Colorado baker told to bake that cake

[Dragonlady]

How about this….if a couple walks in to his bakery and asks him to make a cake for a satanic themed wedding, using satanic symbols and phrases, is he required to bake that cake?

How about this. He shuts his mouth and bakes the cake. If you offer a "custom wedding cake" service, bake the cake.

Americans are always looking for shit to be outraged about.

 

[JoeB131]

Indeed. The disease is Democratic we-know-betterism. It has half the country so fed up they're ready to go with whack job populists to avoid it.

Well, no. Half the country has always been backwards ass, racist, homophobic douchenoodles. This shit has been going on since Tricky Dick, pretty much. It's why I don't waste time really trying to persuade them, because Trump can kill a million people, and the ones who are left will still support him.

 

[JoeB131]

It’s not bigotry to adhere to your religious beliefs. Have you ever heard Phillips say that he hates gay people? Ever? He believes gay marriage is a sin and therefore he cannot be a part of that sin by lending his talents to help someone else commit a sin. The left can’t seem to get past the idea that if someone refuses a gay person, it must be hate….not everything is about hate, and not everyone hates gay people…

Yup, because he's using religion to hide his hate. That's why I don't take it seriously. That, and he doesn't refuse service to other people who are "sinning". If he did, he'd never sell another wedding cake, as 99% of couples have sex before marriage and 75% of them live together before marriage. Add in all the other rules from the Big Book of Bronze Age Fairy Tales, and he'd never sell a wedding cake or any other product, for that matter.

He didn’t break PA laws, he exercised his cotus rights. I’m sorry, no law can force you to give up you cotus protected freedoms.

Except we do that all the time with the polygamy laws, the laws against using drugs in religous ceremonies, the laws against human sacrifice. COTUS doesn't give you the right to break other laws.

And no, you still can’t sacrifice people, unless they grant you the right to do so. You can’t force someone else to participate in your religion.

Um, hey, guy, either the First Amendment is absolute, or it has sensible restrictions. I am sure that even if the sacrifice victim signed all the paperwork, I'd still go to jail for murder. And Philips needs to pay the fine for breaking PA Laws.

It doesn’t matter, your trying to make a point that PA laws supersede religious freedoms, so that means I should be able to walk into any business and force them to violate their religious beliefs, right?

And once again, this whole thing is not about a cake….it’s about Phillips feeling that him doing a service specifically for a gay wedding would be akin to him helping someone else commit a sin, just like the Muslim truckers wouldn’t haul alcohol because Islam believes that them transporting alcohol is helping someone else commit a sin.

If they have a business that offers service, then I expect that service when I walk in, I don't care if they are offended by anything else I do, or who I am. That's there hangup. If they don't want to associate with "Those people", then they shouldn't have a business.

Which is still a part of the celebration.

But not part of the ceremony, so the religious claim fails. Not that it ever has any merit.

Good, I would hope you wouldn’t deny them, cause as far as I’m aware, the Bible doesn’t preach against Mormons. Also, why do you hate them?

Because they are a creepy ass cult started by a child molester...
Do you know the difference between Joseph Smith and David Koresh? Original and Extra Crispy!
Ah, if only we had the ATF in 1845.

No, not at all, he’s just observing his faith. Also, prove that he did anything out of hate….again, the left is fixated on this idea that if you deny a gay person, that it has to be hate, so, I ask again, prove it was hate, show me his history of hateful rhetoric towards gay people, show me anywhere where he said he won’t serve gay people because he hates them.

Here's the thing about Public Accommodation laws. You don't have to prove it was about hate. You cannot deny someone service based on their race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, national origin or physical ability. Period. Full stop. You have a perfectly valid first amendment right to hate gays or Mormons, or just merely disagree with their practices, but your business doesn't have a right to deny them service you provide to other people.

What Islamophobia? At what point have I said anything against Muslims. What, because I bring them up as an example of how people wouldn’t expect them to surrender their religious rights, but they do for Christian’s? This is one of the major problems with the left, that if you disagree with them on something, they immediately start throwing out baseless accusations

Except it's not Muslims who are whining about their religious freedoms being lost. Muslims are just happy when no one firebombs their mosques.

