Baker must make gay cakes

[Plasmaball]

.

Always amusing to see those who support illegal immigration and "sanctuary" cities and states, suddenly so concerned about adherence with "the law".

.

illegals should be deported and made to go through the process of becoming a citizen via legal means. I fully support states like Rhode Island and Oklahoma who passed laws fining companies for highering illegals.

so fail i guess on your part

 

[Mac1958]

.

Always amusing to see those who support illegal immigration and "sanctuary" cities and states, suddenly so concerned about adherence with "the law".

.

illegals should be deported and made to go through the process of becoming a citizen via legal means. I fully support states like Rhode Island and Oklahoma who passed laws fining companies for highering illegals.

so fail i guess on your part

Oh, there are exceptions to every rule. Of course, partisan ideologues aren't very good at nuance.

.

 

[I.P.Freely]

I personally know blacks that HATE being equated to the gay issue.

Anecdotal, unsubstantiated, subjective, and irrelevant.



It is to the extent that neither may be subject to discriminatory measures, and where both are entitled to protections as mandated by public accommodations laws.

From a Christian perspective…

Anecdotal, unsubstantiated, subjective, and irrelevant.

This is an issue concerning the Constitution, the law, and responsible governance and public policy only, having nothing to do with religion; where religious beliefs are not being ‘violated’ and where religious beliefs may not be used as ‘justification’ to discriminate against gay Americans and ignore just, proper, and Constitutional laws.

Being gay is a choice, a belief, and a lifestyle.
Being Christian is a choice, a belief, and a lifestyle.

If gays shouldn't be forced to follow or cater to a Christian standard then why should a Christian be forced to follow or cater to the LGBT/NAMBLA (LGBTN) community and their standards? Stop discriminating against Christians.

Driftingglands what about gay christian bakers?
Jesus was a Gay Jew, who founded christianity because his real parents were bigots, https://www.christiangays.com/

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I personally know blacks that HATE being equated to the gay issue.

Anecdotal, unsubstantiated, subjective, and irrelevant.



It is to the extent that neither may be subject to discriminatory measures, and where both are entitled to protections as mandated by public accommodations laws.

From a Christian perspective…

Anecdotal, unsubstantiated, subjective, and irrelevant.

This is an issue concerning the Constitution, the law, and responsible governance and public policy only, having nothing to do with religion; where religious beliefs are not being ‘violated’ and where religious beliefs may not be used as ‘justification’ to discriminate against gay Americans and ignore just, proper, and Constitutional laws.

Being gay is a choice, a belief, and a lifestyle.
Being Christian is a choice, a belief, and a lifestyle.

If gays shouldn't be forced to follow or cater to a Christian standard then why should a Christian be forced to follow or cater to the LGBT/NAMBLA (LGBTN) community and their standards? Stop discriminating against Christians.

This fails as a false comparison fallacy, as no Christian is being ‘forced’ to follow or do anything, as opposed to laws seeking to deny gay Americans their civil liberties.

Pubic accommodations laws in no way prohibit or interfere with religious practice, where Christians remain at liberty to practice their faith as they see fit. Providing goods or services to gay patrons is not an ‘endorsement’ of homosexuality, nor does it compel Christians to engage in ‘homosexual acts.’

Moreover, the right to religious expression is not absolute, and subject to reasonable restrictions, including disallowing discrimination predicated on religious dogma.

Religion is not a license to discriminate, nor is it justification to ignore or disregard the law.

 

[LockeJaw]

He said he hates free speech...just phrased it in a way folks like yourself who don't have trained eyes or ears to catch his sneaky leftist bullshit would validate it on face value. He basically said my use of those words were unconstitutional(too bad he is wrong), says using my free speech is against the founding principles, and he is all for forcing people to do business with people they wish not to. I can't help you if you're not smart enough to follow the bouncing ball.

This type of hate and ignorance is repugnant to the Constitution regardless whether it’s directed at a person’s sexual orientation or race; it’s repugnant to men and women of good faith, and it’s repugnant to the fundamental tenets upon which this Nation was founded.

Oh STFU... You're weak ass attempt to disguise your hatred for free speech & freedom of association using the very document that espouses free speech, private property, everything you hate...is what is disgusting here. Chickenshit lawyer.

he didn't say he hated free speech, he said he hated repugnant speech.

that you choose to be repugnant in your freedom is quite telling...

it's not his fault for noticing your repugnance!

 

[Plasmaball]

.

Always amusing to see those who support illegal immigration and "sanctuary" cities and states, suddenly so concerned about adherence with "the law".

.

illegals should be deported and made to go through the process of becoming a citizen via legal means. I fully support states like Rhode Island and Oklahoma who passed laws fining companies for highering illegals.

so fail i guess on your part

Oh, there are exceptions to every rule. Of course, partisan ideologues aren't very good at nuance.

.

shrug....

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

.

