Colorado baker told to bake that cake

[dblack]

Should a Muslim baker be forced to bake a cake celebrating Israeli Independence Day?
Should a progressive baker be forced to bake a cake celebrating Donald Trump's birthday?
Should a vegetarian anti-hunting baker be forced to bake a cake celebrating someone's trophy kill? ["Congratulations, Bill, I think you got the last of the species!"]

The state should make all of these decisions. We can't have people just doing whatever they want! The majority must rule in all things.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Actually, COTUS says nothing about businesses having rights.



I wouldn't use that kind of term, but I wouldn't get my panties in a bunch because someone called Putin a f@g.



Actually, it's a pretty simple standard. You can have "rights". Your business has obligations to follow commerce laws. This is INCREDIBLY simple.

It's why you can have all the sex you want, but the minute you take money for it, you are breaking the law. Then it becomes commerce.



Hey, I'll be perfectly honest. I have nothing but contempt for fundy religious nitwits. But if the come to my business, I check my contempt at the door and give them the services I advertised to the best of my abilities.

For instance, right after Trump won, I had some nitwit come to me because he wanted a resume to apply for a Federal Job. (He was kind of delusional). I was straight up forward with him and told him I didn't vote for Trump, but I would still do the best job that I could and He would get the same level of service any other customer would get. I even gave him some useful advice on formatting. (That he probably needed a Federal Format, not a standard format). He never followed up, but it wasn't because I refused him.

Actually, COTUS says nothing about businesses having rights.

Exactly, cotus doesn’t say anything about business whatsoever. It says the rights of the people are protected, that means no law can be written to make you give up your rights, which means if you are a business owner and someone comes to you and asks you to violate your rights, you can refuse.

I know, you’re going to say “but the business has to comply”, and I’ll say what I’ve said before, a business can’t run without the people, so, if we were to go with your idea, then in order to run a business, you may, one day, be forced to give up your cotus rights because of a law created by congress, but the cotus protection of the people are absolute, so, no law can force a business, operated by people, to do something that forces them to give up their rights.

I wouldn't use that kind of term, but I wouldn't get my panties in a bunch because someone called Putin a f@g.

You’re dodging the topic, you admitted only read 2 of the posts and you conveniently picked the one referring to Putin, but the majority of them were not about Putin. Regardless, even if they were about Putin, it makes no difference, the terms are being used in a negative way as an insult. It doesn’t matter who they are directed at, unless you are suggesting that it’s ok to use slurs for groups of people in an insulting way as long as the target of that insult is someone you don’t like? Is that what you are suggesting? The point remains, you accuse the right of all these things, but the left are not exempt from some of those same things…and now you are here defending when the left does it…for reasons I don’t know.

Actually, it's a pretty simple standard. You can have "rights". Your business has obligations to follow commerce laws. This is INCREDIBLY simple.

It's why you can have all the sex you want, but the minute you take money for it, you are breaking the law. Then it becomes commerce.

I’ve explained this repeatedly, you just disagree with my explanation, which is fine. Not everyone will agree with each other.

Hey, I'll be perfectly honest. I have nothing but contempt for fundy religious nitwits. But if the come to my business, I check my contempt at the door and give them the services I advertised to the best of my abilities.

For instance, right after Trump won, I had some nitwit come to me because he wanted a resume to apply for a Federal Job. (He was kind of delusional). I was straight up forward with him and told him I didn't vote for Trump, but I would still do the best job that I could and He would get the same level of service any other customer would get. I even gave him some useful advice on formatting. (That he probably needed a Federal Format, not a standard format). He never followed up, but it wasn't because I refused him.

And that’s great, and I’m sure Phillips would bake a cake for someone who he disagrees with politically, but your scenario isn’t about religious rights, it’s about a disagreement in politics.

 

[JoeB131]

No. The state is not us. That's a liberal lie. A fantasy.
At best (and "at best" is a rare occurrence), the state represents the interests of the majority. I'm not usually in the majority, so the state sure as fuck isn't me, and doesn't represent my interests.
At worst, the state is completely disconnected from "us" and is there simply to control people for the benefit of those in charge.