No, he spent hundreds of thousands of dollars defending his cotus rights from leftist attacks and court cases…something he should not have to do. The fact that he IS spending that money should tell you how convicted he is to his religious rights. If this was only about hate against gay people, he would have given in long ago, rather than spend all this money, if it wasn’t about religious freedom and only about hate.

Nope, it's about using religion to promulgate hate. Even the court wasn't willing to go that far, because if you can start using religion as an excuse to ignore laws, you'll have chaos. So they punted.

Ahh, so if you’re religious, just keep your cotus protected rights behind closed doors….ok then…then maybe gay people should also keep their rights behind closed doors..I mean, why can a gay person be gay openly, but a religious person has to be religious silently?

Oh, if gay people are having sex out in the open, I would arrest them for lewd behavior, just like I would straight people.

But, yeah, keep your backwards superstitions in your homes and churches. Because the minute you let people start imposing their backwards Bronze Age superstitions on the rest of us, that's when you lose "Freedom". Eventually you guys start killing each other off over whether or not Jesus was really made of wafers or not.

As far as gay people being able to practice openly. Within my lifetime, I've seen a coworker fired after the manager found out she was gay, and that was totally legal in Illinois at the time. I've seen gay people I know beaten up, and the police didn't take it terribly seriously. So when someone whines that he has to bake a cake which he will be paid a ridiculous amount of money for, I just can't get terrible upset about it.

Incorrect, starting a business doesn’t mean you have to give up your rights, his business offered to sell cakes to gay people, he’ll, I think he even eluded to the fact that he would even bake cakes for gay people..for birthdays and other stuff, just not for weddings. In either case, his business said it will do business with gay people, but he himself, cannot be forced to give up his cotus rights, no matter what law, or what business he operates.

Then gay people should keep suing him until he's out of business, then he won't ever have to worry about dealing with the nasty gay people again. Problem solved.

Look, just admit, you hate Christian’s, and you think religious freedom is wrong, as you’ve stated several times, “the superstitious…” whatever….you don’t believe in other peoples rights, just your own. You don’t think people who disagree with your world view are deserving of rights…just bow down to your whims, because nobody else’s rights matter …

I do think it will be a happy day when the last church closes it's doors due to lack of interest and the last priest has to get an honest job. When Jesus is cast on the same pile of mythical figures as Hercules and Osiris. Sadly, as long as people have an irrational fear of death, the religious hucksters will have their day.

I do have a dream of having a religion license. I mean, we license massage therapists and doctors and dog kennels... We should have a religion license for churches so that no false churches are leading people astray! .

Here's how you get a religion license. Your head minister brings his bible and doctrine and application to our office at the top of the Sears Tower in Chicago. We then throw him out the window, and if God catches him on the way down, he has a legitimate religion.

Any takers?

Fortunately, our founding fathers saw it differently.

Do you think I care what a bunch of dead slave rapists used to think. They also thought that bleeding was a good medical treatment and shitting in a chamber pot was nifty.

Me, I like that we've moved beyond bronze age superstitions, have solid medical treatment and effective sanitation.

 

[dblack]

Well, no. Half the country has always been backwards ass, racist, homophobic douchenoodles. This shit has been going on since Tricky Dick, pretty much. It's why I don't waste time really trying to persuade them, because Trump can kill a million people, and the ones who are left will still support him.

A country can't survive with that kind of division. Democracy can't survive. But you know, stay the course! Keep pushing.

 

[ThisIsMe]

The reason for the cake is for the ancient cultural celebration...... a wedding.
A marriage of two like minded souls who wish to dedicate their lives to each other....to the concept of 'together'.
And 'wedding cakes' have long been part of that celebration.

No disagreement there, but Phillips religious views are that same sex couples are against his religion, and therefore working in service to a same sex wedding would be akin to helping them commit something against his religion.

 

[JoeB131]

No disagreement there, but Phillips religious views are that same sex couples are against his religion, and therefore working in service to a same sex wedding would be akin to helping them commit something against his religion.

Then he should close down his bakery and find something to do for a living that won't offend his religious sensibilities.

