Colorado baker told to bake that cake

[JoeB131]

Nah, that's a really feeble excuse, you little coward. You can deliver your money to the lawyer via an intermediary. No one has to know where you live. (Not to mention that 'stalking' and 'doxxing' is what Leftist scum do.) Easy-peasy guy. All I want is your money.

Yup, all I have to do is let a creepy stalker know where I live... Um... hard pass, Creepy stalker.

Look, you lied, I called you on it, just learn to live with it. Unless you are so delusional you think this stuff happened. Then there's not much I can do for you. I can't think of a shrink I dislike enough to wish you on.

LOL - of course, of course. Man, you're gonna throw your hip out dancing around like that!

No, dancing at all. You can run a business according to the laws you agreed to when you got your business license, or you can do something else for a living.

No compulsion at all.

We’ll, you and I disagree…i still think the cotus is the first law of the land and the protections it affords cannot be negated by legislation. To me this means people have the freedom to exercise their religion….that means they can practice their religion, that doesn’t give them the excuse to discriminate, but it does give them the right to opt out of an activity if they feel doing that activity would be participating in a sin.

Not a Cotus issue. Philips was never sued personally, Masterpiece Cake, LLC was. Businesses aren't people.

 

[JoeB131]

Cowards like Joe love the internet. They can say any filthy nasty thing about anyone they want, secure in the knowledge that they face no consequences. It's just little Joe's misfortune that I can easily prove I did what I said I did. So he's stuck. It'll be interesting to watch little Joe, day after day, week after week, twisting and turning and ducking and dodging ... trying to explain why he wont' take up my challenge.

This isn't about left or right. I simply DO NOT BELIEVE YOU. You make up a story about marching with Dr. King or protesting the draft back in the sixties (which would make you in your 80's now) to somehow make the racist spew that comes out of your mouth now 'okay".

But you get facts... wrong. Like claiming they made you a company clerk after you refused to be an infantryman... no one believes that.

Racism is a scourge. I just don't think government is the right tool for solving those kinds of problems. In the case of racism, particularly racism against blacks in the wake of slavery, it was and is hard to argue against laws banning it. But the principle was never sound, and now that it's being applied to more and more issues, the idea that government should be banning unpopular biases starts to get Orwellian. We indulged some overreach in the past because slavery left a gaping wound in the nation. But we need to dial it back. Government isn't there to maintain groupthink.

Actually, the principle was always sound, we just never followed up on it. The government already bans unpopular biases... just ask NAMBLA. (And, no, not the North American Marlon Brando Look -Alikes).

Everyone agrees we hate pedophiles, so NAMBLA is treated like a criminal organization.

We need to treat racists and homophobes the same way.

Not as long as we maintain Constitutionally limits on government power. The majority doesn't get to just "control" the minority.

Even if racists were in the majority in a locality, minorities wouldn't be controlled. As long as we keep government clean of bias, minorities are free to do as they wish. Some people might not be willing to accommodate them as we'd like, but others will.

Are you ******* retarded. Do you know what happened in the South after the North decided that race relations weren't a priority? You got Debt Peonage, you got Jim Crow, you got lynching.

On the hand, if government is in charge deciding which biases we can and can't have, it's a different story. In that case, it IS majority rule - the will of the majority will be forced on everyone else. When the DeSantis jackboots take over it's entirely possible they'll add political affiliation to the protected classes list. And then, when the nazi youth come into your diner, fresh from their "kill the homos" rally, you'll have to knuckle under and serve them. Or go to jail.

Well, except that if they killed people, they'd be in trouble, but never mind. Yes, asking for you to provide a cake from your cake shop is just like being forced to serve Nazis.

Libs say this all the time, but it isn't true. PA laws do NOT dictate that businesses must serve everyone equally. They just ban certain biases as outlined by the "protected classes". Everything else is fair game.

Everything else is already privileged. Look, man I'm a straight, white, cig-gendered male. The only time I ever encountered any bias in my life is when I hit a certain age and started encountering age discrimination. Protected classes are protected for a reason.

