Another Christian baker targeted for abuse

[Iceweasel]

So in Texas a Christian Baker can refuse to serve gays.

But a Gay Florist is required by Federal law to provide service to a Christian Baker.

Gee isn't that lovely.

>>>>

Which orifice did you dig that out of? The baker didn't want to make a wedding cake for something they believe is sinful, not that they should even need a reason. If it was just a gay person buy a cake how would they even know? Likely wouldn't care. If the flourist is Muslim or someone that doesn't like Christianity, of course they should be able to say no to a Jesus cake. I've never heard otherwise.

Which orifice?

Did I summarize the legal situation correct? If not, please explain.


In Texas there are no public accommodation laws based on sexual orientation.

However, there is a federal public accommodation law based on religion which is applicable to businesses in Texas.



What did I get incorrect?

>>>>

You incorrectly made the comparison between serving a religious person and a homosexual without recognizing the religious protections mean you can't be discriminated against due to your religion. That isn't the same as refusing to bake a same gendered wedding cake. Duh. You also ignored my point that no law can force a Muslim (or anyone else) to bake a Jesus cake. Dishonesty is all you guys have.

You are the one making the incorrect comparison.

No baker was asked to provide a product they do not advertise that they provide.

A wedding cake is a wedding cake.

A gay couple can be refused service by a Christian in Texas. The gay business owner cannot, by law, refuse to bake a wedding cake because the couple are Christian.

Get it now?

Liar. They didn't advertise gay wedding cakes. Your failure to consider not everyone agrees gender is irrelevant just shows how ignorant and dishonest you are. It's typical for your side, you don't give a rats ass about how others feel. You want to ram your feelings down everybody's throat like a Nazi.

It's time people fight back and start slamming homosexual owned businesses and give them a taste of their own medicine. You want war? Bring it. There's a LOT more of us!

 

[Iceweasel]

You don't see, you got that much right.

I am a Christian and I see just fine. God will not punish these bakers for baking a cake for a same sex wedding.

That isn't really the point, your speaking from authority not with standing. They don't want to bake the ******* cake, that's the point.

It's entirely the point.

You're an idiot. That's the point.

Wow. That was so Christian of you. Like they say - haters gonna hate. Sucks to be miserable like you. lol

Calling you an idiot isn't hate, Einstein. You clearly can't think. Where did you get the idea I was a Christian? You make up shit like the lefties do, you lie, smear and throw temper tantrums. Like a spoiled toddler.

 

[Seawytch]

So in Texas a Christian Baker can refuse to serve gays.

But a Gay Florist is required by Federal law to provide service to a Christian Baker.

Gee isn't that lovely.

>>>>

Which orifice did you dig that out of? The baker didn't want to make a wedding cake for something they believe is sinful, not that they should even need a reason. If it was just a gay person buy a cake how would they even know? Likely wouldn't care. If the flourist is Muslim or someone that doesn't like Christianity, of course they should be able to say no to a Jesus cake. I've never heard otherwise.

Which orifice?

Did I summarize the legal situation correct? If not, please explain.


In Texas there are no public accommodation laws based on sexual orientation.

However, there is a federal public accommodation law based on religion which is applicable to businesses in Texas.



What did I get incorrect?

>>>>

You incorrectly made the comparison between serving a religious person and a homosexual without recognizing the religious protections mean you can't be discriminated against due to your religion. That isn't the same as refusing to bake a same gendered wedding cake. Duh. You also ignored my point that no law can force a Muslim (or anyone else) to bake a Jesus cake. Dishonesty is all you guys have.

You are the one making the incorrect comparison.

No baker was asked to provide a product they do not advertise that they provide.

A wedding cake is a wedding cake.

A gay couple can be refused service by a Christian in Texas. The gay business owner cannot, by law, refuse to bake a wedding cake because the couple are Christian.

Get it now?

Liar. They didn't advertise gay wedding cakes. Your failure to consider not everyone agrees gender is irrelevant just shows how ignorant and dishonest you are. It's typical for your side, you don't give a rats ass about how others feel. You want to ram your feelings down everybody's throat like a Nazi.