 

[HeyNorm]

The reason for the cake is for the ancient cultural celebration...... a wedding.
A marriage of two like minded souls who wish to dedicate their lives to each other....to the concept of 'together'.
And 'wedding cakes' have long been part of that celebration.

You spouting traditions on a thread about same sex weddings?

Amazing. So we should observe traditions now?

A bother pile of you just can’t make up.

 

[HeyNorm]

Then he should close down his bakery and find something to do for a living that won't offend his religious sensibilities.

Or the customer just leave when it finds out that the Baker doesn’t offer the product.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Yup, because he's using religion to hide his hate. That's why I don't take it seriously. That, and he doesn't refuse service to other people who are "sinning". If he did, he'd never sell another wedding cake, as 99% of couples have sex before marriage and 75% of them live together before marriage. Add in all the other rules from the Big Book of Bronze Age Fairy Tales, and he'd never sell a wedding cake or any other product, for that matter.



Except we do that all the time with the polygamy laws, the laws against using drugs in religous ceremonies, the laws against human sacrifice. COTUS doesn't give you the right to break other laws.



Um, hey, guy, either the First Amendment is absolute, or it has sensible restrictions. I am sure that even if the sacrifice victim signed all the paperwork, I'd still go to jail for murder. And Philips needs to pay the fine for breaking PA Laws.



If they have a business that offers service, then I expect that service when I walk in, I don't care if they are offended by anything else I do, or who I am. That's there hangup. If they don't want to associate with "Those people", then they shouldn't have a business.


But not part of the ceremony, so the religious claim fails. Not that it ever has any merit.


Because they are a creepy ass cult started by a child molester...
Do you know the difference between Joseph Smith and David Koresh? Original and Extra Crispy!
Ah, if only we had the ATF in 1845.



Here's the thing about Public Accommodation laws. You don't have to prove it was about hate. You cannot deny someone service based on their race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, national origin or physical ability. Period. Full stop. You have a perfectly valid first amendment right to hate gays or Mormons, or just merely disagree with their practices, but your business doesn't have a right to deny them service you provide to other people.



Except it's not Muslims who are whining about their religious freedoms being lost. Muslims are just happy when no one firebombs their mosques.



Nope, it's about using religion to promulgate hate. Even the court wasn't willing to go that far, because if you can start using religion as an excuse to ignore laws, you'll have chaos. So they punted.



Oh, if gay people are having sex out in the open, I would arrest them for lewd behavior, just like I would straight people.

But, yeah, keep your backwards superstitions in your homes and churches. Because the minute you let people start imposing their backwards Bronze Age superstitions on the rest of us, that's when you lose "Freedom". Eventually you guys start killing each other off over whether or not Jesus was really made of wafers or not.

As far as gay people being able to practice openly. Within my lifetime, I've seen a coworker fired after the manager found out she was gay, and that was totally legal in Illinois at the time. I've seen gay people I know beaten up, and the police didn't take it terribly seriously. So when someone whines that he has to bake a cake which he will be paid a ridiculous amount of money for, I just can't get terrible upset about it.

View attachment 755935



Then gay people should keep suing him until he's out of business, then he won't ever have to worry about dealing with the nasty gay people again. Problem solved.



I do think it will be a happy day when the last church closes it's doors due to lack of interest and the last priest has to get an honest job. When Jesus is cast on the same pile of mythical figures as Hercules and Osiris. Sadly, as long as people have an irrational fear of death, the religious hucksters will have their day.

I do have a dream of having a religion license. I mean, we license massage therapists and doctors and dog kennels... We should have a religion license for churches so that no false churches are leading people astray! .

Here's how you get a religion license. Your head minister brings his bible and doctrine and application to our office at the top of the Sears Tower in Chicago. We then throw him out the window, and if God catches him on the way down, he has a legitimate religion.

Any takers?



Do you think I care what a bunch of dead slave rapists used to think. They also thought that bleeding was a good medical treatment and shitting in a chamber pot was nifty.

Me, I like that we've moved beyond bronze age superstitions, have solid medical treatment and effective sanitation.

Yup, because he's using religion to hide his hate.