Yes, I realize that as a Libertarian Child, you don't like it when they make you follow the rules everyone else has agreed upon.

But those rules are there for a reason. Usually because the majority thought they were a good idea.

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

In the poll, 72 percent of respondents said business owners, because of their religious beliefs, should not be allowed to refuse to serve customers based on sexual orientation, while 14 percent said they do have that right. Another 9 percent said businesses have the right “only in certain circumstances” and 6 percent said they do not know.

Should a Muslim baker be forced to bake a cake celebrating Israeli Independence Day?
Should a progressive baker be forced to bake a cake celebrating Donald Trump's birthday?
Should a vegetarian anti-hunting baker be forced to bake a cake celebrating someone's trophy kill? ["Congratulations, Bill, I think you got the last of the species!"]

Hey, Fake Hippy Doug, tell us again how you marched for Civil Rights, that one never gets old.

We've been over this.

The Muslim Baker doesn't normally offer cakes celebrating the Zionist Entity, so no.

Christian Bakers offer wedding cakes, they have to offer them to everyone. Even marriages they don't personally approve of.

 

[JoeB131]

The state should make all of these decisions. We can't have people just doing whatever they want! The majority must rule in all things.

Um, yes, when you have a dispute, someone needs to arbitrate it. That would be the state. Here's the thing, Most people don't go to the state to arbitrate disputes. They just never use that business again, maybe write a scathing Yelp review, and that's fine.

But they should have redress to the law.

Philips could have ended this by apologizing and promising to never do it again.

Exactly, cotus doesn’t say anything about business whatsoever. It says the rights of the people are protected, that means no law can be written to make you give up your rights, which means if you are a business owner and someone comes to you and asks you to violate your rights, you can refuse.

Except we've already established that religion doesn't allow you to violate the law, which is why they didn't let the Branch Davidians keep molesting kids or the Rastafarians keep smoking the dope, mon!

So should an Atheist baker who just thinks the butt-sex is icky be allowed to discriminate? Or the racist who thinks that me marrying my Chinese girlfriend is terrible.

I know, you’re going to say “but the business has to comply”, and I’ll say what I’ve said before, a business can’t run without the people, so, if we were to go with your idea, then in order to run a business, you may, one day, be forced to give up your cotus rights because of a law created by congress, but the cotus protection of the people are absolute, so, no law can force a business, operated by people, to do something that forces them to give up their rights.

First, why should these rights ONLY apply to business owners. If I told my boss I think that our Mormon Vendor is a deranged cultists, according to my religion, I'd be fired in a heart beat. You seem awfully keen on maintaining the privileges of business owners. I'm sure that Philips had at least one employee who was probably not a stuck up homophobic bigot who would have been happy to bake the cake.

You’re dodging the topic, you admitted only read 2 of the posts and you conveniently picked the one referring to Putin, but the majority of them were not about Putin.

It only took me that long to get bored. I'm sure Putin totally has a case of the not-gays.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

I’ve explained this repeatedly, you just disagree with my explanation, which is fine. Not everyone will agree with each other.

Mine is based on common sense. Once you've established that businesses and even employees can refuse a service on religious grounds, you have chaos..

Usually, when a criminal says, "God Told Me To", we lock him up.

And that’s great, and I’m sure Phillips would bake a cake for someone who he disagrees with politically, but your scenario isn’t about religious rights, it’s about a disagreement in politics.

No, it's about his deranged homophobia.

You know what I haven't seen. Philip's pastor getting behind him and saying, "We totally support this man's homophobia!"

 

[Doug1943]

Yes, I realize that as a Libertarian Child, you don't like it when they make you follow the rules everyone else has agreed upon.

But those rules are there for a reason. Usually because the majority thought they were a good idea.

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

In the poll, 72 percent of respondents said business owners, because of their religious beliefs, should not be allowed to refuse to serve customers based on sexual orientation, while 14 percent said they do have that right. Another 9 percent said businesses have the right “only in certain circumstances” and 6 percent said they do not know.



Hey, Fake Hippy Doug, tell us again how you marched for Civil Rights, that one never gets old.

We've been over this.