Nothing in my statement was untrue. There is no such thing as a "gay wedding cake". Below are two wedding cakes. Can you tell me which is the cake for the gay wedding?

There is no such thing as a gay wedding cake. There are only wedding cakes.

If you want to go after Public Accommodation laws (which have been in effect for the last 50 plus years), go right ahead. But instead of attacking state or local laws (are you a states rights kinda guy or not?) you should be going after the big one that requires that the gay person serve the Christian in all 50 states.

It's time people fight back and start slamming homosexual owned businesses and give them a taste of their own medicine. You want war? Bring it. There's a LOT more of us!

No there aren't. There are not a lot more bigots. You're a very tiny, but very whiny, minority.

7 out of 10 Americans Support LGBT Non Discrimination Protections

 

[mdk]

Behaviors aren't protected in the Constitution unless specified. Religion is specified. Freedom of speech is specified. Bearing arms is specified. Ass ramming isn't though. So, there's the rain on your parade. Also, there's no protection in the Constitution for depriving children (implicit parties to the marriage contract) of a mother or father via a legal bind for life. Unless I was absent that day in poly-sci? I did cut class now and then to go surfing in high school...

I am glad to see you finally moved on from pretending that religion was the only behavior protected in the Constituion. You are learning. Sort of.

You must have been absent that day when it was taught that children do not have a right to a mother and a father in the Constitution. Something tells me that doesn't have to be specified, though. Too funny.

 

[Iceweasel]

So in Texas a Christian Baker can refuse to serve gays.

But a Gay Florist is required by Federal law to provide service to a Christian Baker.

Gee isn't that lovely.

>>>>

Which orifice did you dig that out of? The baker didn't want to make a wedding cake for something they believe is sinful, not that they should even need a reason. If it was just a gay person buy a cake how would they even know? Likely wouldn't care. If the flourist is Muslim or someone that doesn't like Christianity, of course they should be able to say no to a Jesus cake. I've never heard otherwise.

Which orifice?

Did I summarize the legal situation correct? If not, please explain.


In Texas there are no public accommodation laws based on sexual orientation.

However, there is a federal public accommodation law based on religion which is applicable to businesses in Texas.



What did I get incorrect?

>>>>

You incorrectly made the comparison between serving a religious person and a homosexual without recognizing the religious protections mean you can't be discriminated against due to your religion. That isn't the same as refusing to bake a same gendered wedding cake. Duh. You also ignored my point that no law can force a Muslim (or anyone else) to bake a Jesus cake. Dishonesty is all you guys have.

You are the one making the incorrect comparison.

No baker was asked to provide a product they do not advertise that they provide.

A wedding cake is a wedding cake.

A gay couple can be refused service by a Christian in Texas. The gay business owner cannot, by law, refuse to bake a wedding cake because the couple are Christian.

Get it now?

Liar. They didn't advertise gay wedding cakes. Your failure to consider not everyone agrees gender is irrelevant just shows how ignorant and dishonest you are. It's typical for your side, you don't give a rats ass about how others feel. You want to ram your feelings down everybody's throat like a Nazi.

Nothing in my statement was untrue. There is no such thing as a "gay wedding cake". Below are two wedding cakes. Can you tell me which is the cake for the gay wedding?

There is no such thing as a gay wedding cake. There are only wedding cakes.

If you want to go after Public Accommodation laws (which have been in effect for the last 50 plus years), go right ahead. But instead of attacking state or local laws (are you a states rights kinda guy or not?) you should be going after the big one that requires that the gay person serve the Christian in all 50 states.

It's time people fight back and start slamming homosexual owned businesses and give them a taste of their own medicine. You want war? Bring it. There's a LOT more of us!

No there aren't. There are not a lot more bigots. You're a very tiny, but very whiny, minority.