I reject this conception of the First Amendment. It's not supposed to be "special rights for special people". It doesn't grant religious people freedoms the rest of us don't get. That may be the way the Court currently interprets it, but it's bullshit.

Again, like most libertarians, what you want is government protection for the privilege. In an anarchy, this wouldn't be an issue, someone would have burned down Philips cake shop by now, and no one would insure him after that to build another one. But what you want is the police to protect Philips' privileges but not the gay couple, even though they were asking for far less. It's just a damned cake.

 

[JoeB131]

Fake Hippy Doug, coming up with more absurdities.

Well, let's see where we disagree.

I believe that the main role of government should be to provide a framework for free men and women to go about their business. It should not be the government's role to tell them what to think or how to act, except where those acts would harm others.

And the reason is, "the government" is not some abstract, neutral, secular-god entity ... it's also made up of men and women, who have personal material interests. They're not philosopher-kings. A democratic government will, hopefully, more or less see all all the competing material interests cancel each other out, although in reality we know that lobbying and campaign contributions and control of the media give some groups far more power to influence the government than others.

Okay, homophobia and racism harm others. So that's completely in the government's purview to act.

The thing about government, unlike private entities, is that there is no escaping it. If you don't like what my conservative organization is urging you to do -- say, to fly the flag in fron t of your house and join with your neighbors every morning for a Pledge of Allegiance ceremony -- , you can ignore us. But if we can capture the government, we can pass a law forcing you to do it.

Um, your side wants to force women to have their rapists' baby, Fake Hippy. In some states, that's the law of the land.

Should a progressive publisher be forced by the government to print a book from a manuscript submitted by a horrible old rightwinger like me, full of racist-fascist-sexist-ageist-ableist-homo/trans/MAP-phobic garbage? (As the progressive publisher would see it.)

Well, yes ... if there were only one publisher in the country -- if there were a 'natural monopoly' of printing presses and this publisher had the only one -- there would be a case for forcing them to be politically neutral. But since I can go elsewhere, there isn't.

When there is a demonstrable great evil, the solving of which requires the lesser evil of yet more government expansion of its power, then we have to consider doing that. But if not, we shouldn't.

Actually, the publisher already has a built in excuse. Their business model is geared towards a certain customer base your right wing book wouldn't fit into, and they couldn't make any money doing it. It's not just a matter of printing the book, the publisher has to distribute and market it.

The Homophobic Baker has no such excuse. A cake costs a certain amount to make in labor and materials. And a Gay Wedding Cake is absolutely no different than a straight wedding cake.

A better example would be if International Paper refused to provide you paper to print your book.

 

[Doug1943]

Yup, all I have to do is let a creepy stalker know where I live... Um... hard pass, Creepy stalker.

Look, you lied, I called you on it, just learn to live with it. Unless you are so delusional you think this stuff happened. Then there's not much I can do for you. I can't think of a shrink I dislike enough to wish you on.


No, dancing at all. You can run a business according to the laws you agreed to when you got your business license, or you can do something else for a living.

No compulsion at all.



Not a Cotus issue. Philips was never sued personally, Masterpiece Cake, LLC was. Businesses aren't people.

No Joe. I've called YOU. Put up the money, I'll put up the money, and we'll let some honest liberals decide who has lied. Easy. What a coward you are!

 

[Doug1943]

This isn't about left or right. I simply DO NOT BELIEVE YOU. You make up a story about marching with Dr. King or protesting the draft back in the sixties (which would make you in your 80's now) to somehow make the racist spew that comes out of your mouth now 'okay".

But you get facts... wrong. Like claiming they made you a company clerk after you refused to be an infantryman... no one believes that.



Actually, the principle was always sound, we just never followed up on it. The government already bans unpopular biases... just ask NAMBLA. (And, no, not the North American Marlon Brando Look -Alikes).

