Baker Who Won’t Make Cakes for Same-Sex Weddings Appeals Mandatory Re-Education Order

[bodecea]

Virtually no one if anyone arguing the baker should not be forced to bake the cake is arguing that the gay photographer should be forced to work for the baker, and anyone who tried arguing that would be viewed the same as you arguing it's a legitimate use of government force to compel a citizen to bake a cake. This is a vacuous argument.

Really you should try that again in English...

But if I got it correctly...


So we agree, Public Accommodation laws should be repealed right?

That if the baker can refuse to serve gays because they are gay that gays can refuse Christians because of their specific religious stance?

That one can discriminate but the other can't (under the law), is readily apparent unequal treatment under the law.



The remedy then is:

(a) require each to provide equal service to the other, or

(b) neither is required to provide service to the other.​

As it is now one gets to discriminate but the other is barred.

>>>>

We agree that all public accommodation laws should be repealed. We do not agree that until they are then we should add more legislation which is unnecessary and therefore simply an excuse for government to exert power. Why would I possibly agree that more unnecessary government legislation is good? Why would you think that?

Seawytch wants it for validation. She obviously has no problem getting a cake baked. She is just saying if they have it, she wants it too.

The true oppressed minority in this country are achievers who fund the government and provide the jobs. If you want to make a difference, focus on that real problem, not contrived ones.

So...what have YOU actively done to get public accomodation laws repealed?

 

[kaz]

So...what have YOU actively done to get public accomodation laws repealed?

I'm doing it right now

 

[bodecea]

It's not a feeling. I will not submit.

That's fine...no one will make you have or go to a gay marriage. I won't even invite you to our anniversary party next year.

I'm not gonna be forced to labor for a queer and attend an indoctrination class by the state. Did you ever read "1984" by George Orwell?

So you know for a fact that your boss is not gay? That you've never had a gay customer in whatever your business is?

 

[bodecea]

So...what have YOU actively done to get public accomodation laws repealed?

I'm doing it right now

What action are you taking?

 

[kaz]

So...what have YOU actively done to get public accomodation laws repealed?

I'm doing it right now

What action are you taking?

Trying to change minds. I get a lot of comments and PMs from people that while they don't agree with everything I say, I am making them think of things they hadn't considered before. They are used to Republican and Democrat, A or B. They appreciate when I point out there is an option C.

What do you do? You write to your congressman who is either Democrat and already agrees with you or Republican and ignores you because you're obviously not going to vote for him anyway like Seawytch tells me she does?

 

[Gadawg73]

I wish I could buy some cakes from this business..

I like their style.

Baker Who Won?t Make Cakes for Same-Sex Weddings Appeals Mandatory Re-Education Order

The commission’s order requires Phillips to design wedding cakes for same-sex ceremonies in violation of his beliefs, institute re-education classes for his staff on the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act and send quarterly “compliance” reports to the commission for two years.

::::::::::

This is the issue at the heart of the appeal: Phillips claims the government should not be forcing business owners to betray their consciences and convey what they do not believe. Even more importantly, he says, the government should not be in the business of “rehabilitating” consciences or “re-educating” its citizens to change their moral beliefs about the definition of marriage.

I admire this guy for his persistence and fight in him as these laws with their mandates of compliance for training are a little over board.
However, no where in this order is anything about education. There are laws on the books about everything under the sun and ignorance of the law is no excuse. The attorneys in this for the baker in their standard brief before this went to court brought up that the baker never knew of the existence of this civil rights law.
That is what did him on this compliance order. His offer that he had no idea it existed.
Nothing to do at all with religious beliefs. The compliance is minimal and is not "re-education" as all it is is a reading of the law to his employees and the length is because many times there is turnover.
I am sure this baker would not bake a cake for a wedding of a convicted felon because of religious beliefs.

 

[Silhouette]

So you know for a fact that your boss is not gay? That you've never had a gay customer in whatever your business is?

It's hard to tell what behaviors people practice in their bedrooms until they try to call it married and insist that you play along.

That's why "gay" isn't recognizable as an innate race. It is a behavior. And behaviors are regulated state by state according to majority rules. If you don't like it, move to some country where gay fascism already rules. Like one of the scandinavian countries..

 

[WorldWatcher]

And behaviors are regulated state by state according to majority rules. If you don't like it, move to some country where gay fascism already rules. Like one of the scandinavian countries..

How did that "behaviors" argument work for Texas when their anti-sodomy law was challenged in Lawrence v. Texas?

Or maybe Colorado when the passed an anti-gay equal treatment Constitutional Amendment by majority vote which was challenged in Romer v. Evans?