7 out of 10 Americans Support LGBT Non Discrimination Protections

People use the term gay wedding cake for a reason. You can't figure it out, which is part of your problem. You simply can't see what you don't want to. Which is fine but when you can't see others' viewpoints and decide to act on it to destroy them, that's another matter and deserves some backlash.

 

[Seawytch]

Which orifice?

Did I summarize the legal situation correct? If not, please explain.


In Texas there are no public accommodation laws based on sexual orientation.

However, there is a federal public accommodation law based on religion which is applicable to businesses in Texas.



What did I get incorrect?

>>>>

You incorrectly made the comparison between serving a religious person and a homosexual without recognizing the religious protections mean you can't be discriminated against due to your religion. That isn't the same as refusing to bake a same gendered wedding cake. Duh. You also ignored my point that no law can force a Muslim (or anyone else) to bake a Jesus cake. Dishonesty is all you guys have.

You are the one making the incorrect comparison.

No baker was asked to provide a product they do not advertise that they provide.

A wedding cake is a wedding cake.

A gay couple can be refused service by a Christian in Texas. The gay business owner cannot, by law, refuse to bake a wedding cake because the couple are Christian.

Get it now?

Liar. They didn't advertise gay wedding cakes. Your failure to consider not everyone agrees gender is irrelevant just shows how ignorant and dishonest you are. It's typical for your side, you don't give a rats ass about how others feel. You want to ram your feelings down everybody's throat like a Nazi.

Nothing in my statement was untrue. There is no such thing as a "gay wedding cake". Below are two wedding cakes. Can you tell me which is the cake for the gay wedding?

There is no such thing as a gay wedding cake. There are only wedding cakes.

If you want to go after Public Accommodation laws (which have been in effect for the last 50 plus years), go right ahead. But instead of attacking state or local laws (are you a states rights kinda guy or not?) you should be going after the big one that requires that the gay person serve the Christian in all 50 states.

It's time people fight back and start slamming homosexual owned businesses and give them a taste of their own medicine. You want war? Bring it. There's a LOT more of us!

No there aren't. There are not a lot more bigots. You're a very tiny, but very whiny, minority.

7 out of 10 Americans Support LGBT Non Discrimination Protections

People use the term gay wedding cake for a reason. You can't figure it out, which is part of your problem. You simply can't see what you don't want to. Which is fine but when you can't see others' viewpoints and decide to act on it to destroy them, that's another matter and deserves some backlash.

Bigots use the phrase "gay wedding cakes" for a reason. They're bigots, duh. People call a wedding cake a wedding cake. There is no difference between the cakes, just the customers.

So again, in Texas the Christian baker can refuse to bake a wedding cake for the gay customers, but the gay baker cannot refuse to bake a wedding cake for the Christian couple. You're fine with that. Most people aren't.

You're a tiny, bigoted, minority. You're a loudmouthed one, but still a small, bigoted minority.

 

[Iceweasel]

You incorrectly made the comparison between serving a religious person and a homosexual without recognizing the religious protections mean you can't be discriminated against due to your religion. That isn't the same as refusing to bake a same gendered wedding cake. Duh. You also ignored my point that no law can force a Muslim (or anyone else) to bake a Jesus cake. Dishonesty is all you guys have.

You are the one making the incorrect comparison.

No baker was asked to provide a product they do not advertise that they provide.

A wedding cake is a wedding cake.

A gay couple can be refused service by a Christian in Texas. The gay business owner cannot, by law, refuse to bake a wedding cake because the couple are Christian.

Get it now?

Liar. They didn't advertise gay wedding cakes. Your failure to consider not everyone agrees gender is irrelevant just shows how ignorant and dishonest you are. It's typical for your side, you don't give a rats ass about how others feel. You want to ram your feelings down everybody's throat like a Nazi.

Nothing in my statement was untrue. There is no such thing as a "gay wedding cake". Below are two wedding cakes. Can you tell me which is the cake for the gay wedding?

There is no such thing as a gay wedding cake. There are only wedding cakes.