Everyone agrees we hate pedophiles, so NAMBLA is treated like a criminal organization.

We need to treat racists and homophobes the same way.



Are you ******* retarded. Do you know what happened in the South after the North decided that race relations weren't a priority? You got Debt Peonage, you got Jim Crow, you got lynching.



Well, except that if they killed people, they'd be in trouble, but never mind. Yes, asking for you to provide a cake from your cake shop is just like being forced to serve Nazis.



Everything else is already privileged. Look, man I'm a straight, white, cig-gendered male. The only time I ever encountered any bias in my life is when I hit a certain age and started encountering age discrimination. Protected classes are protected for a reason.



Again, like most libertarians, what you want is government protection for the privilege. In an anarchy, this wouldn't be an issue, someone would have burned down Philips cake shop by now, and no one would insure him after that to build another one. But what you want is the police to protect Philips' privileges but not the gay couple, even though they were asking for far less. It's just a damned cake.

No, CowardJoe. Don't distort my words, which are all written out for anyone to see. I didn't 'March with Dr King'. I registered voters in Fayette County, Tennessee in the summer of 1964, and I went to the 'March on Washington' in the summer of 1963, where King spoke.

I didn't 'resist the draft'. I stupidly let myself get drafted, although I strongly opposed the war. While in the Army, I did things like edit and publish anti-war material ... specifically, a publication called 'GI VOICE'. I did time in military prison because I didn't go to Vietnam. If I had believed in the war, I would have gone.

I was serious about my beliefs, and willing to take risks for them. You can't imagine that anyone is like that, because you think everyone else is like you.

Thank God, they're not.

Oh yes: anyone reading this who doesn't already know : I've offered CowardLiarJoe $12,500!!! All he has to do is match the money. We both put it with a lawyer. We both choose three people we trust ... I'm happy with honest liberals. They decide who's the liar. The truth-teller collects the other's money.

And for some strange reason ... Joe won't go for it!!! I'm asking for help here: he fears being 'doxxed'. Uh huh.. So, can anyone suggest a way he can enter into the deal, and keep his anonymity? Seems easy to me. And.. can anyone suggest other conditions that will persuade Joe to risk his money? Assuming, of course, he honestly believes I'm lying.
Help us out here. I can't persuade him. Maybe others can.

 

[dblack]

Actually, the principle was always sound, we just never followed up on it.

Oh yeah? And how would you follow up on it? More protected classes? Or would you try to make ALL discrimination, in all circumstances, subject to government approval? What's your dream world look like here?

The government already bans unpopular biases... just ask NAMBLA.

You're not making any sense. Not that that's unusual, but WTF are you trying to say here? That we're not allowed to discriminate against NAMBLA? Or that NAMBLA isn't allowed to discriminate? Which unpopular bias is being banned in relation to NAMBLA? I'm asking, because it seems like you're actually trying to make a point, rather than the usual trolling, so I want to give you a chance to explain yourself.

I assume you'll just do like always when you're called on your bullshit. Ignore it and fling insults. But I thought I'd ask.

Yes, asking for you to provide a cake from your cake shop is just like being forced to serve Nazis.

You're pretty good at dodging, so I know I won't get a straight answer - but do you think the diner should be forced to serve the nazis in the scenario I outlined? A clear yes or no would be appreciated.

Again, like most libertarians, ...

Like most libertarians, I reject your dream of ubiquitous government. Government should protect people from bullies. It should protect our freedom to live the way we want. You want government to BE the bully, calling ALL the shots, instructing us, from birth to grave, on the right way to live, and forcing us to comply.

Why don't you just commit a crime and go to prison? I think you'd like it there. You'd get free food, housing, healthcare, etc... You'd have someone telling you what to do 24/7. Nirvana.

 

[HeyNorm]

People do not chose to be gay.

Proof?

We could write that sentence, deleting the word gay, for:

pediphiles
Rapists
Murderer
Dishonest
Fraudulent

And a couple hundred or thousand more.