The Muslim Baker doesn't normally offer cakes celebrating the Zionist Entity, so no.

Christian Bakers offer wedding cakes, they have to offer them to everyone. Even marriages they don't personally approve of.

Hey, little Liar Coward Joe, tell us again how I offered you $10 000 if a group of three people we both agreed on looked at my claim ... and if they found it false, you would get $10 000 from me, if they found it true, I would get $10 000 from you -- both of us having put the money up with a trusted third party, probably a lawyer who could make sure it was all legal.

Over and over, I've said, why don't you call my bluff?. And over and over you've avoided it, sometimes running to the mods and saying "This mean old man is persecuting me." (What a gutless wimp you are!)

So I'm glad you're giving me the opportunity to let you expose yourself as the liar and coward you are: you won't take me up on my offer because you know you'll lose your money.

And again, let me say to fellow conservatives: there are honest and decent people on the Left. I know, because I worked with them for Black rights when I was a Leftist myself. This little faker is not one of them (His psychology is: it's safe to post lefty stuff anonymously on the internet. But to actually "go South", as some of us did, to risk something ... no way, are you crazy? And since he's that way, he thinks everyone is.)

 

[JoeB131]

Hey, little Liar Coward Joe, tell us again how I offered you $10 000 if a group of three people we both agreed on looked at my claim ... and if they found it false, you would get $10 000 from me, if they found it true, I would get $10 000 from you -- both of us having put the money up with a trusted third party, probably a lawyer who could make sure it was all legal.

Okay, you wanted to Dox me, and I said no thanks.. I have enough creepy stalkers on this board, thank you. However, if a position for a creepy stalker opens up, I will be sure to keep you in mind.

I don't believe for a second that you are as old as you say you are, much less that a racist like you marched with Dr. King or whatever else you go around claiming.

 

[Doug1943]

Okay, you wanted to Dox me, and I said no thanks.. I have enough creepy stalkers on this board, thank you. However, if a position for a creepy stalker opens up, I will be sure to keep you in mind.

I don't believe for a second that you are as old as you say you are, much less that a racist like you marched with Dr. King or whatever else you go around claiming.

No no no, little lying Joe. We'll choose three people you trust! Liberals! You don't even have to give them your name!!! Just your $10 000!!!!

I'll have to give them my name, and it's Rightists who get doxxed by scum like you, but I'll take that chance, because spending your $10 000 will be so satisfying.

I'm already working out ten rightwing organizations I'll give $1000 each of your money to, while telling them where it comes from! And it'll be all over the rightwing press, ha ha ha.

Yep, you know that I'm telling the truth, you coward. (I didn't 'march with Dr King', but I did attend the 1963 March on Washington. I didn't hear him speak -- there were a lot of people there -- because I was busy selling my socialist newspaper, New America. on the fringes of the crowd.)

Look, Joe. Try to understand. There are people like you who talk a good game, but wouldn't dream of actually inconveniencing themselves, or, worse yet, risking their precious skin, to actually get out and fight for what they believe in.

But not everyone's like you, Joe.

Okay: discussion is now open. I'd like suggestions from everyone as to why Joe refuses to take my $10 000. I say it's because he knows he wouldn't take it, but would lose it. But maybe someone can come up with another reason? The floor is open!

And I want to say again to my fellow rightists: this man is not typical. I've known many people on the Left in my life, and most of them were decent people. Some of them were exceptionally courageous. They're wrong about a lot of things, but that's just life. (I can't speak for the hard Left types like anti-Fa today ... they seem different.)

If you don't think a Leftist can be brave, read this man's Wiki bio: [ Robert Thompson - Wikipedia ] A National Committee member of the Communist Party ... and Silver Star winner.

One of the nicest, most decent people I ever knew was a National Committee member of the Communist Party, sent 'underground' to Memphis Tennessee during McCarthy times. He was arrested, brought back to his hometown of Boston to stand trial under the Smith Act ... and only freed by the Supreme Court's 'Yates' decision. (He broke with the Communist Party during that episode, mainly as the result of reading about Kruschev's "Secret Speech" denouncing Stalin -- which he read in the Washington Post as he was on the train, handcuffed to a Federal Marshall, passing through Washington, DC. )

 

[JoeB131]

No no no, little lying Joe. We'll choose three people you trust! Liberals! You don't even have to give them your name!!! Just your $10 000!!!!