If you want to go after Public Accommodation laws (which have been in effect for the last 50 plus years), go right ahead. But instead of attacking state or local laws (are you a states rights kinda guy or not?) you should be going after the big one that requires that the gay person serve the Christian in all 50 states.

It's time people fight back and start slamming homosexual owned businesses and give them a taste of their own medicine. You want war? Bring it. There's a LOT more of us!

No there aren't. There are not a lot more bigots. You're a very tiny, but very whiny, minority.

7 out of 10 Americans Support LGBT Non Discrimination Protections

People use the term gay wedding cake for a reason. You can't figure it out, which is part of your problem. You simply can't see what you don't want to. Which is fine but when you can't see others' viewpoints and decide to act on it to destroy them, that's another matter and deserves some backlash.

Bigots use the phrase "gay wedding cakes" for a reason. They're bigots, duh. People call a wedding cake a wedding cake. There is no difference between the cakes, just the customers.

So again, in Texas the Christian baker can refuse to bake a wedding cake for the gay customers, but the gay baker cannot refuse to bake a wedding cake for the Christian couple. You're fine with that. Most people aren't.

You're a tiny, bigoted, minority. You're a loudmouthed one, but still a small, bigoted minority.

But people that don't comply with the likes of you are all bigots. The real bigot is the asshole trying to ruin lives, you can't smear your way out of it. All you can do is continue being a low life, calling names and hoping people will take you seriously. I don't.

 

[martybegan]

Only progressives confuse snark with actual political commentary or opinion.

Don't have a cow man

Not at all, just watching idiots like you gleefully condoning the proles with their torches and pitchforks do your dirty work while you stand on the sidelines like the gutless cowards you are.

Where are the 'proles with their torches and pitchforks exactly?

It a metaphor for all the nasty reviews on their yelp page, and for the social media flood in general.

Welcome to the 21st century.

Snark isn't justification.

Wanker.

 

[martybegan]

Only progressives confuse snark with actual political commentary or opinion.

Don't have a cow man

Not at all, just watching idiots like you gleefully condoning the proles with their torches and pitchforks do your dirty work while you stand on the sidelines like the gutless cowards you are.

Whoa there don't be such a drama queen

No real response there, eh wimpy?

Respond to what? You being a diva?

Respond to the topic at hand instead of being a no talent ass-clown.

 

[martybegan]

My issue isn't with the State this time, its with the nasty segment of the people responding via social media.

Welcome to the modern communication age. People get to express their opinions. (Threats of physical violence excluded. Those should be reported to the police for appropriate action.)

And I am not against all PA laws, I am against them being applied to every form of a business transaction.

I support the general repeal of Public Accommodation laws with very narrow exceptions**. I think it is fundamentally unfair that that a Christian baker be allowed to refuse service to gays because of their sexual orientation but a gay florist cannot refuse service (under federal law) to a Christian baker based on the bakers religion.

But in this world of instant communications and social media, expect this type of outcome. The "Market" at work.



**Narrow exceptions would only include emergency medical and basic needs goods (grocery stores, power, water, housing, etc.) It would not include "optional" businesses like theaters, restaurants, florists, photographers, etc.


>>>>

My views on PA's align with yours, and while we cannot stop the flood of social media, we can at least say "poor form" to those who abuse the system, and those who run these websites have a responsibility to remove content that is against the function of the system, and in the case of yelp, are in no way related to yelp's actual function, which is to provide a review of goods and services provided.

 

[Seawytch]

You are the one making the incorrect comparison.

No baker was asked to provide a product they do not advertise that they provide.

A wedding cake is a wedding cake.

A gay couple can be refused service by a Christian in Texas. The gay business owner cannot, by law, refuse to bake a wedding cake because the couple are Christian.

Get it now?

Liar. They didn't advertise gay wedding cakes. Your failure to consider not everyone agrees gender is irrelevant just shows how ignorant and dishonest you are. It's typical for your side, you don't give a rats ass about how others feel. You want to ram your feelings down everybody's throat like a Nazi.