>>>>

 

[Gadawg73]

So you know for a fact that your boss is not gay? That you've never had a gay customer in whatever your business is?

It's hard to tell what behaviors people practice in their bedrooms until they try to call it married and insist that you play along.

That's why "gay" isn't recognizable as an innate race. It is a behavior. And behaviors are regulated state by state according to majority rules. If you don't like it, move to some country where gay fascism already rules. Like one of the scandinavian countries..

Gay marriage affects you in no way.
If you allow it to then your marriage is not a strong one.
YOU and you alone control your emotions.
Gay marriage affects no one and it has no affect on you whatsoever.
How does swingers' parties for heterosexuals affect you? I find them to be disgusting but they also AFFECT ME IN NO WAY.
Quit being a busy body mother hen and mind your own business. Start believing in freedom of religion and supporting it as many preachers in many churches are DENIED being able to marry gay couples that THEY WANT TO MARRY.

 

[nodoginnafight]

So you know for a fact that your boss is not gay? That you've never had a gay customer in whatever your business is?

It's hard to tell what behaviors people practice in their bedrooms until they try to call it married and insist that you play along.

That's why "gay" isn't recognizable as an innate race. It is a behavior. And behaviors are regulated state by state according to majority rules. If you don't like it, move to some country where gay fascism already rules. Like one of the scandinavian countries..

Gay marriage affects you in no way.
If you allow it to then your marriage is not a strong one.
YOU and you alone control your emotions.
Gay marriage affects no one and it has no affect on you whatsoever.
How does swingers' parties for heterosexuals affect you? I find them to be disgusting but they also AFFECT ME IN NO WAY.
Quit being a busy body mother hen and mind your own business. Start believing in freedom of religion and supporting it as many preachers in many churches are DENIED being able to marry gay couples that THEY WANT TO MARRY.

Pastors who are not allowed to marry gay couples in their church is a completely different matter. Denominations have the right to define their sacraments as they choose. IMHO THAT is religious freedom.

 

[Ibentoken]

That's fine...no one will make you have or go to a gay marriage. I won't even invite you to our anniversary party next year.

I'm not gonna be forced to labor for a queer and attend an indoctrination class by the state. Did you ever read "1984" by George Orwell?

So you know for a fact that your boss is not gay? That you've never had a gay customer in whatever your business is?

Those examples aren't the point. I've never been forced to labor against my will or forced to attend indoctrination classes. Do you understand the difference?

 

[Ibentoken]

It's hard to tell what behaviors people practice in their bedrooms until they try to call it married and insist that you play along.

That's why "gay" isn't recognizable as an innate race. It is a behavior. And behaviors are regulated state by state according to majority rules. If you don't like it, move to some country where gay fascism already rules. Like one of the scandinavian countries..

Gay marriage affects you in no way.
If you allow it to then your marriage is not a strong one.
YOU and you alone control your emotions.
Gay marriage affects no one and it has no affect on you whatsoever.
How does swingers' parties for heterosexuals affect you? I find them to be disgusting but they also AFFECT ME IN NO WAY.
Quit being a busy body mother hen and mind your own business. Start believing in freedom of religion and supporting it as many preachers in many churches are DENIED being able to marry gay couples that THEY WANT TO MARRY.

Pastors who are not allowed to marry gay couples in their church is a completely different matter. Denominations have the right to define their sacraments as they choose. IMHO THAT is religious freedom.

The Constitution says govt cannot prohibit the free exercise thereof. It's not talking about church. That's why the baker was targeted.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Courts can order anger management, defensive driving classes ... in the workplace, compliance training is very common and often required.

Educating your employees about how to do their jobs within the guidelines of all applicable regulations is just doing business in the U.S.A. 101. Not a big deal. I do still have issues, however, with the notion of forcing someone to bake a wedding cake against their religious beliefs. In most accommodations, I would say serve all equally. But marriage is a religious sacrament in many denominations. And I think if the interests of equal protection and religious freedom are competing, I'd have to go with the First Amendment over the 14th.

And I think it is a more direct application of the Constitution.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Gay marriage affects you in no way.
If you allow it to then your marriage is not a strong one.
YOU and you alone control your emotions.
Gay marriage affects no one and it has no affect on you whatsoever.
How does swingers' parties for heterosexuals affect you? I find them to be disgusting but they also AFFECT ME IN NO WAY.
Quit being a busy body mother hen and mind your own business. Start believing in freedom of religion and supporting it as many preachers in many churches are DENIED being able to marry gay couples that THEY WANT TO MARRY.

