Here's why religious restoration acts are repressive

[JakeStarkey]

[No one has the right when offering service and goods to the entire public to discriminate against any of that public based on religious values.

Well, you're wrong. See you in Court. We have a very good case.

Nope, you don't. Don't be surprised if it is summarily dismissed.

 

[Zander]

Even if a Christian were forced against their will to perform wedding services for a gay couple it is understandable that the couple would always question the level of service and suspect it was deficient.

If someone told me they were unwilling to perform that service and only did so because they were forced to it I would always think that there was something that could have been better.

No kidding!!

If I were forced to bake a homo-cake against my will......it'd be a doozy! Like this one....

I'm sure you would. It's part of your religion.

Wrong. I'm non-religious and I fully support marriage equality.

Bottom line- I support Liberty and Freedom.

If your or anyone else wants a gay cake, go to a baker that supports your lifestyle. Don't go out of your way to harass religious people for sport or political reasons. It's stupid and spiteful. Gays have enough problems without looking for frivolous reasons to be "outraged". I don't think it is helping them become more accepted, in fact it's quite the opposite.

 

[Nosmo King]

Can a prostitute be raped? If a prostitute refuses to service a particular john and he rapes her does his leaving money on her body make the rape not have happened?

You're essentially talking about theft. What is your point?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

All this comes down to is intimidation and impinging on one group's freedom to reinforce another's freedom.... this isn't what freedom is about. No, this is Orwellian and it's hypocritical.

No, it is not. In the public forum, no one cannot be infringed upon by religious prejudice. We have treat every one equally. The far right reactionary social cons want to re-institute the moral domination of 19th and 20th century evangelicalism in the public square. Folks, those days are over, forever.

. We are not in Jim Crowe days, Jake.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Anyone take notice of Jeb`s flip-flop on the Indiana law? He supported the anti-gay legislation until the backlash and now he`s hopping off the crazy train. Leading from behind as he did with immigration.

maybe he doesn't want to be assinated or his house burned down for stating his beliefs.

 

[Katzndogz]

Can a prostitute be raped? If a prostitute refuses to service a particular john and he rapes her does his leaving money on her body make the rape not have happened?

You're essentially talking about theft. What is your point?

How can it be theft? He paid good money to a woman plying her trade. Except she didn't want to do business with him. So he forced her to accept him as a customer and he paid her going rate. That's not theft.

 

[dblack]

Can a prostitute be raped? If a prostitute refuses to service a particular john and he rapes her does his leaving money on her body make the rape not have happened?

You're essentially talking about theft. What is your point?

How can it be theft? He paid good money to a woman plying her trade. Except she didn't want to do business with him. So he forced her to accept him as a customer and he paid her going rate. That's not theft.

Yeah. It pretty much is. Well, it's worse actually.

 

[JakeStarkey]

All this comes down to is intimidation and impinging on one group's freedom to reinforce another's freedom.... this isn't what freedom is about. No, this is Orwellian and it's hypocritical.

No, it is not. In the public forum, no one cannot be infringed upon by religious prejudice. We have treat every one equally. The far right reactionary social cons want to re-institute the moral domination of 19th and 20th century evangelicalism in the public square. Folks, those days are over, forever.

. We are not in Jim Crowe days, Jake.

And you won't be allowed to send America there again.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Anyone take notice of Jeb`s flip-flop on the Indiana law? He supported the anti-gay legislation until the backlash and now he`s hopping off the crazy train. Leading from behind as he did with immigration.

maybe he doesn't want to be assinated or his house burned down for stating his beliefs.

I agree that the real crazies on the far right are thinking it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Even if a Christian were forced against their will to perform wedding services for a gay couple it is understandable that the couple would always question the level of service and suspect it was deficient.

If someone told me they were unwilling to perform that service and only did so because they were forced to it I would always think that there was something that could have been better.

No kidding!!

If I were forced to bake a homo-cake against my will......it'd be a doozy! Like this one....

I'm sure you would. It's part of your religion.

Wrong. I'm non-religious and I fully support marriage equality.

Bottom line- I support Liberty and Freedom.

If your or anyone else wants a gay cake, go to a baker that supports your lifestyle. Don't go out of your way to harass religious people for sport or political reasons. It's stupid and spiteful. Gays have enough problems without looking for frivolous reasons to be "outraged". I don't think it is helping them become more accepted, in fact it's quite the opposite.

No one is seeking to “harass religious people for sport or political reasons,' including gay Americans, the notion is ridiculous. There's also nothing 'frivolous' about seeking to realize one's comprehensive civil rights, or to end being discriminated against in public accommodations in a manner consistent with the Constitution and its case law.

What's stupid is the idea that a gay American – or any American, for that matter – must avoid patronizing a business open to the general public in his home community only because that business owner has an unwarranted fear and hatred of who that patron is; indeed, seeking the services of a business open to the general public, requesting services offered to the general public as a normal course of doing business, is not to 'harass' that business.

Bottom line – public accommodations laws are necessary, proper, and Constitutional, as authorized by the Commerce Clause, and when enacted by the states or local jurisdictions, do not compromise Liberty or Freedom.

The primary intent of public accommodations laws is regulatory, in no way designed to interfere with 'religious liberty,' where just and proper laws enacted in good faith cannot be ignored or violated with 'religious belief' as an 'excuse' for doing so.

 

[Zander]

Even if a Christian were forced against their will to perform wedding services for a gay couple it is understandable that the couple would always question the level of service and suspect it was deficient.

If someone told me they were unwilling to perform that service and only did so because they were forced to it I would always think that there was something that could have been better.

No kidding!!

If I were forced to bake a homo-cake against my will......it'd be a doozy! Like this one....

I'm sure you would. It's part of your religion.

Wrong. I'm non-religious and I fully support marriage equality.

Bottom line- I support Liberty and Freedom.

If your or anyone else wants a gay cake, go to a baker that supports your lifestyle. Don't go out of your way to harass religious people for sport or political reasons. It's stupid and spiteful. Gays have enough problems without looking for frivolous reasons to be "outraged". I don't think it is helping them become more accepted, in fact it's quite the opposite.

No one is seeking to “harass religious people for sport or political reasons,' including gay Americans, the notion is ridiculous. There's also nothing 'frivolous' about seeking to realize one's comprehensive civil rights, or to end being discriminated against in public accommodations in a manner consistent with the Constitution and its case law.

What's stupid is the idea that a gay American – or any American, for that matter – must avoid patronizing a business open to the general public in his home community only because that business owner has an unwarranted fear and hatred of who that patron is; indeed, seeking the services of a business open to the general public, requesting services offered to the general public as a normal course of doing business, is not to 'harass' that business.

Bottom line – public accommodations laws are necessary, proper, and Constitutional, as authorized by the Commerce Clause, and when enacted by the states or local jurisdictions, do not compromise Liberty or Freedom.

The primary intent of public accommodations laws is regulatory, in no way designed to interfere with 'religious liberty,' where just and proper laws enacted in good faith cannot be ignored or violated with 'religious belief' as an 'excuse' for doing so.

blah blah balh.. despite your verbosity, you're full of crap.

Homosexual activists are out looking for bakeries to turn them down, for the express purpose of ginning up a non-issue. There is no shortage in the supply of gay wedding cake bakers. PERIOD.

At any rate, If I were a baker with a religious objection to homosexual marriages and I was forced to bake a cake against my will, I guarantee it would LITERALLY taste like shit.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Kiddo, that would be a criminal act and a serious health code violation,

6 months in jail, $2000 fine, and the closure of your baker.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Bottom line – public accommodations laws are necessary, proper, and Constitutional, as authorized by the Commerce Clause, and when enacted by the states or local jurisdictions, do not compromise Liberty or Freedom.

^^^ that

 

[Katzndogz]

Even if a Christian were forced against their will to perform wedding services for a gay couple it is understandable that the couple would always question the level of service and suspect it was deficient.

If someone told me they were unwilling to perform that service and only did so because they were forced to it I would always think that there was something that could have been better.

No kidding!!

If I were forced to bake a homo-cake against my will......it'd be a doozy! Like this one....

I'm sure you would. It's part of your religion.

Wrong. I'm non-religious and I fully support marriage equality.

Bottom line- I support Liberty and Freedom.

If your or anyone else wants a gay cake, go to a baker that supports your lifestyle. Don't go out of your way to harass religious people for sport or political reasons. It's stupid and spiteful. Gays have enough problems without looking for frivolous reasons to be "outraged". I don't think it is helping them become more accepted, in fact it's quite the opposite.

No one is seeking to “harass religious people for sport or political reasons,' including gay Americans, the notion is ridiculous. There's also nothing 'frivolous' about seeking to realize one's comprehensive civil rights, or to end being discriminated against in public accommodations in a manner consistent with the Constitution and its case law.

What's stupid is the idea that a gay American – or any American, for that matter – must avoid patronizing a business open to the general public in his home community only because that business owner has an unwarranted fear and hatred of who that patron is; indeed, seeking the services of a business open to the general public, requesting services offered to the general public as a normal course of doing business, is not to 'harass' that business.

Bottom line – public accommodations laws are necessary, proper, and Constitutional, as authorized by the Commerce Clause, and when enacted by the states or local jurisdictions, do not compromise Liberty or Freedom.

The primary intent of public accommodations laws is regulatory, in no way designed to interfere with 'religious liberty,' where just and proper laws enacted in good faith cannot be ignored or violated with 'religious belief' as an 'excuse' for doing so.

blah blah balh.. despite your verbosity, you're full of crap.

Homosexual activists are out looking for bakeries to turn them down, for the express purpose of ginning up a non-issue. There is no shortage in the supply of gay wedding cake bakers. PERIOD.

At any rate, If I were a baker with a religious objection to homosexual marriages and I was forced to bake a cake against my will, I guarantee it would LITERALLY taste like shit.

If I was forced to commit such a sin I would literally destroy the wedding. I would make it a day they would never forget.

 

[Katzndogz]

There is such a thing as door to door service. Drop the cake parts, flowers, a camera, at the door and refuse to enter the venue. What are they going to do? It's their wedding day.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

There is such a thing as door to door service. Drop the cake parts, flowers, a camera, at the door and refuse to enter the venue. What are they going to do? It's their wedding day.

This is the sort of hate and ignorance the people of the states are at liberty to guard against in public accommodations, and prohibit this sort of discrimination in accordance with the Constitution.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The haters are amazing on the far social con right.

They, the victimizers, use the language of victimization to continue victimizing their perceived enemies

 

[Katzndogz]

There is such a thing as door to door service. Drop the cake parts, flowers, a camera, at the door and refuse to enter the venue. What are they going to do? It's their wedding day.

This is the sort of hate and ignorance the people of the states are at liberty to guard against in public accommodations, and prohibit this sort of discrimination in accordance with the Constitution.

Now we're at a different subject. It's not a gay person walking into a business and getting served any more. It's now about forcing people to attend a gay wedding against their will. Will you next demand civil behavior and not standing up and shouting how they will burn in hell forever? How about taking the mothers aside and asking them how did they go so wrong?

People who are forced to attend events they object to cannot be depended on to be joyful.

 

[JakeStarkey]

These are your lying words, Tipsy: It's not a gay person walking into a business and getting served any more. It's now about forcing people to attend a gay wedding against their will.

It's nothing of the sort. Do your job, collect your money, treat everyone how you wished to be treated. Live the Two Great Commandments, and quit being a jerk.

 

[Katzndogz]

Your position is that the baker, florist or photographer need not attend the wedding.

Then gays have more of a point. Door to door delivery. Wedding photos are taken on the sidewalk.

Hire an uber driver to deliver the cake.