Um, okay, there aren't three people on this board I trust. I don't know any of their real names, where they live, or anything like that. So why would I dox my personal information because I've offended some conservatard.

Yep, you know that I'm telling the truth, you coward. (I didn't 'march with Dr King', but I did attend the 1963 March on Washington. I didn't hear him speak -- there were a lot of people there -- because I was busy selling my socialist newspaper, New America. on the fringes of the crowd.)

Yup, the sign of a pathological liar is his desire to make grand statements about themselves.

Okay: discussion is now open. I'd like suggestions from everyone as to why Joe refuses to take my $10 000. I say it's because he knows he wouldn't take it, but would lose it. But maybe someone can come up with another reason? The floor is open!

Naw, I just find it kind of creepy that you are so upset that I don't believe your fantasies. You made up a story, I didn't believe you. That's pretty much the end of it. Sell it to someone who is more gullible.

Look, Joe. Try to understand. There are people like you who talk a good game, but wouldn't dream of actually inconveniencing themselves, or, worse yet, risking their precious skin, to actually get out and fight for what they believe in.

Well, I was in the army for 11 years. Now, not bragging, so I'm not going to claim I shot the apple off Saddam's head or anything like that. I mostly just filed paperwork. Kind of like what I do in the civilian world. But I was perfectly willing to fight for my country.
I think you made up some story about being a draft resister or something like that, and I didn't believe that one, either.

 

[Doug1943]

Um, okay, there aren't three people on this board I trust. I don't know any of their real names, where they live, or anything like that. So why would I dox my personal information because I've offended some conservatard.



Yup, the sign of a pathological liar is his desire to make grand statements about themselves.



Naw, I just find it kind of creepy that you are so upset that I don't believe your fantasies. You made up a story, I didn't believe you. That's pretty much the end of it. Sell it to someone who is more gullible.



Well, I was in the army for 11 years. Now, not bragging, so I'm not going to claim I shot the apple off Saddam's head or anything like that. I mostly just filed paperwork. Kind of like what I do in the civilian world. But I was perfectly willing to fight for my country.
I think you made up some story about being a draft resister or something like that, and I didn't believe that one, either.

Nah, we don't have to find three people here. We'll find other leftists, people who are, unlike you, Coward Joe, honest. You won't have to give them your name or any details at all. You just have to turn over $10 000 to a lawyer we both agree on -- he'll probably charge a fee -- . Just get the cash and bring it to him.

As for being in the Army, sure, lots of people are, and a good thing too. They have various motives for being there. For some -- like my best friend growing up -- it was that, or five years in the pokey, Huntsville State Prison. (Although his alternative was the Marines.)

We have a sort of necessary social convention that they're all heroes, but of course, they're ordinary people, some of whom may be motivated by patriotism, among other things. And, by the way, patriotism is a neutral virtue. You can be a strong patriot, and a bad person. There are/were plenty of genuine racists, Klan members, who were strong patriots. Big deal.

No, I was not a "draft resister". I was someone who was against the Vietnam War, or, rather, at the time, in favor of the victory of the North Vietnamese, being a communist, as I was then. I stupidly got myself drafted, trained as an 11B10, got orders to Vietnam, and deserted on the way.

They knew all about me -- I had an interview with the FBI when I refused to sign the loyalty oath at the induction center -- I even had a conversation with the S2 when I was still in the army but had served my time in the stockade, and he knew I had edited an antiwar soldier's newspaper, GI Voice. Turned myself in after a year and a half hiding out, had a sort of change of heart and decided I would go to Vietnam but not carry out any illegal orders, like killing women and children, as happened at My Lai. Spent 6 months in the stockade with 2/3 reduction in pay at 'hard labor'. Then, although I was willing to deploy .... they kicked me out after a few weeks working as a company clerk!

Military service is an education in itself. I met all kinds of people, especially in the stockade. Most were decent people. Some were like you.

