Bakers fined for not working homosexual "wedding" continue fighting for their freedoms

[WorldWatcher]

Wedding cakes are offered as part of a separate and private contract. No one has ever prevented or even objected to gays going into any bakery and buying anything they want. The bakers are complaining about being forced into a contract against their will.

You might have a case if the Klien's had sold wedding cakes as separate entity from their business. However they didn't. They advertised and sold wedding cakes as a service from their business.


>>>>

 

[Silhouette]

Wedding cakes are offered as part of a separate and private contract. No one has ever prevented or even objected to gays going into any bakery and buying anything they want. The bakers are complaining about being forced into a contract against their will.

You might have a case if the Klien's had sold wedding cakes as separate entity from their business. However they didn't. They advertised and sold wedding cakes as a service from their business.


>>>>

Well what if cakes for celebrations were part of a Jewish person's lineup? Would he be required to bake a cake with a swastika and "Happy Nazi Pride Day" frosted on top?

Remember, the 7th circuit found in Hively v Ivy Tech (2016) that sexual-orientation (a description of behavior) isn't covered under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. So comparisons there aren't allowed.

 

[Seawytch]

Unless your business is "faith based" then you are just a regular business and you have to follow the same rules and regulations that everyone else does. Sorry but your faith doesn't make you "special."

Sorry, but the 1st Amendment says otherwise...it protects the American people from that kind of absurdity that I have to follow the crowd and Nazi goose-step in the exact same direction.

The United States was founded on, and built for, the individual. It is not about the collective.

So how come it only protects people that hate gays and leaves out people that think interracial marriage is sinful? How come the anti gay bigots get concessions we don't give racists?

It shouldn't. I know damn well you've head me say on this board that a person absolutely has the constitutional right to reject entering into a business agreement with someone if they are racist.

You cannot legislate feelings and believing you can is the textbook definition of fascism. Additionally, even if you could legislate feelings - you shouldn't. You should just leave people free to live their lives. I won't tell you that you can't be gay if you won't tell someone else they can't hate gays. Deal?

Until you get that pesky Civil Rights Act repealed, you're just sniveling in the internet about state and local laws. That's a hell of a stance for such a defender of state's rights...

 

[Iceweasel]

Fake meme?

Yeah fake. (not just a 55 second clip of a half hour speech.)

Man alive....only a progressive could deny video.

Only a pseudo-con could believe the lies from the talking head based on a few second clip compared listening to the entire speech and making up their own minds.....

Can you say intentional dumbing down?

Retard.
If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that.

 

[Silhouette]

Until you get that pesky Civil Rights Act repealed, you're just sniveling in the internet about state and local laws. That's a hell of a stance for such a defender of state's rights...

From a perspective of a homosexual, that Act was just repealed this year: Hively v Ivy Tech. Read my last post. Sexual behavior is now not legally equal to race or gender.

 

[Seawytch]

Oregon was the State that passed the PA law that included protection for the LGBT community. This is a States Rights issue.

...because it isn't a constitutional one.

Right, because the SC has already set the precedent that the state can protect the LBGT community with PA laws.

You missed the point entirely. They needed the PA laws because it wasn't in the constitution. There isn't anything to prevent them but that isn't the point. Freedom of association and religious freedom is constitutional but political correctness has overridden it. Like they did with abortion.

The issue isn't about Freedom of association or Religion. It's strictly business.

That is the issue. You think you are God and can determine others' values for them. You do so because you are a control freak leftist and those like you had to create laws apart from the Constitution, which does protect association and religion. You would force a Jew to bake a Nazi cake so that makes you the Nazi.

In business we can. We told racists they had to serve blacks and interracial couples despite it being against their religion.

 

[Iceweasel]

Only a pseudo-con could believe the lies from the talking head based on a few second clip compared listening to the entire speech and making up their own minds.....

Can you say intentional dumbing down?

Here's the thing buttercup...I was listening live on XM radio in my office when Obama gave that speech. I heard the entire thing and I nearly fell out of my chair when he said "if you have a business, you didn't build that".

So you're just stupid? Is that it Sweet Pea?

Typical leftist. Lie and when you can't get away with it insult and blame the others.

 

[Syriusly]

The issue isn't about Freedom of association or Religion. It's strictly business.

That is the issue. You think you are God and can determine others' values for them. You do so because you are a control freak leftist and those like you had to create laws apart from the Constitution, which does protect association and religion. You would force a Jew to bake a Nazi cake so that makes you the Nazi.

Thinking a bakery shop open to the public, should bake a cake for a customer is hardly worthy of being call a supernatural creature.


Wheeeeeeee


I got called a Nazi too.

I couldn't understand what you were trying to say. The bottom line is that you want to force your values onto others. That makes you an authoritarian.

I want cars to stop for a red light.

Apparently that makes me an 'authoritarian'

Because I think people should follow the law.

Whoooosh. The conversation is WAY over your head.

Bottom line is that I believe people should obey the law.

You think that Christian's get a special exemption from obeying the law.

 

[Silhouette]

Bottom line is that I believe people should obey the law.

You think that Christian's get a special exemption from obeying the law.

Then your gay graphic designers had better get busy printing huge highway billboard signs that read "Homosexuality is a sin unto God" or get ready to be fined and have their licenses revoked...And that Jewish baker better bake that "nazi-pride celebration day!" cake...or else!

 

[Iceweasel]

...because it isn't a constitutional one.

Right, because the SC has already set the precedent that the state can protect the LBGT community with PA laws.

You missed the point entirely. They needed the PA laws because it wasn't in the constitution. There isn't anything to prevent them but that isn't the point. Freedom of association and religious freedom is constitutional but political correctness has overridden it. Like they did with abortion.

The issue isn't about Freedom of association or Religion. It's strictly business.

That is the issue. You think you are God and can determine others' values for them. You do so because you are a control freak leftist and those like you had to create laws apart from the Constitution, which does protect association and religion. You would force a Jew to bake a Nazi cake so that makes you the Nazi.

In business we can. We told racists they had to serve blacks and interracial couples despite it being against their religion.

Homosexuality isn't a race. Nobody knows who you diddle unless you make it their business. If you make it their business and it's objectionable then you should leave. You are so fucked up you can't tell the difference between sexual preferences and race.

 

[Syriusly]

I couldn't understand what you were trying to say. The bottom line is that you want to force your values onto others. That makes you an authoritarian.

Telling a company which bakes cakes for weddings that they cannot discriminate against gay customers is not "forcing your beliefs on others". That would be forcing the bakers to marry gays. No one is doing that. All they are being required to do is to bake the ******* cake.

Wrong. If it's against your religion or morals to participate in the lie that like gender relationships are equal to opposite gender then the government has gone well beyond the founder's intent. It must be rolled back, the leftists have gone too far.

'well beyond the founder's intent'

Allowing mixed race couples to marry was 'well beyond the founder's intent.

We damn leftists have gone too far.

 

[Iceweasel]

That is the issue. You think you are God and can determine others' values for them. You do so because you are a control freak leftist and those like you had to create laws apart from the Constitution, which does protect association and religion. You would force a Jew to bake a Nazi cake so that makes you the Nazi.

Thinking a bakery shop open to the public, should bake a cake for a customer is hardly worthy of being call a supernatural creature.


Wheeeeeeee


I got called a Nazi too.

I couldn't understand what you were trying to say. The bottom line is that you want to force your values onto others. That makes you an authoritarian.

I want cars to stop for a red light.

Apparently that makes me an 'authoritarian'

Because I think people should follow the law.

Whoooosh. The conversation is WAY over your head.

Bottom line is that I believe people should obey the law.

You think that Christian's get a special exemption from obeying the law.

Bottom line, you're a hypocrite. The law is the law unless we don't like it. The dishonesty is the worse crime against humanity.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Example #1: A Jewish baker has a nazi walk in, plain clothes, no identifying features on his person that he's a nazi. The nazi asks the Jew to bake him a yellow cake with chocolate frosting; maybe some sprinkles on top and a rose or something. The Jew bakes him the cake and nobody is the wiser.

No violation of the law there.

Example #2: A Jewish baker has a nazi walk in, wearing a swastika armband and asks the Jew to make him a cake with a swastika emblem frosted on top with the caption "Happy Nazi-Pride Day!". The Jew refuses, as is his right. The nazi here is inviting the Jew to be party to celebrating something the Jew is loathe to do from deep personal convictions. Even when the Jew isn't citing his religious objections; because in the Torah, there's nothing stated about "you must not associate with nazis under pain of eternal damnation". Yet nobody but the nazis would contest the Jew was in his rights to refuse.

No violation of the law their becasue Nazi's are one of the groups protected under Public Accommodation laws.

Example #1a: A Christian baker has a gay man walk in his shop, plain clothes, no identifying features on his person that he is gay. Even if he did identify he was gay, it wouldn't matter because to a Christian, it's "hate the sin, not the sinner". The gay asks the Christian to bake him a cake, strawberry, with vanilla icing. Maybe some chocolate chips on top with some irises frosted. The Christian bakes him the cake without violating his faith.

No violation of the law there.

Example #2a: A Christian baker has two gay men walk in his shop, hanging all over each other, snuggling and kissing on the mouth. They ask the Christian baker to bake them a wedding cake that says "Happy Marriage, Adam & Steve". The Christian refuses, as is his right. The homosexuals here are inviting the Christian to be party to celebrating something the Christian is loathe to do from deep personal convictions. Yet there is something mentioned directly in the Bible about facilitating the spread of homosexuality as a cultural value; under pain of eternal damnation of the Christian's soul. His passive refusal is his right because this is no longer about an individual homosexual; it's about promoting homosexuality as a new cultural value: which is strictly forbidden by the New Testament of Jesus Christ in Jude 1.

1. The Cyers didn't walk into the baker's shop hanging all over each other or kissing.

2. Refusing to provides the same goods and services as normally afforded to other customers is a violation of the law as we saw the Klien's loose in court and upon appeal.

Since both nazism and homosexuality are behaviors;

Nazism isn't protected by Oregon's Public Accommodation law. Other behaviors are such as religion and marital status, along with sexual orientation (behavior being your description which is wrong).

And, if a gay baker wanted to refuse to bake a cake for a Christian celebration; it would be his right as well.

No it's not. It's a violation of Oregon Law regarding Public Accommodation and Federal law to refuse service based on the religion of the customer.

If his deepest beliefs are "Christianity is an affront to my personal beliefs!", he'd be in his right to refuse. He'd go broke of course. But that is his choice to make.

Nope. That avenue was tried by Piggie Park Enterprises to argue that serving blacks was against thier religion. DIdn't matter that it might have been their "personal beliefs". They still lost.


>>>>

 

[Silhouette]

'well beyond the founder's intent'

Allowing mixed race couples to marry was 'well beyond the founder's intent.

We damn leftists have gone too far.

Hively v Ivy Tech (2016) says that you no longer can make a civil rights comparison between race and sexual behaviors...

 

[Syriusly]

Fake meme?

Yeah fake. (not just a 55 second clip of a half hour speech.)

Man alive....only a progressive could deny video.

Man alive....only right wing nut jobs believe that if its on Youtube it must be true....

 

[Seawytch]

I couldn't understand what you were trying to say. The bottom line is that you want to force your values onto others. That makes you an authoritarian.

Telling a company which bakes cakes for weddings that they cannot discriminate against gay customers is not "forcing your beliefs on others". That would be forcing the bakers to marry gays. No one is doing that. All they are being required to do is to bake the ******* cake.

Wrong. If it's against your religion or morals to participate in the lie that like gender relationships are equal to opposite gender then the government has gone well beyond the founder's intent. It must be rolled back, the leftists have gone too far.

So telling racists they had to serve blacks wasn't too far but telling anti gay bigots they have to serve gays is?

 

[Iceweasel]

I couldn't understand what you were trying to say. The bottom line is that you want to force your values onto others. That makes you an authoritarian.

Telling a company which bakes cakes for weddings that they cannot discriminate against gay customers is not "forcing your beliefs on others". That would be forcing the bakers to marry gays. No one is doing that. All they are being required to do is to bake the ******* cake.

Wrong. If it's against your religion or morals to participate in the lie that like gender relationships are equal to opposite gender then the government has gone well beyond the founder's intent. It must be rolled back, the leftists have gone too far.

'well beyond the founder's intent'

Allowing mixed race couples to marry was 'well beyond the founder's intent.

We damn leftists have gone too far.

Liar. First, sexuality isn't a race no matter how many times you stupid deranged assholes make the assertion. The 3/5th rule was to get slave states onboard and wasn't about marriage.

 

[Syriusly]

Gays can go to the bakery and buy any ******* cake they want. Stick their own figures on top of it and instant wedding cake. No one has ever stopped them.

The couple in this bakery did just that.

They went to the bakery- and the baker refused to sell them the cake.

 

[Iceweasel]

I couldn't understand what you were trying to say. The bottom line is that you want to force your values onto others. That makes you an authoritarian.

Telling a company which bakes cakes for weddings that they cannot discriminate against gay customers is not "forcing your beliefs on others". That would be forcing the bakers to marry gays. No one is doing that. All they are being required to do is to bake the ******* cake.

Wrong. If it's against your religion or morals to participate in the lie that like gender relationships are equal to opposite gender then the government has gone well beyond the founder's intent. It must be rolled back, the leftists have gone too far.

So telling racists they had to serve blacks wasn't too far but telling anti gay bigots they have to serve gays is?

I explained that to you at a toddler level numerous times. You have the mental ability of a 5 year old.

 

[Syriusly]

Gays can go to the bakery and buy any ******* cake they want. Stick their own figures on top of it and instant wedding cake. No one has ever stopped them.

Do they offer Wedding Cakes to the public? Well, 'did they' I guess is the appropriate term.........

Wedding cakes are offered as part of a separate and private contract. No one has ever prevented or even objected to gays going into any bakery and buying anything they want. The bakers are complaining about being forced into a contract against their will.
.

Public Accommodation laws have been around since 1964. Restaurant owners were told that they couldn't refuse service to blacks or Jews or Mexicans.

That must really piss you off that those restuarant owners 'rights' were violated for the last 50 years.