Nothing in my statement was untrue. There is no such thing as a "gay wedding cake". Below are two wedding cakes. Can you tell me which is the cake for the gay wedding?

There is no such thing as a gay wedding cake. There are only wedding cakes.

If you want to go after Public Accommodation laws (which have been in effect for the last 50 plus years), go right ahead. But instead of attacking state or local laws (are you a states rights kinda guy or not?) you should be going after the big one that requires that the gay person serve the Christian in all 50 states.

It's time people fight back and start slamming homosexual owned businesses and give them a taste of their own medicine. You want war? Bring it. There's a LOT more of us!

No there aren't. There are not a lot more bigots. You're a very tiny, but very whiny, minority.

7 out of 10 Americans Support LGBT Non Discrimination Protections

People use the term gay wedding cake for a reason. You can't figure it out, which is part of your problem. You simply can't see what you don't want to. Which is fine but when you can't see others' viewpoints and decide to act on it to destroy them, that's another matter and deserves some backlash.

Bigots use the phrase "gay wedding cakes" for a reason. They're bigots, duh. People call a wedding cake a wedding cake. There is no difference between the cakes, just the customers.

So again, in Texas the Christian baker can refuse to bake a wedding cake for the gay customers, but the gay baker cannot refuse to bake a wedding cake for the Christian couple. You're fine with that. Most people aren't.

You're a tiny, bigoted, minority. You're a loudmouthed one, but still a small, bigoted minority.

But people that don't comply with the likes of you are all bigots. The real bigot is the asshole trying to ruin lives, you can't smear you way out of it.

Nope. The bigots are those that wish to discriminate against other Americans but don't want to actually get rid of PA laws. They just want special little "I hate gays" carve outs.

The people that don't want to bake a cake for gays in Texas are bigots. Since there are no PA protections for gays in Texas, the free market gets to decide. What that means is that bigoted bakers get called out for being bigoted bakers on Yelp. Hey, it's Texas so =it's almost as likely that being called a homophobe on Yelp will help their business.

If you don't want a negative review of your business, do good business.

 

[martybegan]

My issue isn't with the State this time, its with the nasty segment of the people responding via social media.

Welcome to the modern communication age. People get to express their opinions. (Threats of physical violence excluded. Those should be reported to the police for appropriate action.)

And I am not against all PA laws, I am against them being applied to every form of a business transaction.

I support the general repeal of Public Accommodation laws with very narrow exceptions**. I think it is fundamentally unfair that that a Christian baker be allowed to refuse service to gays because of their sexual orientation but a gay florist cannot refuse service (under federal law) to a Christian baker based on the bakers religion.

But in this world of instant communications and social media, expect this type of outcome. The "Market" at work.



**Narrow exceptions would only include emergency medical and basic needs goods (grocery stores, power, water, housing, etc.) It would not include "optional" businesses like theaters, restaurants, florists, photographers, etc.


>>>>

That doesn't seem fair. I don't get to be a bigot because I own a grocery store, but the guy that owns the flower shop does?

it has to do with harm done in each situation. Not being able to get food for nourishment is actual harm, having to go get another photographer, another specialty baker, or rent another hall for your wedding is not. (on the other hand being denied a hotel room would be harm when one was travelling).

 

[martybegan]

Don't have a cow man

Not at all, just watching idiots like you gleefully condoning the proles with their torches and pitchforks do your dirty work while you stand on the sidelines like the gutless cowards you are.

Where are the 'proles with their torches and pitchforks exactly?

It a metaphor for all the nasty reviews on their yelp page, and for the social media flood in general.

Welcome to the 21st century.

How dare anyone use social media to attack a business.....

Starbucks unveiled its plain red cups Nov. 1, but they became a culture-war topic last week by cropping up on former pastor Joshua Feuerstein's Facebook page. He posted a video denouncing Starbucks for removing "Christmas from their cups because they hate Jesus." Other Christians took to social media to slam the decision.

