If Christians are allowed to discriminate against gays ...

[bodecea]

Freedom in this country also requires embracing the fact that all people are created equal.

Of course but not demanded by the government....that is called tyranny....we have a right to be a bigot and we have a right to run and operate our business hey way we want to....

And the state has the right to not give you a business license.

 

[Lysistrata]

All they did was file a routine discrimination report. It wasn't a "political attack." They probably did find a cake. Are you suggesting that people who are refused service should just shut up and slink off? That's ridiculous! I monitored state and federal court decisions on employment discrimination as part of my job for decades, so I'm familiar with the discrimination-reporting systems of just about every state. Like I say, routine complaint.

Even if it wasn't, the point remains. Government was used to coerce one individual to involuntarily serve another.

Is that not a correct statement of the situation?

Yes. But it doesn't matter. This is part of our system, which is designed to bring order to society. The guy was licensed and expected to observe the relevant laws. Observing relevant laws is what we do here in the U.S. I'm not for anarchy.

 

[koshergrl]

Should gays be allowed to discriminate against Christians?


I'm sure some gays already do...Humans are clannish by nature and tend to group people...

Should it be legal?

Should it be legal to associate with people you like and are comfortable being with? Are you serious?

That's the current state of things. If a gay (or anyone else) ran a business and refused to cater to Christians, that would be illegal under current civil rights law.

You people just really can't grasp this simple concept.

It is illegal for a baker to refuse service to fags because they're fags. So yes, it's still illegal for fags to refuse to cater to Christians because they're Christian.

It's not illegal to refuse to create a special product for a particular celebration if you think your soul is in danger if you participate in any way.

Now if a Christian came to a ****** baker and said "Bake me a cake to celebrate a pogrom against homosexuals" and if homosexuality is the religion of the baker..then absolutely the *** has the right to refuse to take that project on.

But if a ****** baker tells a person wearing a cross "I don't serve your kind" then there might be a problem.

 

[Skull Pilot]

If I think being a christian violates my deepest religious beliefs should I be forced to do business with christians?

Now you're getting the question. What do you think, should you?

I think I can turn Christians away if a Christian says he can turn a person away because of his beliefs I surely can do the same

 

[LordBrownTrout]

My business doesn't care what walks through the door as long as my business account continues to grow.

 

[dblack]

Should gays be allowed to discriminate against Christians?


I'm sure some gays already do...Humans are clannish by nature and tend to group people...

Should it be legal?

Should it be legal to associate with people you like and are comfortable being with? Are you serious?

That's the current state of things. If a gay (or anyone else) ran a business and refused to cater to Christians, that would be illegal under current civil rights law.

You people just really can't grasp this simple concept.

It is illegal for a baker to refuse service to fags because they're fags. So yes, it's still illegal for fags to refuse to cater to Christians because they're Christian.

It's not illegal to refuse to create a special product for a particular celebration if you think your soul is in danger if you participate in any way.

Now if a Christian came to a ****** baker and said "Bake me a cake to celebrate a pogrom against homosexuals" and if homosexuality is the religion of the baker..then absolutely the *** has the right to refuse to take that project on.

But if a ****** baker tells a person wearing a cross "I don't serve your kind" then there might be a problem.

Listen, I couldn't care less about the particulars of any given case. The question is intended to open discussion on the validity of our approach to civil rights law - aka 'public accommodations'. I'm not interested in a bunch of hair-splitting about loopholes and "it's different when we do it" excuses.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Freedom in this country also requires embracing the fact that all people are created equal. We have been forced, kicking and screaming, to stop refusing housing or jobs to blacks. We have been forced, kicking and screaming, to allow women to serve in the military. We will not do it willingly, so government must step in to enforce it. Freedom from tyranny may sound pretty good--pretty damned romantic, even--but your vision of it, where people are allowed to refuse treating fellow Americans as equals, is not so pretty as it sounds.

Freedom also requires not forcing people to think or believe a certain way. Your statement, and the entire effort to force involuntary servitude on individuals is loaded with irony.

There is nothing pretty about snobs looking down their noses at the unwashed masses. You seem to be advocating that government force be used to punish people from engaging in snobery. You want government to force people to like other people.

Is there anything government can't do, in your mind?

 

[koshergrl]

Should gays be allowed to discriminate against Christians?


I'm sure some gays already do...Humans are clannish by nature and tend to group people...

Should it be legal?

Should it be legal to associate with people you like and are comfortable being with? Are you serious?

That's the current state of things. If a gay (or anyone else) ran a business and refused to cater to Christians, that would be illegal under current civil rights law.

You people just really can't grasp this simple concept.

It is illegal for a baker to refuse service to fags because they're fags. So yes, it's still illegal for fags to refuse to cater to Christians because they're Christian.

It's not illegal to refuse to create a special product for a particular celebration if you think your soul is in danger if you participate in any way.

Now if a Christian came to a ****** baker and said "Bake me a cake to celebrate a pogrom against homosexuals" and if homosexuality is the religion of the baker..then absolutely the *** has the right to refuse to take that project on.

But if a ****** baker tells a person wearing a cross "I don't serve your kind" then there might be a problem.

Listen, I couldn't care less about the particulars of any given case. The question is intended to open discussion on the validity of our approach to civil rights law - aka 'public accommodations'. I'm not interested in a bunch of hair-splitting about loopholes and "it's different when we do it" excuses.

Yes I know. You aren't interested in doing anything but presenting a false analogy and pushing a false narrative.
I already pointed that out.

 

[bendog]

OP is a false premise.
The SCOTUS determined that failing to bake a gake for a ****** orgy is NOT discrimination.

The OP does not rely on the recent SCOTUS decision. It's a general question.

No, it's a false analogy.

Christians are not discriminating against gays. It's a false analogy.

In debate class, you'd be sent to the back of the room to start over.

"1. Podunk Community College should not require a freshman writing course. Harvard does not require a freshman writing course and the students there get along just fine without it.
False Analogy. It is false because the two items do not have strong enough similarities to predict that what happens in one will happen in the other."
Faulty Logic

PS..you don't get to just assert any stupid thing you like, and then say "my statement is based on nothing!" and expect any sort of serious consideration. You come off as a fruitcake who thinks he's being clever, when all you're really doing is pointing out to everybody your inability to reason.

I'm making no analogy. I'm presenting a hypothetical. I'm sorry if it confused you.

I'm not confused.
If you are presenting a *hypothetical* then you deliberately misrepresented it as an accurate analogy..

and it's not, of course.

So either you're disingenuous, or you're using a false analogy.

I'm making a point about our inconsistent and hypocritical approach to "discrimination". The question could be rephrased as, "Why should religious affiliation be a protected class, but not sexual orientation?". To be clear, I'm opposed to the entire practice of using government to thwart bigotry. It's the wrong tool for the job and it's creating more problems than it's solving, violates more rights than it protects.

I'm a wee bit concerned that the topic is going to "protected classes" rather than equal protection. At the time the baker chose to not bake the cake, the Sup Ct had not

Freedom in this country also requires embracing the fact that all people are created equal.

Of course but not demanded by the government....that is called tyranny....we have a right to be a bigot and we have a right to run and operate our business hey way we want to....

That's NOT what the Sup Ct held. It held that the baker did not have an absolute right to discriminate, but the Commission had to take into account the baker's sincerely held religious beliefs, and the Commission did not do that. The Sup Ct found the Commission was actually hostile to the religious beliefs. And that was 7 of the Justices .. not even close.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

What individual rights can we **** over with the standard (lack of standard, actually) that we are allowed to be bigoted asswipes to one another?

Should that be illegal? What about just being asswipes?

A decision on this can open the gates to putting that sign back in the window that "We refuse to serve ...." and I don't think that is what America is about.

It also opens the door for we, the non-bigots, to boycott the **** out of such establishments. No government action needed.

We are supposed to be about individual freedom to be EQUAL and treated FAIRLY, no matter who we are or what we look like.

Loaded with irony. How can you not see the irony of this statement?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Yes. But it doesn't matter. This is part of our system, which is designed to bring order to society. The guy was licensed and expected to observe the relevant laws. Observing relevant laws is what we do here in the U.S. I'm not for anarchy.

So, **** his rights. That's what you are saying, isn't it?

That bastard should be forced to serve another individual against his will?

 

[Rustic]

Lol
It’s obvious gays want nothing to do with Christians, so be it...

My gay neighbors are legally married and go to the same church I do

Just because someone goes to church does not make them Christian

 

[Rustic]

... then gays should be allowed to discriminate against Christians.

Agree or Disagree?

In theory, the Baker discriminates only against 'the sin." (I don't see the sin btw) And the gay only discriminates against the discrimination of not baking

An absolute sin...

 

[featherlite]

Bullshit. It's not about religion, it's about being anti-gay, period.

Bakery Will Do Pagan, Cloning, and Divorce Cakes But Not Gay Weddings

Just because someone's religious faith is against Gay Marriage doesn't mean they have problems with Paganism, cloning or divorce.

Technically we Christians should have a problem with all the above and most do in varying degrees.
Should service be refused to all these?

.

 

[Rustic]

And what religion is okay with paganism and divorce but not gay marriage?

Are there bakeries that will bake cakes for pagan ceremonies and divorces, that won't do it for Gay Marriage?

They claim they are Christian. I’d like to se the Christian Bible where Jesus condemns gays marrying but is totally cool with divorce and following other gods.

They are bigots. It has nothing to do with religion.

Shit for brains, religion is man-made… Christianity is a faith. And by the way you don’t get to determine anything about Christianity. There is a book for that dumbass

 

[bendog]

If I think being a christian violates my deepest religious beliefs should I be forced to do business with christians?

Now you're getting the question. What do you think, should you?

I'm not sure it is getting at the question. The Sup Ct's holding doesn't have any issue with the notion that if someone doesn't want to buy from a gay baker or a Christian baker ... they don't have to buy.

The Sup Ct DID find that that if one is a Christian baker saying baking the cake forces him into a sin then the State must seek to find some unspecified neutral decision that took into account those beliefs along with the right to be free of biz discrimination based on sexual orientation.

 

[Skull Pilot]

If I think being a christian violates my deepest religious beliefs should I be forced to do business with christians?

Now you're getting the question. What do you think, should you?

I'm not sure it is getting at the question. The Sup Ct's holding doesn't have any issue with the notion that if someone doesn't want to buy from a gay baker or a Christian baker ... they don't have to buy.

The Sup Ct DID find that that if one is a Christian baker saying baking the cake forces him into a sin then the State must seek to find some unspecified neutral decision that took into account those beliefs along with the right to be free of biz discrimination based on sexual orientation.

So I can say that the act of doing any business with any Christian is a sin according to my deeply held personal beliefs right?

 

[Rustic]

No one has forced the baker to be a baker or bake wedding cakes. He chose to do that, in a state with PA laws and then he chose to discriminate against customers based on their lifestyle.

To force anyone to serve a customer they do not want to serve is un American...when did we decide that the government can tell a private business owner who he must serve? We used to have signs that said we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone....now that is Freedom from tyranny....

Freedom in this country also requires embracing the fact that all people are created equal. We have been forced, kicking and screaming, to stop refusing housing or jobs to blacks. We have been forced, kicking and screaming, to allow women to serve in the military. We will not do it willingly, so government must step in to enforce it. Freedom from tyranny may sound pretty good--pretty damned romantic, even--but your vision of it, where people are allowed to refuse treating fellow Americans as equals, is not so pretty as it sounds.

Gays and tranny’s should be able to discriminate against anyone they want as business owners, the right to refuse service to anyone...

 

[Sunni Man]

Obviously, I have. It was interesting from an historical perspective.

Then you must have overlooked this part of the Bible. ....

Leviticus 20:13 “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.”

 

[featherlite]

Why is it always the most immoral people who grandstand morality.

guess its part of being a true partisan hack.