Always amusing to see those who support illegal immigration and "sanctuary" cities and states, suddenly so concerned about adherence with "the law".

.

This doesn’t make any sense, as no one ‘supports’ illegal immigration.

This statement is obviously predicated on your ignorance of the law, where undocumented immigrants are entitled to due process, and are not ‘illegal’ until determine so in a court of law (Plyler v. Doe (1982)).

Consequently, jurisdictions which afford undocumented immigrants due process in accordance with the Constitution are indeed following the law.

 

[Seawytch]

.

Always amusing to see those who support illegal immigration and "sanctuary" cities and states, suddenly so concerned about adherence with "the law".

.

I support changing the law, not circumventing it. Has anyone produced legislation that would repeal the Civil Rights act?

 

[DriftingSand]

Anecdotal, unsubstantiated, subjective, and irrelevant.



It is to the extent that neither may be subject to discriminatory measures, and where both are entitled to protections as mandated by public accommodations laws.



Anecdotal, unsubstantiated, subjective, and irrelevant.

This is an issue concerning the Constitution, the law, and responsible governance and public policy only, having nothing to do with religion; where religious beliefs are not being ‘violated’ and where religious beliefs may not be used as ‘justification’ to discriminate against gay Americans and ignore just, proper, and Constitutional laws.

Being gay is a choice, a belief, and a lifestyle.
Being Christian is a choice, a belief, and a lifestyle.

If gays shouldn't be forced to follow or cater to a Christian standard then why should a Christian be forced to follow or cater to the LGBT/NAMBLA (LGBTN) community and their standards? Stop discriminating against Christians.

Driftingglands what about gay christian bakers?
Jesus was a Gay Jew, who founded christianity because his real parents were bigots, https://www.christiangays.com/

Much idiocy! Thanks for your non-interesting post (bigoted Christ hater).

 

[Mac1958]

.

Always amusing to see those who support illegal immigration and "sanctuary" cities and states, suddenly so concerned about adherence with "the law".

.

This doesn’t make any sense, as no one ‘supports’ illegal immigration.

This statement is obviously predicated on your ignorance of the law, where undocumented immigrants are entitled to due process, and are not ‘illegal’ until determine so in a court of law (Plyler v. Doe (1982)).

Consequently, jurisdictions which afford undocumented immigrants due process in accordance with the Constitution are indeed following the law.

Look, he's trying to intellectualize his partisan ideology.

Not to mention avoiding the fact that the Left defends illegal immigrants and sanctuary areas as a matter of course.

Do you really think anyone buys this stuff? Really?

.

 

[Crystalclear]

Anecdotal, unsubstantiated, subjective, and irrelevant.







It is to the extent that neither may be subject to discriminatory measures, and where both are entitled to protections as mandated by public accommodations laws.







Anecdotal, unsubstantiated, subjective, and irrelevant.



This is an issue concerning the Constitution, the law, and responsible governance and public policy only, having nothing to do with religion; where religious beliefs are not being ‘violated’ and where religious beliefs may not be used as ‘justification’ to discriminate against gay Americans and ignore just, proper, and Constitutional laws.

Being gay is a choice, a belief, and a lifestyle.

Being Christian is a choice, a belief, and a lifestyle.



If gays shouldn't be forced to follow or cater to a Christian standard then why should a Christian be forced to follow or cater to the LGBT/NAMBLA (LGBTN) community and their standards? Stop discriminating against Christians.

This fails as a false comparison fallacy, as no Christian is being ‘forced’ to follow or do anything, as opposed to laws seeking to deny gay Americans their civil liberties.



Pubic accommodations laws in no way prohibit or interfere with religious practice, where Christians remain at liberty to practice their faith as they see fit. Providing goods or services to gay patrons is not an ‘endorsement’ of homosexuality, nor does it compel Christians to engage in ‘homosexual acts.’



Moreover, the right to religious expression is not absolute, and subject to reasonable restrictions, including disallowing discrimination predicated on religious dogma.



Religion is not a license to discriminate, nor is it justification to ignore or disregard the law.

No, religion not, but a baker should have the right to decide what and for who he makes his cakes.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

If gays want two boy dollies on their cake they can go to their local Walmart and buy two boy dollies. Don't force the baker to do something that goes against his conscience. See how easy that is?

Amen to this. If you don't want to be forced to do something that you don't want to do, don't put anyone else into the position then. People who run a business have the right to refuse service to those that they do not want to deal with anyways and when that happens to a person, then in my opinion, they should either go somewhere else or try to make what is needed themselves. Making it themselves would only make whatever it is they are making even more special because they made it themselves...even if it doesn't look all that great when it is done.

Since this chat is about the making of a certain kind of food, those who wanted the cake should have considered themselves blessed that they not only have the money to pay for it unlike some people in this world, but they also have the ability to eat it too. I know someone who is not able to eat just anything because of how severe their food allergies are.

God bless you and them always!!!