While I considered the whole thing to be silly and a waste of time, there are differences between the cases. How many of the people complaining, as a percentage, were actual customers of Starbucks compared to the percentage of people slamming this baker on Yelp who were actual customers of said baker?

 

[Seawytch]

My issue isn't with the State this time, its with the nasty segment of the people responding via social media.

Welcome to the modern communication age. People get to express their opinions. (Threats of physical violence excluded. Those should be reported to the police for appropriate action.)

And I am not against all PA laws, I am against them being applied to every form of a business transaction.

I support the general repeal of Public Accommodation laws with very narrow exceptions**. I think it is fundamentally unfair that that a Christian baker be allowed to refuse service to gays because of their sexual orientation but a gay florist cannot refuse service (under federal law) to a Christian baker based on the bakers religion.

But in this world of instant communications and social media, expect this type of outcome. The "Market" at work.



**Narrow exceptions would only include emergency medical and basic needs goods (grocery stores, power, water, housing, etc.) It would not include "optional" businesses like theaters, restaurants, florists, photographers, etc.


>>>>

That doesn't seem fair. I don't get to be a bigot because I own a grocery store, but the guy that owns the flower shop does?

it has to do with harm done in each situation. Not being able to get food for nourishment is actual harm, having to go get another photographer, another specialty baker, or rent another hall for your wedding is not. (on the other hand being denied a hotel room would be harm when one was travelling).

Still doesn't seem fair. I just happen to inherit my family's grocery store and now I can't be a bigot because I sell milk but the guy that uses my milk to make cakes does get to be a bigot? Seems a lot more fair if either everybody gets to discriminate or nobody does.

 

[martybegan]

My issue isn't with the State this time, its with the nasty segment of the people responding via social media.

Welcome to the modern communication age. People get to express their opinions. (Threats of physical violence excluded. Those should be reported to the police for appropriate action.)

And I am not against all PA laws, I am against them being applied to every form of a business transaction.

I support the general repeal of Public Accommodation laws with very narrow exceptions**. I think it is fundamentally unfair that that a Christian baker be allowed to refuse service to gays because of their sexual orientation but a gay florist cannot refuse service (under federal law) to a Christian baker based on the bakers religion.

But in this world of instant communications and social media, expect this type of outcome. The "Market" at work.



**Narrow exceptions would only include emergency medical and basic needs goods (grocery stores, power, water, housing, etc.) It would not include "optional" businesses like theaters, restaurants, florists, photographers, etc.


>>>>

That doesn't seem fair. I don't get to be a bigot because I own a grocery store, but the guy that owns the flower shop does?

it has to do with harm done in each situation. Not being able to get food for nourishment is actual harm, having to go get another photographer, another specialty baker, or rent another hall for your wedding is not. (on the other hand being denied a hotel room would be harm when one was travelling).

Still doesn't seem fair. I just happen to inherit my family's grocery store and now I can't be a bigot because I sell milk but the guy that uses my milk to make cakes does get to be a bigot? Seems a lot more fair if either everybody gets to discriminate or nobody does.

Simple solutions for simple people i guess.

 

[Seawytch]

My issue isn't with the State this time, its with the nasty segment of the people responding via social media.

Welcome to the modern communication age. People get to express their opinions. (Threats of physical violence excluded. Those should be reported to the police for appropriate action.)

And I am not against all PA laws, I am against them being applied to every form of a business transaction.

I support the general repeal of Public Accommodation laws with very narrow exceptions**. I think it is fundamentally unfair that that a Christian baker be allowed to refuse service to gays because of their sexual orientation but a gay florist cannot refuse service (under federal law) to a Christian baker based on the bakers religion.

But in this world of instant communications and social media, expect this type of outcome. The "Market" at work.



**Narrow exceptions would only include emergency medical and basic needs goods (grocery stores, power, water, housing, etc.) It would not include "optional" businesses like theaters, restaurants, florists, photographers, etc.


>>>>

That doesn't seem fair. I don't get to be a bigot because I own a grocery store, but the guy that owns the flower shop does?

it has to do with harm done in each situation. Not being able to get food for nourishment is actual harm, having to go get another photographer, another specialty baker, or rent another hall for your wedding is not. (on the other hand being denied a hotel room would be harm when one was travelling).

