Rules For Traditionals: How People In Wedding Trades Can Defend Themselves

[ogibillm]

Maybe it is not high enough

That confirms you are a jerk.

Realist

If you own a business and are informed that blatant discrimination bears a $150k fine and you think your personal hatreds are more important....then you made a choice to pay the fine

In this situation you shouldn't have to make the choice to begin with.

A choice of "We don't serve n*ggers here"?

I thought we settled that 50 years ago

And if we would allow it today, we would all be a lot more honest with each other. Back then the force of government was firmly on the side of the segregationists, without that government force, they couldn't really survive unless they were some small niche business, or in a town entirely full of hard on racists.

Are you so naive that you think the only reason businesses segregated was due to the law, and only businesses operating under segregation laws did so?

 

[martybegan]

That confirms you are a jerk.

Realist

If you own a business and are informed that blatant discrimination bears a $150k fine and you think your personal hatreds are more important....then you made a choice to pay the fine

In this situation you shouldn't have to make the choice to begin with.

A choice of "We don't serve n*ggers here"?

I thought we settled that 50 years ago

And if we would allow it today, we would all be a lot more honest with each other. Back then the force of government was firmly on the side of the segregationists, without that government force, they couldn't really survive unless they were some small niche business, or in a town entirely full of hard on racists.

50 years ago we established the role of business in the public domain

Discrimination against customers you find "yucky" is not allowed

In response to government mandated discrimination is said domain. The original systemic discrimination that existed does no longer. The tools we used then are no longer needed, but are continued because people like you love forcing your will on others.

 

[martybegan]

That confirms you are a jerk.

Realist

If you own a business and are informed that blatant discrimination bears a $150k fine and you think your personal hatreds are more important....then you made a choice to pay the fine

In this situation you shouldn't have to make the choice to begin with.

A choice of "We don't serve n*ggers here"?

I thought we settled that 50 years ago

And if we would allow it today, we would all be a lot more honest with each other. Back then the force of government was firmly on the side of the segregationists, without that government force, they couldn't really survive unless they were some small niche business, or in a town entirely full of hard on racists.

Are you so naive that you think the only reason businesses segregated was due to the law, and only businesses operating under segregation laws did so?

The reason it survived as long as it did was due to the law, same as slavery. It needed government protection to maintain towards the end its existence, same as slavery.

And once government protection was lifted it went away, same as slavery. Now the laws used to get there are being used on non-systemic discrimination in non-essential commerce, and that was not the intent of the laws.

 

[rightwinger]

Realist

If you own a business and are informed that blatant discrimination bears a $150k fine and you think your personal hatreds are more important....then you made a choice to pay the fine

In this situation you shouldn't have to make the choice to begin with.

A choice of "We don't serve n*ggers here"?

I thought we settled that 50 years ago

And if we would allow it today, we would all be a lot more honest with each other. Back then the force of government was firmly on the side of the segregationists, without that government force, they couldn't really survive unless they were some small niche business, or in a town entirely full of hard on racists.

50 years ago we established the role of business in the public domain

Discrimination against customers you find "yucky" is not allowed

In response to government mandated discrimination is said domain. The original systemic discrimination that existed does no longer. The tools we used then are no longer needed, but are continued because people like you love forcing your will on others.

The signs said......."We" don't serve colored here

not

"The government mandates we are not allowed to serve colored here


You would think that 50 years later, business would have gotten the word about discriminating. Now its....If we wrap it in religious freedom to discriminate, we can do what we want

 

[martybegan]

In this situation you shouldn't have to make the choice to begin with.

A choice of "We don't serve n*ggers here"?

I thought we settled that 50 years ago

And if we would allow it today, we would all be a lot more honest with each other. Back then the force of government was firmly on the side of the segregationists, without that government force, they couldn't really survive unless they were some small niche business, or in a town entirely full of hard on racists.

50 years ago we established the role of business in the public domain

Discrimination against customers you find "yucky" is not allowed

In response to government mandated discrimination is said domain. The original systemic discrimination that existed does no longer. The tools we used then are no longer needed, but are continued because people like you love forcing your will on others.

The signs said......."We" don't serve colored here

not

"The government mandates we are not allowed to serve colored here


You would think that 50 years later, business would have gotten the word about discriminating. Now its....If we wrap it in religious freedom to discriminate, we can do what we want

There was still a law that mandated that, usually at the municipal level.
And that law was enforced.

50 years later the same laws are being used to soothe hurt feewings, they were meant to fix economic disparity, not because some couple has a sadz, and had to find another baker 30 min later.

 

[Pop23]

No you did a snarky non-answer.

The question is, is not serving a wedding cake to a gay couple worth a $150k fine?

Maybe it is not high enough

That confirms you are a jerk.

Realist

If you own a business and are informed that blatant discrimination bears a $150k fine and you think your personal hatreds are more important....then you made a choice to pay the fine

In this situation you shouldn't have to make the choice to begin with.

A choice of "We don't serve n*ggers here"?

I thought we settled that 50 years ago

Blacks don't make the choice to be black.

Bruce Jenner proves that gays can.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Yeah, doesn't work that way when it comes to a wedding cake. Wedding cakes are now for gay people as well. If you can't deal with that, close, you won't be missed.