 

[mak2]

Proof?

We could write that sentence, deleting the word gay, for:

pediphiles
Rapists
Murderer
Dishonest
Fraudulent

And a couple hundred or thousand more.

How do you know? Have you always felt hetro or did you decide to be? If you are, of course.

 

[Doug1943]

Proof?

We could write that sentence, deleting the word gay, for:

pediphiles
Rapists
Murderer
Dishonest
Fraudulent

And a couple hundred or thousand more.

This is bad reasoning. All of the categories you list have two things in common:

(1) they are behaviors, not internal mental states.

(2) they cause harm to others (I'm assuming by "paedophile" you mean someone who actively seeks out children with whom to have sex, ie an active child abuser). And by 'dishonest' I assume you mean one who deceives others for his own gain.

But being gay is an internal mental state. It's not something one chooses, any more than you or I choose to be straight.

Of course, gay behavior is a choice. But here, if it's between two consenting adults, it's again not in the category of the things you've mentioned.

The Left wants to expand the power of the state indefinitely, to cover more and more human activities. It's their totalitarian mindset.

We, the Right, on the other hand, want to restrict the power of the state as much as we can, consonant with the general welfare. What adults think, and how they behave so long as it does not harm others, is up to them.

 

[JoeB131]

No Joe. I've called YOU. Put up the money, I'll put up the money, and we'll let some honest liberals decide who has lied.

Again, your weird stalking is amusing, I can see where I hurt your feelings.
If you were actually confident in the things you did, you wouldn't be so upset about your "Stolen Virtue".

No, CowardJoe. Don't distort my words, which are all written out for anyone to see. I didn't 'March with Dr King'. I registered voters in Fayette County, Tennessee in the summer of 1964, and I went to the 'March on Washington' in the summer of 1963, where King spoke.

Sounds like a distinction without a difference... and no one believes it. You read about it in a history book and attached it to your fake persona.

I didn't 'resist the draft'. I stupidly let myself get drafted, although I strongly opposed the war. While in the Army, I did things like edit and publish anti-war material ... specifically, a publication called 'GI VOICE'. I did time in military prison because I didn't go to Vietnam. If I had believed in the war, I would have gone.

Yeah, guy, that's simply not believalbe, because such a publication would violate more regulations than I can count.

I was serious about my beliefs, and willing to take risks for them. You can't imagine that anyone is like that, because you think everyone else is like you.

Well, no, most people are nowhere near as cool as I am.

What I don't need to do is make up a fake internet persona to try to rationalize my racism like you do. I'm not even sure why you think it gives you more credibility.

But I will keep having fun at your expense.

 

[JoeB131]

The whining of Libertarian Children...

Oh yeah? And how would you follow up on it? More protected classes? Or would you try to make ALL discrimination, in all circumstances, subject to government approval? What's your dream world look like here?

You're not making any sense. Not that that's unusual, but WTF are you trying to say here? That we're not allowed to discriminate against NAMBLA? Or that NAMBLA isn't allowed to discriminate? Which unpopular bias is being banned in relation to NAMBLA? I'm asking, because it seems like you're actually trying to make a point, rather than the usual trolling, so I want to give you a chance to explain yourself.

I thought I made it pretty clear. The Government treats NAMBLA like a criminal organization. As it should. Now, in your bizarre "Constitution is a Suicide Pact" world, they should have every right to go out there and lobby for the elimination of age of consent and child molestation laws.

My solution would be they would mysteriously disappear in the middle of the night and a hog farm in Southern Illinois would have mysteriously fatter hogs.

assume you'll just do like always when you're called on your bullshit. Ignore it and fling insults. But I thought I'd ask.

And I gave you an answer, which you still wouldn't understand..

THE CONSTITUTION IS NOT A SUICIDE PACT. Some people truly do need to be removed from polite society. Again. Hog farm.

You're pretty good at dodging, so I know I won't get a straight answer - but do you think the diner should be forced to serve the nazis in the scenario I outlined? A clear yes or no would be appreciated.