I’ve asked you several times now, show me the proof it’s based in hate. In your opinion, if anyone denies a gay person, it’s hate? I could easily say your attack on Phillips is hate.

That, and he doesn't refuse service to other people who are "sinning". If he did, he'd never sell another wedding cake, as 99% of couples have sex before marriage and 75% of them live together before marriage.

Again, you have no proof of that. You have no proof that he knows the situation of people when they walk into his shop, unless they tell him.

Nobody waking through his door is going to ask him to bake a cake celebrating their living together, or having had sex before marriage, if they did, he might likely refuse that as well.

Phillips isn’t refusing them because they are gay, he’s refusing them because they want him to make a cake for a gay wedding.

Except we do that all the time with the polygamy laws, the laws against using drugs in religous ceremonies, the laws against human sacrifice. COTUS doesn't give you the right to break other laws.

Polygamy laws are wrong, I think you should be able to marry as many people as you want.

The courts ruled that native tribes are allowed to use peyote for religious reasons when on tribal land.

as far as sacrifice or any of these other laws, if you have a problem with them, then it is your right to petition the government to change them. If the members of a religion that practice willing human sacrafice want to make a case to the government for their right to do so, then they have that right to do so.

As far as I’m aware, there are currently no religions that exist in the United States that practice human sacrifice, if they ever do come to America, the we can revisit this topic then.

Of course, you lefty’s always like to bring up extreme examples as a way of trying to sway the argument, so, I’m a fair person…if you want willing human sacrifice in this country, feel free to voice your grievance to our government for not allowing it, but saying that one religious freedom is wrong because another is not allowed is wrong also…the cotus is clear and you have the freedom to practice your religion so if you feel your religion is not being fairly trested, then you have a process to do something about it.

Um, hey, guy, either the First Amendment is absolute, or it has sensible restrictions. I am sure that even if the sacrifice victim signed all the paperwork, I'd still go to jail for murder. And Philips needs to pay the fine for breaking PA Laws.

I’m sure you would, and if you are a member of a religion that exists in America and you feel that your cotus rights are being infringed, you have a right to petition the government for the redress of grievances. You want to compare human sacrifice to someone not wanting to participate in a gay wedding, is strange..but hey, I believe in fairness and the cotus is absolute, so, you are correct, if your religion prescribed human sacrifices and you feel you are being denied your religious rights, the feel free to let your representatives know about it.

If they have a business that offers service, then I expect that service when I walk in, I don't care if they are offended by anything else I do, or who I am. That's there hangup. If they don't want to associate with "Those people", then they shouldn't have a business.

And once again, you think that PA laws can override the cotus. You also think that being a business owner means you have to give up your protected freedoms. You also use “those people” in quotes as you know the mindset of Phillips and that he was using hate as the basis for his decision. Again, just because someone does something doesn’t mean it was out of hate. For all we know, Phillips himself may not have a problem with gay weddings….but the religion he follows does.. you are making assumptions about his reasonings, which is why I said, find us evidence of the hate, of the prior anti gay rhetoric that should be found all over his social media.

But not part of the ceremony, so the religious claim fails. Not that it ever has any merit.

The reception is not part of a wedding? Not part of the celebration?

Because they are a creepy ass cult started by a child molester...
Do you know the difference between Joseph Smith and David Koresh? Original and Extra Crispy!
Ah, if only we had the ATF in 1845.

No, I don’t know anything about Joseph smith..does the Mormon religion advocate for child moleststion? If so, the I understand the hate, but that still doesn’t have anything to do with Phillips.

Here's the thing about Public Accommodation laws. You don't have to prove it was about hate. You cannot deny someone service based on their race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, national origin or physical ability. Period. Full stop. You have a perfectly valid first amendment right to hate gays or Mormons, or just merely disagree with their practices, but your business doesn't have a right to deny them service you provide to other people.

ok….are you suggesting that our congress can make laws that contradict the cotus? Let’s just answer that question.

Except it's not Muslims who are whining about their religious freedoms being lost. Muslims are just happy when no one firebombs their mosques.