Now you and I both know that if you really believed I was lying about all this, you'd JUMP at the chance to get $10 000 off me. But you're a coward, Joe. So you twist and turn, "Oh, I'm afraid of being doxxed... oh, I don't trust the other lefties here ... oh ... oh ... oh... oh, Mr Moderator, a mean old man is doing something bad, close this thread ...."

And anyone reading this knows it as well. Joe is a liar -- he deliberately says things he knows are not true. And he's a coward. He hides behind the anonymity which the internet provides to nasty little slandering cowards like him.

He won't back up his lies and doesn't have the personal decency to admit he was wrong.

And by the way: there are people like you on the Right as well. This isn't a political thing, it's just a question of personal honor, which you don't have.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Yes, I realize that as a Libertarian Child, you don't like it when they make you follow the rules everyone else has agreed upon.

But those rules are there for a reason. Usually because the majority thought they were a good idea.

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

In the poll, 72 percent of respondents said business owners, because of their religious beliefs, should not be allowed to refuse to serve customers based on sexual orientation, while 14 percent said they do have that right. Another 9 percent said businesses have the right “only in certain circumstances” and 6 percent said they do not know.



Hey, Fake Hippy Doug, tell us again how you marched for Civil Rights, that one never gets old.

We've been over this.

The Muslim Baker doesn't normally offer cakes celebrating the Zionist Entity, so no.

Christian Bakers offer wedding cakes, they have to offer them to everyone. Even marriages they don't personally approve of.

The problem with that poll is, it’s misleading. I too agree that you should not use religious freedom to refuse business to gay people, unless they ask you to do something that would be akin to participation in an activity they are planning. What the poll cites and what Phillips did are two different things.

I’m against sexual discrimination, never stated I wasn’t, and if you refuse someone just because you don’t like a characteristic about them, then I agree with you, but if they say “hey, bake a cake specifically for our gay wedding”, then the baker feels that puts him in the position of supporting that ceremony, which is why Phillips said he would sell them any cake already prepared, but not one specifically for the wedding or reception.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Um, yes, when you have a dispute, someone needs to arbitrate it. That would be the state. Here's the thing, Most people don't go to the state to arbitrate disputes. They just never use that business again, maybe write a scathing Yelp review, and that's fine.

But they should have redress to the law.

Philips could have ended this by apologizing and promising to never do it again.



Except we've already established that religion doesn't allow you to violate the law, which is why they didn't let the Branch Davidians keep molesting kids or the Rastafarians keep smoking the dope, mon!

So should an Atheist baker who just thinks the butt-sex is icky be allowed to discriminate? Or the racist who thinks that me marrying my Chinese girlfriend is terrible.



First, why should these rights ONLY apply to business owners. If I told my boss I think that our Mormon Vendor is a deranged cultists, according to my religion, I'd be fired in a heart beat. You seem awfully keen on maintaining the privileges of business owners. I'm sure that Philips had at least one employee who was probably not a stuck up homophobic bigot who would have been happy to bake the cake.


It only took me that long to get bored. I'm sure Putin totally has a case of the not-gays.

View attachment 768061View attachment 768062

Sorry, I couldn't resist.




Mine is based on common sense. Once you've established that businesses and even employees can refuse a service on religious grounds, you have chaos..

Usually, when a criminal says, "God Told Me To", we lock him up.



No, it's about his deranged homophobia.

You know what I haven't seen. Philip's pastor getting behind him and saying, "We totally support this man's homophobia!"

Except we've already established that religion doesn't allow you to violate the law, which is why they didn't let the Branch Davidians keep molesting kids or the Rastafarians keep smoking the dope, mon!

I agree, religion doesn’t allow you to break the law, but a law that forces you to give up your rights is not valid. I know it’s hard for you to accept this, given your total hatred for any kind of religion, means you’ll never accept anyone else’s position…

Again, if you believe that congress can legislate away your rights, then don’t complain if some member of congress creates a law that forces you to give up other rights.

So should an Atheist baker who just thinks the butt-sex is icky be allowed to discriminate? Or the racist who thinks that me marrying my Chinese girlfriend is terrible.