No, they shouldn't. And then there's that hog farm I mentioned earlier to send them to.

But that you equate a gay couple wanting to get married to a bunch of Nazis preaching about wanting to murder gays or Jews is telling.

Like most libertarians, I reject your dream of ubiquitous government. Government should protect people from bullies. It should protect our freedom to live the way we want. You want government to BE the bully, calling ALL the shots, instructing us, from birth to grave, on the right way to live, and forcing us to comply.

Um, no. I realize that being a libertarian child, you don't get that we need government to arbitrate disputes.

Why don't you just commit a crime and go to prison? I think you'd like it there. You'd get free food, housing, healthcare, etc... You'd have someone telling you what to do 24/7. Nirvana.

The fact that you think that following Democratically determined laws is JUST LIKE BEING IN PRISON says a lot more about you than me.

Do you know how much interaction I have with government? Almost none. I pay my taxes, I maybe get pulled over for a moving violation once every couple of years... and that's about it. The way you carry on, you'd think we were living in East Germany.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Yes. It's satisfying to skewer hypocrites, and to blow up lazy assumptions. On another thread, one of them made some insult about how stupid we Rightists were ... so I asked him for help in solving a very difficult integral. He went silent. Maybe he's working on the problem.

But not all people on the Left are like that, and we've got a few on the Right who are also like that. Both of them pollute political argument, by turning it into a personal slanging match. The whole point of a forum like this is that we ought to be able to confront the best arguments of the other side ... which will sharpen our thinking, and, who knows, might even change our minds on something. Only a fool believes he is always 100% right on every question, and I have appreciated being able to argue with intelligent Leftists here.

(By the way, I've just started reading your book, but so far I've only got into the part where you reprise Paley's watchmaker argument. I'm going to bed now and will get through another chapter or two.)

Please PM me with any questions you may have. My favorite construction may well be the phrase I originated, "profound fortuitous interdependencies," and my calculations of the insuperable statistics of titin synthesis.

 

[Doug1943]

Again, your weird stalking is amusing, I can see where I hurt your feelings.
If you were actually confident in the things you did, you wouldn't be so upset about your "Stolen Virtue".


Sounds like a distinction without a difference... and no one believes it. You read about it in a history book and attached it to your fake persona.


Yeah, guy, that's simply not believalbe, because such a publication would violate more regulations than I can count.



Well, no, most people are nowhere near as cool as I am.

What I don't need to do is make up a fake internet persona to try to rationalize my racism like you do. I'm not even sure why you think it gives you more credibility.

But I will keep having fun at your expense.

Okay! For those who have just come in, Joe says I lie about my political past, which was on the Left. Active in the Civil Rights movement and the Anti-Vietnam War movement.

I said, okay, I can easily prove what I said, but ... you're going to pay for calling me a liar.

My offer was: we both put up a substantial sum of money with a trusted third person, probably a lawyer who can make it all legal. I proposed $10 000, then upped it $12 500.
We choose three people we both trust. I'm happy if all three are liberals, because I know there are honest people on the Left.

I give them my proof, they examine it, say if they think I've just made it up. Of course, I'm willing to be interviewed by Zoom or whatever.

The loser loses $10 000 or, better, $12 500.

Now, if Joe really believed, at this point, that I was lying, he'd leap at the chance to either call my bluff, or get $10 000.

But guess what!!!! He won't do it! And it obvious why. He realizes now his casual slander was a mistake ... I'd get his money.

A liar and a coward.

 

[JoeB131]

Okay! For those who have just come in, Joe says I lie about my political past, which was on the Left. Active in the Civil Rights movement and the Anti-Vietnam War movement.

Yup, pretty much. You get too many details wrong. I picture you about 20 something making up a fake online profile to promote your views.

That you are so burned up about it... is hilarious.

Did you start believing your own bullshit?

 

[ThisIsMe]

If you think that, you haven't been reading anything I've posted.