Yeah, because nobody is challenging them like they are for Christian’s, nobody is asking them to violate their religious freedoms. Let’s see the courts start trying to force Muslims to violate their religion, and you’ll start seeing the complaints.

Nope, it's about using religion to promulgate hate. Even the court wasn't willing to go that far, because if you can start using religion as an excuse to ignore laws, you'll have chaos. So they punted.

Nobody is suggesting you use religion to ignore laws, but people are wanting the courts to uphold people religious freedom. And again, you use the word “hate”, and I ask again, show the hate. Just because someone disagrees with someone doesn’t mean hate is involved. Left wing media certainly has done a good job of promoting that though…hmm..come to think of it, your assertion of that is actually….bigotry..and prejudice….

Oh, if gay people are having sex out in the open, I would arrest them for lewd behavior, just like I would straight people.

But, yeah, keep your backwards superstitions in your homes and churches. Because the minute you let people start imposing their backwards Bronze Age superstitions on the rest of us, that's when you lose "Freedom". Eventually you guys start killing each other off over whether or not Jesus was really made of wafers or not.

This has nothing to do with sex out in the open….is Phillips having sex out in the open? ANYONE who does that would be arrested. We’re not talking about sex, we’re talking about the right to openly practice a cotus protected freedom, so, if you say people must practice their cotus protected rights behind closed doors, the I guess that means gay people should also practice their rights behind closed doors. Don’t try to move the goal post on the argument….

Because the minute you let people start imposing their backwards Bronze Age superstitions on the rest of us, that's when you lose "Freedom".

Ahh, but it’s ok to impose your lifestyle on someone else and violate their cotus rights…and THATS freedom?

As far as gay people being able to practice openly. Within my lifetime, I've seen a coworker fired after the manager found out she was gay, and that was totally legal in Illinois at the time. I've seen gay people I know beaten up, and the police didn't take it terribly seriously. So when someone whines that he has to bake a cake which he will be paid a ridiculous amount of money for, I just can't get terrible upset about it.

Yeah, it’s a good thing laws and civil rights have advanced since….the 70’s? Regardless, those peoples rights were violated, and it was WRONG, but here you are, completely willing to violate someone’s rights, because you don’t like them….that too is wrong.


I don’t know what your meme is supposed to represent. Someone is being asked to give up their cotus rights? Sure, that could be considered oppression. Equality is being able to be openly gay in America as well as being able to observe your religious practices. Oppression is when you try to observe your cotus rights, and you get sued for it and the courts side with the plaintiff, against your rights.

Then gay people should keep suing him until he's out of business, then he won't ever have to worry about dealing with the nasty gay people again. Problem solved.

Ahh, now that would be hate, suing someone out of spite because they wouldn’t give up their rights.

So, he should counter sue for harassment and defamation

I do have a dream of having a religion license. I mean, we license massage therapists and doctors and dog kennels... We should have a religion license for churches so that no false churches are leading people astray! .

Here's how you get a religion license. Your head minister brings his bible and doctrine and application to our office at the top of the Sears Tower in Chicago. We then throw him out the window, and if God catches him on the way down, he has a legitimate religion.

Any takers?

Well, at least we know your hatred for religion and the people who practice it is firm. You know what I didn’t hear in that paragraph? Your rebuttal to my assertion that you don’t care about anyone else’s rights but your own, and those who you agree with, which actually puts this whole argument into perspective…..

Do you think I care what a bunch of dead slave rapists used to think. They also thought that bleeding was a good medical treatment and shitting in a chamber pot was nifty.

Me, I like that we've moved beyond bronze age superstitions, have solid medical treatment and effective sanitation.

No, it’s obviously clear that you don’t care what anybody else thinks, you don’t care about rights, or the constitution, sincerely held religious beliefs, and the right to observe and practice them. You only care about what you want and what you believe, and you apparently think everyone else should cater to what you and the lefty’s want.

Here’s the deal, you have the tools to get whatever you want. Get enough states to call an article 5 convention and you can change and amend the cotus as much as you want.

 

[ThisIsMe]

How about this. He shuts his mouth and bakes the cake. If you offer a "custom wedding cake" service, bake the cake.

Americans are always looking for shit to be outraged about.