Nope and nope, because 1) there’s no religious ground, and 2) neither of those things would be something you could claim religious rights on anyway. You can’t seem to get past the fact that Phillips didn’t refuse service to them because he thought “butt sex was icky”…that’s something you keep repeating…but have yet to show any evidence of.

First, why should these rights ONLY apply to business owners. If I told my boss I think that our Mormon Vendor is a deranged cultists, according to my religion, I'd be fired in a heart beat. You seem awfully keen on maintaining the privileges of business owners. I'm sure that Philips had at least one employee who was probably not a stuck up homophobic bigot who would have been happy to bake the cake.

I don’t think those rights apply only to business owners, religious freedoms apply to everyone, so, if you have a legitimate religious objection to your Mormon vendor, your employer would have to make reasonable accommodations for you, as we have discussed about the Muslim truck drivers.

I'm sure that Philips had at least one employee who was probably not a stuck up homophobic bigot who would have been happy to bake the cake.

Does he? I mean, if he has other bakers in his shop, then I might agree with you, he could have appointed the job to someone else, I assumed he was the only baker there.

Of course, some would also argue that him allowing his business to be used in the commission of a sin would also be reflective of his religion…but I won’t go there because I already know your argument on this, plus, legally, that would be a harder row to hoe.

It only took me that long to get bored. I'm sure Putin totally has a case of the not-gays.

Look, you can call it what you want. I pointed you in the direction of the things I was observing, if you want to look the other way and condone that kind of behavior, that’s your right. I already know what I see.

No, it's about his deranged homophobia.

You know what I haven't seen. Philip's pastor getting behind him and saying, "We totally support this man's homophobia!"

You still haven’t proven homophobia. That’s just your accusation…I’ve asked several times to show me evidence of his hatred of gays…if it’s there, it should be easy to show.

If you show me that, then I’d say you have a point in all of this, until then, it’s just a religious freedom argument.

 

[dblack]

The problem with that poll is, it’s misleading. I too agree that you should not use religious freedom to refuse business to gay people, unless they ask you to do something that would be akin to participation in an activity they are planning. What the poll cites and what Phillips did are two different things.

I’m against sexual discrimination, never stated I wasn’t, and if you refuse someone just because you don’t like a characteristic about them, then I agree with you, but ...

As soon as you concede that, you lose the argument. The rest is moot. Once you grant government the power to compel you to associate with others against your will, it's just a matter of who's on charge at the time.

 

[JoeB131]

Nah, we don't have to find three people here.

Again, your stalking is weird, Fake Hippy Doug. I have no interest in having ANY contact with you outside of this board. Get it?

No, I was not a "draft resister". I was someone who was against the Vietnam War, or, rather, at the time, in favor of the victory of the North Vietnamese, being a communist, as I was then. I stupidly got myself drafted, trained as an 11B10, got orders to Vietnam, and deserted on the way.

Sure you did.

They knew all about me -- I had an interview with the FBI when I refused to sign the loyalty oath at the induction center -- I even had a conversation with the S2 when I was still in the army but had served my time in the stockade, and he knew I had edited an antiwar soldier's newspaper, GI Voice. Turned myself in after a year and a half hiding out, had a sort of change of heart and decided I would go to Vietnam but not carry out any illegal orders, like killing women and children, as happened at My Lai. Spent 6 months in the stockade with 2/3 reduction in pay at 'hard labor'. Then, although I was willing to deploy .... they kicked me out after a few weeks working as a company clerk!

Wow, your stories get more lurid every day...

First, if you were trained as an 11B10, that's what they would have deployed you as. They certainly wouldn't have wasted time retraining you to be a 75B10, much less trusted you with sensitive personnel information.

Now you and I both know that if you really believed I was lying about all this, you'd JUMP at the chance to get $10 000 off me.

No, I just don't contact creepy ass stalkers from USMB. That's the joy of USMB. Right Wingers show up in all their rancid glory and have to take all the abuse I inflict on them.

 

[JoeB131]

The problem with that poll is, it’s misleading. I too agree that you should not use religious freedom to refuse business to gay people, unless they ask you to do something that would be akin to participation in an activity they are planning. What the poll cites and what Phillips did are two different things.