Holly

 

[Againsheila]

[/IMG]

Hahaha. Now THAT's what I'm talkin' about. Bam!

Look ... if a queer must go to a straight dude to get a cake just go in and ask for a cake without announcing your sexual preferences. I don't go to Subway and ask for a sandwich then blurt out: " by the way ... I'm straight ... just so ya know." Only a mentally incompetent goon would announce his sexual activities when ordering food.

Let's say you have a fiance, you are getting married. You and she go to a bakery recommended by a friend for the quality of their wedding cakes. Wedding cakes are not something kept in the display case, they are special ordered. The baker needs more information so he can make suggestions and design a cake. He asked "So who's getting married", the answer is "Joan and I".

You really think that is "announcing your sexuality"?

Now if a queer goes in and asks the baker to draw an image of a penis on the cake the baker has EVERY RIGHT UNDER THE SUN to decline such a mentally screwed up request.

If a baker does not normally produce a "penis" cake, then they are not required to produce it for anyone. On the other hand of the baker routinely makes "penis" cakes, then he can't refuse to sell them base on the class of the customer.

If a baker does normally make wedding cakes, they cannot refuse to sell them based on the class of the customer.


>>>>

My girlfriends and I picked out my wedding cake. My husband had nothing to do with it. He was with me when we picked out the wedding invitations, but then again, today you can just print those off at home. The truth is, we did our wedding on the cheap. We didn't have a lot of money.

 

[Againsheila]

[/IMG]

Hahaha. Now THAT's what I'm talkin' about. Bam!

Look ... if a queer must go to a straight dude to get a cake just go in and ask for a cake without announcing your sexual preferences. I don't go to Subway and ask for a sandwich then blurt out: " by the way ... I'm straight ... just so ya know." Only a mentally incompetent goon would announce his sexual activities when ordering food.

Let's say you have a fiance, you are getting married. You and she go to a bakery recommended by a friend for the quality of their wedding cakes. Wedding cakes are not something kept in the display case, they are special ordered. The baker needs more information so he can make suggestions and design a cake. He asked "So who's getting married", the answer is "Joan and I".

You really think that is "announcing your sexuality"?

Now if a queer goes in and asks the baker to draw an image of a penis on the cake the baker has EVERY RIGHT UNDER THE SUN to decline such a mentally screwed up request.

If a baker does not normally produce a "penis" cake, then they are not required to produce it for anyone. On the other hand of the baker routinely makes "penis" cakes, then he can't refuse to sell them base on the class of the customer.

If a baker does normally make wedding cakes, they cannot refuse to sell them based on the class of the customer.



>>>>

Well, you're in luck, this baker doesn't make wedding cakes anymore. Happy now?

 

[Vandalshandle]

If gays want two boy dollies on their cake they can go to their local Walmart and buy two boy dollies. Don't force the baker to do something that goes against his conscience. See how easy that is?

Amen to this. If you don't want to be forced to do something that you don't want to do, don't put anyone else into the position then. People who run a business have the right to refuse service to those that they do not want to deal with anyways and when that happens to a person, then in my opinion, they should either go somewhere else or try to make what is needed themselves. Making it themselves would only make whatever it is they are making even more special because they made it themselves...even if it doesn't look all that great when it is done.

Since this chat is about the making of a certain kind of food, those who wanted the cake should have considered themselves blessed that they not only have the money to pay for it unlike some people in this world, but they also have the ability to eat it too. I know someone who is not able to eat just anything because of how severe their food allergies are.

God bless you and them always!!!

Holly

JO, You would have right at home back where I grew up in Atlanta in the 1950's.....

 

[JOSweetHeart]

^^^ I'm not sure what you mean by this, but okay.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[Seawytch]

Well, you're in luck, this baker doesn't make wedding cakes anymore. Happy now?

I am neither happy or unhappy. They choose to lose revenue based on their personal beliefs. It's like Hobby Lobby choosing not to carry Jewish religious products.

 

[jillian]

Well, you're in luck, this baker doesn't make wedding cakes anymore. Happy now?

should anyone feel badly that their bigotry mattered more than their business?

didn't think so.

 

[LockeJaw]

Jillian you're a retard so I am sure you won't get what I am about to say...but Ill give it a shot.

It is about the principles, morals, and values of the people who follow Christianity, it's not bigotry. It's sticking to your beliefs. Okay? I know christians who believe homosexuality is a sin that still treat homosexuals with fairness & as equals as fellow human beings, but your marriage is still counterfeit if it involves 2 people of the same sex in their eyes.

What you want is to force Christians to validate homosexuality, which is blasphemy. So cut the crap already. You have no right to force people to commit sacriledge and blaspheme their God. This country was founded on religious freedom & it'll fall if or when that is no longer the case.

 

[Vandalshandle]

^^^ I'm not sure what you mean by this, but okay.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

I know you don't, JO, and that is the really sad thing about it......