Americans are always looking for shit to be outraged about.

I know! And the right has to defend people cotus rights when the left starts spouting that outrage.

How about this. He shuts his mouth and bakes the cake. If you offer a "custom wedding cake" service, bake the cake.

How about this, there are probably several other bakeries in the area without religious objections, so, when you find someone exercising a cotus religious right, move on to another bakery and stop harassing them into giving up their rights.

 

[JoeB131]

Or the customer just leave when it finds out that the Baker doesn’t offer the product.

Shush, the grownups are talking.

I could easily say your attack on Phillips is hate

Polygamy laws are wrong, I think you should be able to marry as many people as you want.

Actually, there are good reasons for them, mostly to protect women from abuse.

The courts ruled that native tribes are allowed to use peyote for religious reasons when on tribal land.

Why just on tribal land? Why shouldn't I be able to smoke Peyote as part of my religion if I leave the reservation (essentially, government concentration camps, anyway.)

as far as sacrifice or any of these other laws, if you have a problem with them, then it is your right to petition the government to change them.

No, you keep missing the point. We have murder laws for a good reason. We have PA laws for a good reason. Your belief in your imaginary sky friend should not be a good reason to break them.

For all we know, Phillips himself may not have a problem with gay weddings….but the religion he follows does.. you are making assumptions about his reasonings, which is why I said, find us evidence of the hate, of the prior anti gay rhetoric that should be found all over his social media.

nope. He broke the law. Done. I could care less about the reason.

Just like if I find you with a bloody ax and a dead hooker in your truck, I don't really have to determine what your motives were.

No, I don’t know anything about Joseph smith..does the Mormon religion advocate for child moleststion?

Joseph Smith and other founders of Mormonism engaged in polygamy with underage girls. Read a book.

We’re not talking about sex, we’re talking about the right to openly practice a cotus protected freedom, so, if you say people must practice their cotus protected rights behind closed doors, the I guess that means gay people should also practice their rights behind closed doors. Don’t try to move the goal post on the argument….

Actually, most companies have "No Protolyzing" rules. Which means you can't go around screaming about Jesus to your coworkers because that is considered a hostile work environment.

Well, at least we know your hatred for religion and the people who practice it is firm. You know what I didn’t hear in that paragraph? Your rebuttal to my assertion that you don’t care about anyone else’s rights but your own, and those who you agree with, which actually puts this whole argument into perspective…..

I'm going to break this to you gently. THere are no rights. Any fool who thinks he has rights needs to look up "Japanese Americans, 1942". There are merely the privileges that society thinks you should have because they are fairly reasonable.

No, it’s obviously clear that you don’t care what anybody else thinks, you don’t care about rights, or the constitution, sincerely held religious beliefs, and the right to observe and practice them. You only care about what you want and what you believe, and you apparently think everyone else should cater to what you and the lefty’s want.

Here’s the deal, you have the tools to get whatever you want. Get enough states to call an article 5 convention and you can change and amend the cotus as much as you want.

Nope, we can keep crushing the religious assholes with the laws we have now. And when they get tired of spending money and looking like assholes on a national stage, they will knock this shit the **** off.

 

[dblack]

We've got to stop using government to fight the culture wars. That's cheating..

 

[HeyNorm]

Shush, the grownups are talking.




Actually, there are good reasons for them, mostly to protect women from abuse.


Why just on tribal land? Why shouldn't I be able to smoke Peyote as part of my religion if I leave the reservation (essentially, government concentration camps, anyway.)


No, you keep missing the point. We have murder laws for a good reason. We have PA laws for a good reason. Your belief in your imaginary sky friend should not be a good reason to break them.



nope. He broke the law. Done. I could care less about the reason.

Just like if I find you with a bloody ax and a dead hooker in your truck, I don't really have to determine what your motives were.



Joseph Smith and other founders of Mormonism engaged in polygamy with underage girls. Read a book.


Actually, most companies have "No Protolyzing" rules. Which means you can't go around screaming about Jesus to your coworkers because that is considered a hostile work environment.



I'm going to break this to you gently. THere are no rights. Any fool who thinks he has rights needs to look up "Japanese Americans, 1942". There are merely the privileges that society thinks you should have because they are fairly reasonable.