Pastors who are not allowed to marry gay couples in their church is a completely different matter. Denominations have the right to define their sacraments as they choose. IMHO THAT is religious freedom.

The Constitution says govt cannot prohibit the free exercise thereof. It's not talking about church. That's why the baker was targeted.

I wasn't responding to you. Gadawg WAS taking about churches. I was responding to him. Sorry for any confusion.

 

[bodecea]

I'm not gonna be forced to labor for a queer and attend an indoctrination class by the state. Did you ever read "1984" by George Orwell?

So you know for a fact that your boss is not gay? That you've never had a gay customer in whatever your business is?

Those examples aren't the point. I've never been forced to labor against my will or forced to attend indoctrination classes. Do you understand the difference?

Those indoctrination classes...what do you think they are composed of?

 

[Silhouette]

And behaviors are regulated state by state according to majority rules. If you don't like it, move to some country where gay fascism already rules. Like one of the scandinavian countries..

How did that "behaviors" argument work for Texas when their anti-sodomy law was challenged in Lawrence v. Texas?

Or maybe Colorado when the passed an anti-gay equal treatment Constitutional Amendment by majority vote which was challenged in Romer v. Evans?


>>>>

Lawrence v. Texas simply decriminalized sodomy. It didn't say it was a civil right that had to get special protections! Or a behavior that all had to embrace "as healthy and normal". It just said people who do it won't go to jail. Like if you smoke cigarettes. It's not healthy. But if you do it you don't go to jail. Should we teach kids in school that "smoking is a healthy alternative to other types of breathing"? No! Of course not. And smokers face all manner of restrictions even though smoking is legal.

 

[Ibentoken]

So you know for a fact that your boss is not gay? That you've never had a gay customer in whatever your business is?

Those examples aren't the point. I've never been forced to labor against my will or forced to attend indoctrination classes. Do you understand the difference?

Those indoctrination classes...what do you think they are composed of?

Pure crap. What do you think they are composed of?

 

[Seawytch]

Virtually no one if anyone arguing the baker should not be forced to bake the cake is arguing that the gay photographer should be forced to work for the baker, and anyone who tried arguing that would be viewed the same as you arguing it's a legitimate use of government force to compel a citizen to bake a cake. This is a vacuous argument.

Really you should try that again in English...



But if I got it correctly...





So we agree, Public Accommodation laws should be repealed right?



That if the baker can refuse to serve gays because they are gay that gays can refuse Christians because of their specific religious stance?



That one can discriminate but the other can't (under the law), is readily apparent unequal treatment under the law.







The remedy then is:

(a) require each to provide equal service to the other, or



(b) neither is required to provide service to the other.​

As it is now one gets to discriminate but the other is barred.



>>>>

We agree that all public accommodation laws should be repealed. We do not agree that until they are then we should add more legislation which is unnecessary and therefore simply an excuse for government to exert power. Why would I possibly agree that more unnecessary government legislation is good? Why would you think that?



Seawytch wants it for validation. She obviously has no problem getting a cake baked. She is just saying if they have it, she wants it too.



The true oppressed minority in this country are achievers who fund the government and provide the jobs. If you want to make a difference, focus on that real problem, not contrived ones.

Again Kaz is arguing where he wants the world to be, not where it is. PA laws exist. If I can't discriminate against Christians in private business, they shouldn't be able to discriminate against me.

 

[Seawytch]

So...what have YOU actively done to get public accomodation laws repealed?

I'm doing it right now

What action are you taking?

Bitching.

 

[WorldWatcher]

And behaviors are regulated state by state according to majority rules. If you don't like it, move to some country where gay fascism already rules. Like one of the scandinavian countries..

How did that "behaviors" argument work for Texas when their anti-sodomy law was challenged in Lawrence v. Texas?

Or maybe Colorado when the passed an anti-gay equal treatment Constitutional Amendment by majority vote which was challenged in Romer v. Evans?


>>>>

Lawrence v. Texas simply decriminalized sodomy. It didn't say it was a civil right that had to get special protections! Or a behavior that all had to embrace "as healthy and normal". It just said people who do it won't go to jail. Like if you smoke cigarettes. It's not healthy. But if you do it you don't go to jail. Should we teach kids in school that "smoking is a healthy alternative to other types of breathing"? No! Of course not. And smokers face all manner of restrictions even though smoking is legal.

Deflection and off point.

You said States get to determine "behaviors" I provided two examples, and I'm sure there are others, where that is not true and such State actions were ruled unconstitutional and such actions stopped.



>>>>