No, they really aren't.

I’m against sexual discrimination, never stated I wasn’t, and if you refuse someone just because you don’t like a characteristic about them, then I agree with you, but if they say “hey, bake a cake specifically for our gay wedding”, then the baker feels that puts him in the position of supporting that ceremony, which is why Phillips said he would sell them any cake already prepared, but not one specifically for the wedding or reception.

Bullshit. He's providing a cake. He's not doing marriage counselling. He's not performing the service.

I agree, religion doesn’t allow you to break the law, but a law that forces you to give up your rights is not valid. I know it’s hard for you to accept this, given your total hatred for any kind of religion, means you’ll never accept anyone else’s position…

No rights are being given up because they sued the business, not him personally.

Again, if you believe that congress can legislate away your rights, then don’t complain if some member of congress creates a law that forces you to give up other rights.

Again, I'm a realist. Any fool who thinks he has rights needs to look up "Japanese Americans, 1942"

You have privileges that society agrees you should have.

Nope and nope, because 1) there’s no religious ground, and 2) neither of those things would be something you could claim religious rights on anyway. You can’t seem to get past the fact that Phillips didn’t refuse service to them because he thought “butt sex was icky”…that’s something you keep repeating…but have yet to show any evidence of.

Actually, until SCOTUS ruled otherwise, the laws against interracial marriages WERE justified on the basis of religion. in fact, the lower court judge ruled.

On October 28, 1964, after waiting almost a year for a response to their motion, the ACLU attorneys filed a federal class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. This prompted the county court judge in the case, Leon M. Bazile (1890–1967), to issue a ruling on the long-pending motion to vacate. Echoing Johann Friedrich Blumenbach's 18th-century interpretation of race, Bazile denied the motion with the words:

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.[23]

So some mutant CAN claim that because my lady love was born in China and my ancestors came from Europe, God never meant for us to be.

I don’t think those rights apply only to business owners, religious freedoms apply to everyone, so, if you have a legitimate religious objection to your Mormon vendor, your employer would have to make reasonable accommodations for you, as we have discussed about the Muslim truck drivers.

Except that it would never happen, my boss would simply fire me and call me a bigot in court. Of course, there was a legitimate religious objection to Mormons by the Evangelicals...they are a cult. Or at least that's what they thought until Romney got the GOP nomination, because OH MY GOD, THERE'S A NEGRO IN THE WHITE HOUSE!!! Racial Bigotry always trumps religious bigotry with the Evangelicals, so fuck 'em.

Does he? I mean, if he has other bakers in his shop, then I might agree with you, he could have appointed the job to someone else, I assumed he was the only baker there.

Of course, some would also argue that him allowing his business to be used in the commission of a sin would also be reflective of his religion…but I won’t go there because I already know your argument on this, plus, legally, that would be a harder row to hoe.

Uh, the Bible says that you should stone people, doesn't say anything about Stoning them for baking a cake for the gay people. Of course, once we decided stoning people for minor infractions was unacceptable.. so was the rest of it.

You still haven’t proven homophobia. That’s just your accusation…I’ve asked several times to show me evidence of his hatred of gays…if it’s there, it should be easy to show.

If you show me that, then I’d say you have a point in all of this, until then, it’s just a religious freedom argument.

Your free to worship any imaginary sky friend you want. But once you run a business you have to follow the law. It's really that simple. if he feels doing the things his business contracted to do is against his bronze age superstitions, he always has the option to do something else for a living that won't.

 

[JoeB131]

As soon as you concede that, you lose the argument. The rest is moot. Once you grant government the power to compel you to associate with others against your will, it's just a matter of who's on charge at the time.

No one is compelling the baker. He always has the option of not being a baker.

 

[Doug1943]

Again, your stalking is weird, Fake Hippy Doug. I have no interest in having ANY contact with you outside of this board. Get it?


Sure you did.


Wow, your stories get more lurid every day...

First, if you were trained as an 11B10, that's what they would have deployed you as. They certainly wouldn't have wasted time retraining you to be a 75B10, much less trusted you with sensitive personnel information.



No, I just don't contact creepy ass stalkers from USMB. That's the joy of USMB. Right Wingers show up in all their rancid glory and have to take all the abuse I inflict on them.

Of course you're afraid to take me up on my offer, Joe. You know you're lying and you know you're a coward.

As for 'stalking' ... YOU are the one who first called me a liar.

I said, if you genuinely believe I'm lying, then ... let's see: I'll put up $10 000 ....you will do the same .. .we'll choose someone we both trust to hold the money... and then choose three people we both trust to judge whether or not I'm telling the truth .. easy for me to do, by the way ... and if they think I'm lying, as you claim, you get $10 000 of my money!!!!

But if not ... if they acknowledge that I'm telling the truth ... you lose $10 000.

What could be fairer than that? But of course you wouldn't dare do it, because by now you know I'm telling the truth and you haven't got the personal integrity to withdraw your claim.

Now, the smart thing for you to do would be to just creep away, maybe stop posting for a few weeks, get a new screen name, and come back as someone else, not little Coward Lying Joe.

But you can't let go of it. That's a characteristic of narcissists.

So keep posting, you coward. Let more and more people read this and laugh at you. And I'm making sure a lot of people see this hilarious dialogue. Joe caught in the trap, wriggling and twisting, trying to think of some plausible reason not to accept my offer.

From now on, we'll call you No-$10,000-Joe. So wealthy that he can't be bothered to take $10 000 from a rightwinger. Ha ha ha ...

To any Leftist reading this: there are dishonest people on both sides of the barricades. I know this man is not typical of your side, certainly not of the people who post here. We've got people like him too. Let's argue/debate political issues, not make dishonest personal attacks on each other. You can be an honest person and be mistaken. No-$10,000-Joe is just not one of them.

 

[JoeB131]

Of course you're afraid to take me up on my offer, Joe. You know you're lying and you know you're a coward.

As for 'stalking' ... YOU are the one who first called me a liar.

Yes, because you made up a fanciful story about being a communist civil rights worker in the 60's, but today you are a right wing racist. That's just not terribly credible.

Your $10,000 offer has all the credibility of a Nigerian Prince Scam.

 

[dblack]

No one is compelling the baker. He always has the option of not being a baker.

Of course they are. He's compelled to bake the cake. Or he's compelled to stop baking. Trying to pretend that isn't force is a straight up lie.

 

[JoeB131]

Of course they are. He's compelled to bake the cake. Or he's compelled to stop baking. Trying to pretend that isn't force is a straight up lie.

Well, if he has more than one choice, he isn't being compelled.

Just like if we have a sanitation law, you are required to keep a clean shop, or you have the option of not being a baker.

But selling unsafe food simply isn't an option, and neither is refusing service because you are a bigot.

Now, if the government swooped in, carted him off and made him watch Brokeback Mountain on a continuous loop for days on end, THAT would be horribly oppressive.

Also fucking hysterical.

But making him follow the laws of Commerce he agreed to when he got a business license, not so much.

 

[Doug1943]

Yes, because you made up a fanciful story about being a communist civil rights worker in the 60's, but today you are a right wing racist. That's just not terribly credible.

Your $10,000 offer has all the credibility of a Nigerian Prince Scam.

'Nigerian prince scam'!!! EEEEKKK!!! A racist!!!! Ha ha ha.

Well, since it has no credibility, let's get down to business. Find some people you trust -- plenty of honest Leftists on this board ... suggest some names to me ... I'll check them out .. we'll pick three.

Then we'll find a lawyer ... that we both can trust. Maybe in Chicago so you can take your money to him personally if you want. I'll send him a check. We might both have to pay a small fee to him, but we want this to be legal.

And then I'll show my evidence to the three judges. You'll lose your money. It will go to ten rightwing organizations, a thousand each, and they'll be told where it came from. So much laughter, so much happiness you'll bring to people!

But if I'm unable to prove what I say, then you get the money! What could be fairer than that?

But of course, by now, you know I'm telling the truth and can easily prove it. And instead of admitting you were wrong, you try to squirm out of it. That's so transparent, so obvious...

I loathe dishonest people like you, No-10,000-Joe, and I'm glad you're being exposed here as a coward and a liar.