If you believe the second paragraph, I don’t know how else that is to be taken. You state there are no exceptions for religious rights. If that’s how you feel, then you align yourself with joe, becasue that’s how he feels.

 

[ThisIsMe]

That would be impossible to prove. If their big day was really that important, find a gay baker.

That’s not the point. If you don’t bake the cake, you get sued, if they perceive the cake was intentionally made to lesser standards, you get sued. It puts the baker in a bad situation

 

[ThisIsMe]

Well, let's see where we disagree.

I believe that the main role of government should be to provide a framework for free men and women to go about their business. It should not be the government's role to tell them what to think or how to act, except where those acts would harm others.

And the reason is, "the government" is not some abstract, neutral, secular-god entity ... it's also made up of men and women, who have personal material interests. They're not philosopher-kings. A democratic government will, hopefully, more or less see all all the competing material interests cancel each other out, although in reality we know that lobbying and campaign contributions and control of the media give some groups far more power to influence the government than others.

The thing about government, unlike private entities, is that there is no escaping it. If you don't like what my conservative organization is urging you to do -- say, to fly the flag in fron t of your house and join with your neighbors every morning for a Pledge of Allegiance ceremony -- , you can ignore us. But if we can capture the government, we can pass a law forcing you to do it.

Should a progressive publisher be forced by the government to print a book from a manuscript submitted by a horrible old rightwinger like me, full of racist-fascist-sexist-ageist-ableist-homo/trans/MAP-phobic garbage? (As the progressive publisher would see it.)

Well, yes ... if there were only one publisher in the country -- if there were a 'natural monopoly' of printing presses and this publisher had the only one -- there would be a case for forcing them to be politically neutral. But since I can go elsewhere, there isn't.

When there is a demonstrable great evil, the solving of which requires the lesser evil of yet more government expansion of its power, then we have to consider doing that. But if not, we shouldn't.

Surely reasonable people can agree on that?

Ok…I wasn’t aware I had made a post disagreeing with you. The post you quoted from me was my disagreeing with joe…so…where are you come from in this post?

 

[ThisIsMe]

Yup, all I have to do is let a creepy stalker know where I live... Um... hard pass, Creepy stalker.

Look, you lied, I called you on it, just learn to live with it. Unless you are so delusional you think this stuff happened. Then there's not much I can do for you. I can't think of a shrink I dislike enough to wish you on.


No, dancing at all. You can run a business according to the laws you agreed to when you got your business license, or you can do something else for a living.

No compulsion at all.



Not a Cotus issue. Philips was never sued personally, Masterpiece Cake, LLC was. Businesses aren't people.

Ok joe, we’ve been down this road already. We’re not making any ground…so, you believe what you will, I’ll believe what I will.

Ain’t America grand?

 

[Doug1943]

Yup, pretty much. You get too many details wrong. I picture you about 20 something making up a fake online profile to promote your views.

That you are so burned up about it... is hilarious.

Did you start believing your own bullshit?

Twist and turn, duck and cover. Poor little Joe. A liar and a coward.
C'mon, guy!!! $10 000!!!!!!!!! Or even more!!!
Propose your judges! What are you afraid of???

 

[Doug1943]

Ok…I wasn’t aware I had made a post disagreeing with you. The post you quoted from me was my disagreeing with joe…so…where are you come from in this post?

Whoa, sorry. (Joe is a lying coward who doesn't deserve the courtesy of taking him seriously, politically, as you'll know if you read other threads here. He says I am not an ex-Leftist who took part in the civil rights and anti-war movements, as I mentioned, somewhere. , and that I'm lying about it ... and I've offered him $10 000 if three people we both trust judge that he's right. But he has to pay me $10 000 if they decide I'm telling the truth, which I am. So of course he doesn't dare take up my offer, since by now he knows I'm telling the truth. A diseased personality.)

So I don't bother to reply to his purely political posts and I'm sorry I did so indirectly.