Still doesn't seem fair. I just happen to inherit my family's grocery store and now I can't be a bigot because I sell milk but the guy that uses my milk to make cakes does get to be a bigot? Seems a lot more fair if either everybody gets to discriminate or nobody does.

Simple solutions for simple people i guess.

More like Occam's razor.

 

[martybegan]

Welcome to the modern communication age. People get to express their opinions. (Threats of physical violence excluded. Those should be reported to the police for appropriate action.)

I support the general repeal of Public Accommodation laws with very narrow exceptions**. I think it is fundamentally unfair that that a Christian baker be allowed to refuse service to gays because of their sexual orientation but a gay florist cannot refuse service (under federal law) to a Christian baker based on the bakers religion.

But in this world of instant communications and social media, expect this type of outcome. The "Market" at work.



**Narrow exceptions would only include emergency medical and basic needs goods (grocery stores, power, water, housing, etc.) It would not include "optional" businesses like theaters, restaurants, florists, photographers, etc.


>>>>

That doesn't seem fair. I don't get to be a bigot because I own a grocery store, but the guy that owns the flower shop does?

it has to do with harm done in each situation. Not being able to get food for nourishment is actual harm, having to go get another photographer, another specialty baker, or rent another hall for your wedding is not. (on the other hand being denied a hotel room would be harm when one was travelling).

Still doesn't seem fair. I just happen to inherit my family's grocery store and now I can't be a bigot because I sell milk but the guy that uses my milk to make cakes does get to be a bigot? Seems a lot more fair if either everybody gets to discriminate or nobody does.

Simple solutions for simple people i guess.

More like Occam's razor.

When people are forced to do something they don't want to do, some harm has to be established before the government can compel them to act against their desires. Hurt feelings are not harm.

 

[Seawytch]

That doesn't seem fair. I don't get to be a bigot because I own a grocery store, but the guy that owns the flower shop does?

it has to do with harm done in each situation. Not being able to get food for nourishment is actual harm, having to go get another photographer, another specialty baker, or rent another hall for your wedding is not. (on the other hand being denied a hotel room would be harm when one was travelling).

Still doesn't seem fair. I just happen to inherit my family's grocery store and now I can't be a bigot because I sell milk but the guy that uses my milk to make cakes does get to be a bigot? Seems a lot more fair if either everybody gets to discriminate or nobody does.

Simple solutions for simple people i guess.

More like Occam's razor.

When people are forced to do something they don't want to do, some harm has to be established before the government can compel them to act against their desires. Hurt feelings are not harm.

And obviously some has since the government in many localities put these laws into place.

You want to create a Rube Goldberg machine of who can discriminate and who can't. If you can't buy your wedding cake anywhere else, you go without? Gays and Muslims can't have flowers if they live in rural areas? Easier and more efficient to either say everyone gets to discriminate or nobody does.

Still waiting for you folks to go after the biggie, Title II of the CRA instead of just the gay protections. Show us this really is about PA laws and not about being anti gay bigots.

 

[WorldWatcher]

My views on PA's align with yours, and while we cannot stop the flood of social media, we can at least say "poor form" to those who abuse the system, and those who run these websites have a responsibility to remove content that is against the function of the system, and in the case of yelp, are in no way related to yelp's actual function, which is to provide a review of goods and services provided.

Or in this case, provide a review of services not provided.



>>>>

 

[AvgGuyIA]

"As of yet, the couple has not filed a formal charge against the Christian couple...."

As always, that's the key. The couple can choose to just let the bakers be who they are and find another baker, or they can choose to have them punished.
.

Let's hope the gay men choose to go to a bakery willing to help them celebrate their wedding. The Kern bakery isn't showing favoritism because they won't bake other types of cakes that. Are sinful to them. Afterall, they don't refuse normal business from gays. The gay-fascists need to leave them alone.