Nope, we can keep crushing the religious assholes with the laws we have now. And when they get tired of spending money and looking like assholes on a national stage, they will knock this shit the **** off.

Joe, when you coming out of the closet. You are putting a lot of effort into this.

Your hate of religion and heterosexuality is obvious.

 

[JoeB131]

Joe, when you

Shush, the grownups are talking.

We've got to stop using government to fight the culture wars. That's cheating..

Quite the contrary, it's better than the alternative.

The alternative would be each side using force to impose their will.

The alternative would be after the Homophobic Baker refuses to bake the cake, an angry mob of gays storm his store, burn it down and dress him in a pink tutu.

But this funny thing. Because we have government as an arbiter, they can't burn down his store, and he has to actually provide the services promised.

Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

The problem with so-called Libertarians, is that they are perfectly fine with a government that enforces their privileges and protects their property, but not the other guy.

 

[dblack]

Shush, the grownups are talking.




Quite the contrary, it's better than the alternative.

The alternative is voluntary association. I don't think state coercion is better.

 

[HeyNorm]

Shush, the grownups are talking.




Quite the contrary, it's better than the alternative.

The alternative would be each side using force to impose their will.

The alternative would be after the Homophobic Baker refuses to bake the cake, an angry mob of gays storm his store, burn it down and dress him in a pink tutu.

But this funny thing. Because we have government as an arbiter, they can't burn down his store, and he has to actually provide the services promised.

Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

The problem with so-called Libertarians, is that they are perfectly fine with a government that enforces their privileges and protects their property, but not the other guy.

Joe, Joe, Joe. Only until you provide proof he provided a cake for a straight same sex couples wedding, you continued with no proof the baker acted in a discriminatory manner.

You gays sure don’t get it.

 

[JoeB131]

The alternative is voluntary association. I don't think state coercion is better.

Voluntary association usually favors the privileged. No thank you, I want recourse if I feel I've been wronged.

Joe, Joe, Joe.

Shush, the grownups are talking. Not that I consider Libertarians to be grownups.

 

[airplanemechanic]

The thing about American businesses that operate in the public sector is that they do so under the rubric of public supported...taxpayer.....physical infrastructure, banking regulations, health and food regulations, policing, and myriad other 'public governance' realities.

As such, they are subject to the prevailing desire of that societal-fabric to adhere to the society's mandates......ala'.....no discrimination for color, religion, sexual orientation, and probably some other stuff.

In short, if you want to operate a business in the United States and enjoy and profit from all the public-paid "infrastructure" mechanisms that foster that, well......pay unto Caesar that which is Caesar's.

Meaning, you benefit, therefore you have a duty.

Wrong. They are only limited in discriminating based on age, race, religion, national origin or gender. "Sexual orientation" is not a protected class.

By your definition, everyone lives in the public sector because everyone has to take a public taxpayer funded road to get to their house.

 

[JoeB131]

Wrong. They are only limited in discriminating based on age, race, religion, national origin or gender. "Sexual orientation" is not a protected class.

By your definition, everyone lives in the public sector because everyone has to take a public taxpayer funded road to get to their house.

To a degree, that is true.

Hence why we have public accommodation laws.

The business gets the benefits of fire, police, roads, utilities, infrastructure, and yes, even the internet.
In return, they have to comply with laws to not discriminate against people on the basis of their race, religion, gender, national origin, or sexual orientation.

That sounds completely reasonable to me.

 

[airplanemechanic]

To a degree, that is true.

Hence why we have public accommodation laws.

The business gets the benefits of fire, police, roads, utilities, infrastructure, and yes, even the internet.
In return, they have to comply with laws to not discriminate against people on the basis of their race, religion, gender, national origin, or sexual orientation.

That sounds completely reasonable to me.

Sexual orientation is not part of any protected class. That business pays taxes so they should have the right to serve anyone they please. It's THEIR BUSINESS.

Do you support a muslim business being forced to make a penis cake for a gay wedding? What about a big anus cake with a penis shaped cake going into it? What about a big pink ***** cake for a lesbian wedding?