGAL AT PUBLIC VENUES. Public accommodations - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia