Colorado baker told to bake that cake

[dblack]

It can’t be discriminatory practice if the baker doesn’t offer same sex wedding cakes regardless what the sexuality of the couple is!

It's totally discriminatory. And I vehemently disagree with the baker's bigotry. I wouldn't do business with someone like that.

But we're all entitled to have our biases and preferences, and to act on them. To me, it's insane to have government going around second guessing our decisions in this regard.

 

[HeyNorm]

It's totally discriminatory. And I vehemently disagree with the baker's bigotry. I wouldn't do business with someone like that.

But we're all entitled to have our biases and preferences, and to act on them. To me, it's insane to have government going around second guessing our decisions in this regard.

Nope, it is the picture of non discriminatory practice.

 

[dblack]

Nope, it is the picture of non discriminatory practice.

So, you think "actual" discrimination should be illegal?

 

[HeyNorm]

So, you think "actual" discrimination should be illegal?

If the baker simply does not offer a product, no discrimination legal or illegal exists.

 

[dblack]

If the baker simply does not offer a product, no discrimination legal or illegal exists.

Ok, whatever. I'm not going to debate with you whether the baker was discriminating. Seems to me pretty obvious he was, but my point is that anti-discrimination laws are overreaching government and violate basic individual rights. You, apparently, think those laws are fine - you just want an exemption for homophobes.

This is why I grimace whenever bigots "thank" my posts that argue against anti-discrimination laws. They don't give a shit about the principles involved, or individual rights, or anything like that. They just don't like queers (or whoever).

Believe me, I'm NOT on your "side".

 

[ThisIsMe]

Not a constitutional issue. You don't have a right to break the law and use religion as an excuse. Otherwise, I would have the right to cut out my ex-boss's heart with an obsidian knife to please the Aztec Deities I just started worshipping last week.

View attachment 755001
Aw, who am I kidding... that guy didn't have heart.




Events he was perfectly willing to make cakes for if they belonged to certain groups (Heterosexuals).



Only after Congress passed a law, which they only passed after SCOTUS ruled that the first Amendment doesn't protect drug use for religious purposes. You kind of made my point. Do you even read your own links.




yet is is illegal. Now, I'd have no problem making it legal, either, as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult. But the point is, we have a law that says that you can't marry more than one person at a time. Period. Full stop.



What's the difference? How do we know that God wasn't talking to David Koresh any more than he was talking to Joseph Smith, Mohammed or Jesus? Maybe God just likes to **** with people and tell them crazy stuff to see how it plays out.

Point was, the Branch Davidians believed that God said they should stockpile guns and give their wives and daughters to Koresh as sex slaves. The government had something to say about that.

View attachment 755002
Winner of the Darwin Award, 1993




Yes, they do. Some religions- get this - even think Gays should be able to get married! So if there is a church somewhere who approves of this, he really doesn't have a leg to stand on to deny them.

Not a constitutional issue. You don't have a right to break the law and use religion as an excuse. Otherwise, I would have the right to cut out my ex-boss's heart with an obsidian knife to please the Aztec Deities I just started worshipping last week.

People like to bring up sacrifices and cannibalism as an argument against religious freedom. I’ll give you and answer you probably are not expecting…and that is: if you belong to a religion that practices that sort of thing, and if you want to offer yourself up as a sacrifice, or as a cannibal sacrifice, as long as you’re willing….have at it. If you don’t want to risk it happening to you…don’t join that religion.

As far as your boss goes, if he’s not part of your religion, then no, you would not be able to cut his heart out.

Just like the nobody is going to force those Muslim truckers to violate their religion by forcing them to help someone else commit a sin, same goes for Phillips.

Events he was perfectly willing to make cakes for if they belonged to certain groups (Heterosexuals).

Again, you are being misleading. There’s no evidence to suggest that he won’t serve gay people for any other reason. If there was, by now, they’d be coming out of the woodwork to accuse him of not serving them…at all.

yet is is illegal. Now, I'd have no problem making it legal, either, as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult. But the point is, we have a law that says that you can't marry more than one person at a time. Period. Full stop.

Yeah, and it’s wrong and should be appealed…government has no business in the bedroom. By the way, why hasn’t anyone proposed that? Polygamy is generally considered to be demeaning to women, which is probably why the law still exists, but, in todays age of freedom to marry whoever you want, I don’t understand why it’s not been brought up. If you are a woman and want to be one of 5 wives, you should be able to.

What's the difference? How do we know that God wasn't talking to David Koresh any more than he was talking to Joseph Smith, Mohammed or Jesus? Maybe God just likes to **** with people and tell them crazy stuff to see how it plays out.

Point was, the Branch Davidians believed that God said they should stockpile guns and give their wives and daughters to Koresh as sex slaves. The government had something to say about that.

Korean thought he was a prophet, I don’t know any place in the Bible that says people should stockpile weapons.

The difference between the two, however, is that cults often tend to portray themselves as messengers of God…people observing a religion just practice what is written in their holy book.

Yes, they do. Some religions- get this - even think Gays should be able to get married! So if there is a church somewhere who approves of this, he really doesn't have a leg to stand on to deny them.

As I’ve said, there are people in certain religions that have different views on things, just like marriage. Odds are, the churches that accept gay marriage don’t actually believe it’s biblical, they probably just accept it as they don’t believe it’s a big deal. That doesn’t mean they are right, or that Phillips is wrong. What does the Bible say about it?

I’m not saying it’s perfect, but I’m not the judge of what other people hold to be religious or not, all I know is the Bible does speak against same sex relations, and Phillips, while not refusing service to same sex couples, just won’t do same sex weddings.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I support public accommodation laws. If there is a cake already on display and a gay couple wants to buy it, then the baker does not have the right to refuse.

I do not support forced speech, however, so demands that the baker CREATE a cake or write something on an existing cake, they should be able to refuse.

 

[JoeB131]

Children who respect the rights of others - something you apparently can't grasp.

The problem is, whenever I hear a wingnut talk about "rights" or "Freedoms" they usually mean the ability of those with wealth and privilege to oppress those without it. they certainly don't mean a woman being able to practice the birth control of her choice or gays to marry who they want.

Ohhh... well, maybe I'm mistaken. Maybe you're polishing up your jackboots at this moment. Or, maybe you're just hoping the government will force your will on others because you don't have the balls to do it yourself.

Quite the contrary, we can't have civilization without order. Me, I find it a pain in the ass when a cop pulls me over for a moving violation. But it would be a LOT worse if we had no traffic laws and Rush Hour looked like a Mad Max movie.

But libertarian children think civilization happens without taxes, laws, and rules.

That's not the point. But I'm sure you know that and are just evading.

No, it's exactly the point. We have rules to govern bakeries that are just as much for the protection of the customer as the baker. And the end of the day, this was a dispute between the baker and the customer, and the baker was in violation of the law.

Yes, and for you, I suppose, the majority should always get its way.

Within reason, yes.

The gall!! Who does he think he is? The government should keep all businesses on a short leash and supervise all their hiring and customer service decisions. And you nitwits whine when people call you socialists.

Bottom line - liberal social engineering has completely jumped the shark. You simply can't control other people the way you'd like, and if you keep trying the whole thing will go down in flames.

Actually, most people support the rights of gays to get services.

Most Americans oppose businesses refusing to serve gay people: Reuters/Ipsos poll

Nearly three quarters of U.S. adults believe that businesses should not have the right on religious grounds to deny services to customers based on their sexual orientation, a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll released on Monday showed.

www.reuters.com

if he refused the right of an interracial couple to get

Joe absolutely kills me!

Shush, the grownups are talking.

 

[HeyNorm]

The problem is, whenever I hear a wingnut talk about "rights" or "Freedoms" they usually mean the ability of those with wealth and privilege to oppress those without it. they certainly don't mean a woman being able to practice the birth control of her choice or gays to marry who they want.



Quite the contrary, we can't have civilization without order. Me, I find it a pain in the ass when a cop pulls me over for a moving violation. But it would be a LOT worse if we had no traffic laws and Rush Hour looked like a Mad Max movie.

But libertarian children think civilization happens without taxes, laws, and rules.


No, it's exactly the point. We have rules to govern bakeries that are just as much for the protection of the customer as the baker. And the end of the day, this was a dispute between the baker and the customer, and the baker was in violation of the law.


Within reason, yes.



Actually, most people support the rights of gays to get services.

Most Americans oppose businesses refusing to serve gay people: Reuters/Ipsos poll

Nearly three quarters of U.S. adults believe that businesses should not have the right on religious grounds to deny services to customers based on their sexual orientation, a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll released on Monday showed.

www.reuters.com

if he refused the right of an interracial couple to get


Shush, the grownups are talking.

Then why do you keep calling me back to the table??????

 

[JoeB131]

People like to bring up sacrifices and cannibalism as an argument against religious freedom. I’ll give you and answer you probably are not expecting…and that is: if you belong to a religion that practices that sort of thing, and if you want to offer yourself up as a sacrifice, or as a cannibal sacrifice, as long as you’re willing….have at it. If you don’t want to risk it happening to you…don’t join that religion.

As far as your boss goes, if he’s not part of your religion, then no, you would not be able to cut his heart out.

You miss the point. The Aztecs didn't sacrifice willing subjects, they sacrificed their enemies. In fact the reason why the other tribes joined the Spanish was that they were sick of the Aztecs killing them en masse.

So if I am exempt from laws that offend my religion, I should be totally able to sacrifice my boss to the Winged Serpent!

Just like the nobody is going to force those Muslim truckers to violate their religion by forcing them to help someone else commit a sin, same goes for Phillips.

nope. Because they weren't suing Philips personally, they were suing Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. A business entity. Businesses aren't people, my friend. (To paraphrase Mitt Romney).

Again, you are being misleading. There’s no evidence to suggest that he won’t serve gay people for any other reason. If there was, by now, they’d be coming out of the woodwork to accuse him of not serving them…at all.

Not relevant.

Yeah, and it’s wrong and should be appealed…government has no business in the bedroom. By the way, why hasn’t anyone proposed that? Polygamy is generally considered to be demeaning to women, which is probably why the law still exists, but, in todays age of freedom to marry whoever you want, I don’t understand why it’s not been brought up. If you are a woman and want to be one of 5 wives, you should be able to.

Except that there's no popular will to change the law.

Korean thought he was a prophet, I don’t know any place in the Bible that says people should stockpile weapons.

The difference between the two, however, is that cults often tend to portray themselves as messengers of God…people observing a religion just practice what is written in their holy book.

Nope. There's no difference at all. The only difference is a religion has gotten to the point where it is established and respected. Koresh was molesting kids, but so was the Catholic Church, and I didn't see anyone storming St. Marks.

As I’ve said, there are people in certain religions that have different views on things, just like marriage. Odds are, the churches that accept gay marriage don’t actually believe it’s biblical, they probably just accept it as they don’t believe it’s a big deal. That doesn’t mean they are right, or that Phillips is wrong. What does the Bible say about it?

If you want to go by what the bible says, you need to stone any of your neighbors who work on Sunday.

I’m not saying it’s perfect, but I’m not the judge of what other people hold to be religious or not, all I know is the Bible does speak against same sex relations, and Phillips, while not refusing service to same sex couples, just won’t do same sex weddings.

Then he needs to go find something else to do for a living.

 

[JoeB131]

Then why do you keep calling me back to the table??????

i don't. YOu keep waiving your arms up and down like an autistic five year old on a sugar rush trying to get attention.

I support public accommodation laws. If there is a cake already on display and a gay couple wants to buy it, then the baker does not have the right to refuse.

I do not support forced speech, however, so demands that the baker CREATE a cake or write something on an existing cake, they should be able to refuse.

Cakes aren't speech. They are a product. No one is 'forcing' him, he opened a shop and offered the services.

You have a right to whatever backwards, bronze age supersitions you want to selectively follow. Your business, however, has to comply with the state laws.

And this protects religious people as much as gay people. Left to your own devices, you'd all be killing each other over whether or not Jesus was made out of wafers.

 

[HeyNorm]

You miss the point. The Aztecs didn't sacrifice willing subjects, they sacrificed their enemies. In fact the reason why the other tribes joined the Spanish was that they were sick of the Aztecs killing them en masse.

So if I am exempt from laws that offend my religion, I should be totally able to sacrifice my boss to the Winged Serpent!



nope. Because they weren't suing Philips personally, they were suing Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. A business entity. Businesses aren't people, my friend. (To paraphrase Mitt Romney).



Not relevant.



Except that there's no popular will to change the law.



Nope. There's no difference at all. The only difference is a religion has gotten to the point where it is established and respected. Koresh was molesting kids, but so was the Catholic Church, and I didn't see anyone storming St. Marks.



If you want to go by what the bible says, you need to stone any of your neighbors who work on Sunday.


Then he needs to go find something else to do for a living.

Let me know when the baker makes a cake for a heterosexual same sex wedding, then you have a case, until then, the baker has not performed a discriminatory practice.

 

[HeyNorm]

i don't. YOu keep waiving your arms up and down like an autistic five year old on a sugar rush trying to get attention.



Cakes aren't speech. They are a product. No one is 'forcing' him, he opened a shop and offered the services.

You have a right to whatever backwards, bronze age supersitions you want to selectively follow. Your business, however, has to comply with the state laws.

And this protects religious people as much as gay people. Left to your own devices, you'd all be killing each other over whether or not Jesus was made out of wafers.

BINGO JOE, and they can’t force him to sell a product his bakery does not offer!

Feel better now?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

BINGO JOE, and they can’t force him to sell a product his bakery does not offer!

Feel better now?

But his bakery offers cakes with multiple colors of icing.

 

[HeyNorm]

But his bakery offers cakes with multiple colors of icing.

He’s never made a self mutilation celebration cake for anyone. It’s a product he does not carry.

 

[Chillicothe]

But libertarian children think civilization happens without taxes, laws, and rules.

That is well said, and succinct too.
Thank you, Joe.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"...and they can’t force him to sell a product his bakery does not offer!"

Yeah, that seems so obvious.

(So let's do this again. After all, we've done it twice in this thread and poor Norm still hasn't gotten the hint)

OK, Norm's baker doesn't offer the cake on the left....because it will be eaten at a wedding for a same sex couple. Duh! That is so obvious.

However, he does offer the cake on the right because it won't be eaten by people at a same-sex wedding.

I cannot conceive how anyone could mistake one for the other.

After all, he doesn't offer the one on the left.....so how could anyone eat it?
And as we know, Norm defines which cake is which by who eats it.

Duh!

Not for Sale .............................For Sale.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

He’s never made a self mutilation celebration cake for anyone. It’s a product he does not carry.

The cake was not mutilated, it merely had two colors of icing. The purpose of the cake once it leaves the bakery is none of the bakers business.

 

[HeyNorm]

That is well said, and succinct too.
Thank you, Joe.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Yeah, that seems so obvious.

(So let's do this again. After all, we've done it twice in this thread and poor Norm still hasn't gotten the hint)

OK, Norm's baker doesn't offer the cake on the left....because it will be eaten at a wedding for a same sex couple. Duh! That is so obvious.

However, he does offer the cake on the right because it won't be eaten by people at a same-sex wedding.

I cannot conceive how anyone could mistake one for the other.

After all, he doesn't offer the one on the left.....so how could anyone eat it?
And as we know, Norm defines which cake is which by who eats it.

Duh!

Not for Sale .............................For Sale.

Easy, one is a product offered in a non discriminatory way.

The other is a product not offered, also in a non discriminatory way.

Hope this helps eases your worried mind.

 

[ThisIsMe]

You miss the point. The Aztecs didn't sacrifice willing subjects, they sacrificed their enemies. In fact the reason why the other tribes joined the Spanish was that they were sick of the Aztecs killing them en masse.

So if I am exempt from laws that offend my religion, I should be totally able to sacrifice my boss to the Winged Serpent!



nope. Because they weren't suing Philips personally, they were suing Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. A business entity. Businesses aren't people, my friend. (To paraphrase Mitt Romney).



Not relevant.



Except that there's no popular will to change the law.



Nope. There's no difference at all. The only difference is a religion has gotten to the point where it is established and respected. Koresh was molesting kids, but so was the Catholic Church, and I didn't see anyone storming St. Marks.



If you want to go by what the bible says, you need to stone any of your neighbors who work on Sunday.


Then he needs to go find something else to do for a living.

Or, the gay couple needs to respect his rights and find another bakery.

As far as the whole Aztec thing goes, they didn’t have a constitution, which says you can practice a religion, or you can not practice a religion. If you take someone against their will and sacrifice them, then you have violated their freedom to not be a part of a religion.

This is often where these arguments devolve. Someone wants to bring up something about canabalism or ritual sacrifice.

So…

Should a halal butcher be forced to process pork products? I know you say no because they don’t do pork products for anyone, but, their job is a butcher, and PA laws mean they have to serve everyone equally, right? So if one guy comes in with a cow to process then the next comes in with a pig, hey..you are a butcher, you process meat, that’s your job, and PA laws say you have to serve everyone equally, so, you must process my pig.

I get it, you, like others here, don’t recognize religious freedom. You believe that someone’s religious freedom ends at their front door, and they should be forced to compromise their beliefs to anyone else who asks them to. I know, you’re going to say “then they shouldn’t own a business”. So, what you are trying to say is that, anyone who has a belief or value system shouldn’t own a business because one day, you may be asked to compromise those values.

Well, there will certainly be a lot fewer businesses to choose from.

We have a constitution, that protects the free exercise of religion. It doesn’t say that you can only practice your religion in your home, or that it has to be confined to a church building. It doesn’t say that you might have to compromise your religion when someone else asks you to, and it doesn’t say that Congress can make laws that directly violate the protections of the constitution. You say that people can’t use freedom of religion (the constitution) to violate PA laws, I say, people can’t make PA laws (or any law), that violates the constitution. If they want to remove freedom of religion, or make any changes, then get an article 5 convention, and change it.

Also, as evidence here many times, people can’t seem to grasp the difference between not serving gay people in general, and not doing specific ceremonies.

You once said that if a Muslim trucking company refused to haul alcohol, that was cool, because they don’t haul alcohol for anyone. Well, the same could be said for Phillips, he doesn’t do gay weddings, for anyone. But then you are going to say “but he bakes cakes for weddings, so he has to do gay wedding”, and then I’ll say “the Muslim trucking company hauls other goods and services, including other beverages, and if I hire them to haul a trailer full of pork, they must do so, right?”

Point is, according to your idea of the PA laws, that Muslim trucking company has to haul any product I ask them to, because they are a freight company, and they cannot refuse my business for any reason.

I disagree, I think religious freedom means you don’t have to do anything that violates your religious beliefs and convictions.

Again, if this man is such an anti gay person, it should be easy to find examples of him turning away gay people for other services, based solely on the fact that they are gay. If you find these, then I’ll agree with you.

 

[HeyNorm]

The cake was not mutilated, it merely had two colors of icing. The purpose of the cake once it leaves the bakery is none of the bakers business.

Cake is simply a human construct. So walking out with an empty box is actually a cake.