That's called fascism, asshole. No one is surprised that you support it.

Once again- you confuse following the law with 'fascism'.

It's the content of the law that constitutes fascism. You seem to believe it's impossible to have fascist laws. Here's a clue for you, numskull, the Nazis passed laws for everything they did, even sending Jews to concentration camps.

It boggles my mind that you turds are so stupid and brainwashed that you don't understand the distinction between law and justice. A good little toady of the all powerful state believes them to be the same thing, just like you.

Ahhh, another Godwin moment.

I am surprised.

As I've explained many times in the past, "Godwin's law" is bullshit. It was conceived by a liberal to protect liberals from the inevitable comparisons that were bound to be made between their beliefs and the beliefs of Nazis.

And yet, it's Righties who love to use the title far more than Lefties when they see a holocaust reference they don't like...

 

[rightwinger]

Maybe it is not high enough

That confirms you are a jerk.

Realist

If you own a business and are informed that blatant discrimination bears a $150k fine and you think your personal hatreds are more important....then you made a choice to pay the fine

In this situation you shouldn't have to make the choice to begin with.

A choice of "We don't serve n*ggers here"?

I thought we settled that 50 years ago

Blacks don't make the choice to be black.

Bruce Jenner proves that gays can.

Seems Bruce was transgender his whole life. Two of his ex-wives have said he admitted it to them. The "gays choose to be gay" myth does not justify discrimination

 

[Dante]

Whatever 'principles' these homophobic bakers are hiding behind are based in ignorance and fear. They are not 'principles' but mere excuses to perpetuate more petty repression against a class of American citizens who are committing no crime by simply being who they are.

It doesn't make any difference what their motives are. You have no right to be served by any business, period.

Sorry Bripiss, but repeating what is wrong doesn't make it right. You lost this argument, decades ago.

Take some of your own advice. Forcing people to associate with other people they don't want to associate with is what's wrong. I realize a Nazi asshole like you will never understand that, but I will repeat it as many times as necessary for those who are capable of committing logic.

selling a cake is nothing like associating with people.

That's exactly what it is, numskull. The usual liberal trick of changing the definition of words, only fools the gullible.

What about the guy who sells the flour or the icing to the baker? Are they participating in a gay marriage?

 

[Dante]

Freedom means you can walk into any business open to the public and purchase their goods and services, without being turned away on the basis of you race, age, sex, religion, or sexual orientation. Period. End of story.

If you want to be in business, you cannot impugn the freedom of your customers.

Neither the Baker or the Florist denied service IN THEIR BUSINESS.

Entirely untrue, but it matters not a damn. Do you think they bake cakes on-site?

They denied service over what the cake and flowers were for, which is none of their ******* business,

Here's a lovely cake. If YOU want to ice it once you leave, be my guest.

Have a nice day

Yeah, doesn't work that way when it comes to a wedding cake. Wedding cakes are now for gay people as well. If you can't deal with that, close, you won't be missed.

That's called fascism, asshole. No one is surprised that you support it.

Wow! Throwing 'fascism' around? I thought righties hated that tactic

 

[Dante]

Unless the baker advertises Hitler cakes, he/she doesn't have to bake a Hitler cake. The baker wouldn't bake a Hitler cake for anyone. But if the baker agrees to bake a Hitler cake for me, she/he can't refuse to bake one for you.

So what if the baker advertises heterosexual wedding cakes?

Why would a baker care? Do they sell other cakes to gays? Maybe gays use other cakes during sexual acts.

 

[Dante]

That confirms you are a jerk.

Realist

If you own a business and are informed that blatant discrimination bears a $150k fine and you think your personal hatreds are more important....then you made a choice to pay the fine

In this situation you shouldn't have to make the choice to begin with.

A choice of "We don't serve n*ggers here"?

I thought we settled that 50 years ago

Blacks don't make the choice to be black.

Bruce Jenner proves that gays can.

Seems Bruce was transgender his whole life. Two of his ex-wives have said he admitted it to them. The "gays choose to be gay" myth does not justify discrimination

the fool thinks all transgender people are gay?

 

[Statistikhengst]

Unless the baker advertises Hitler cakes, he/she doesn't have to bake a Hitler cake. The baker wouldn't bake a Hitler cake for anyone. But if the baker agrees to bake a Hitler cake for me, she/he can't refuse to bake one for you.

So what if the baker advertises heterosexual wedding cakes?

Why would a baker care? Do they sell other cakes to gays? Maybe gays use other cakes during sexual acts.

OMG...

 

[Nosmo King]

Ahhh, another Godwin moment.

I am surprised.

As I've explained many times in the past, "Godwin's law" is bullshit. It was conceived by a liberal to protect liberals from the inevitable comparisons that were bound to be made between their beliefs and the beliefs of Nazis.

It was the Nazis who enabled discrimination against German Jews,

much like you RWnuts want to enable discrimination against American gays.

Your side is advocating government persecution of people for their beliefs over something as trivial as a wedding cake. All the enabling is on your side this time.

Its not about fairness to you, its about punishing those who disagree with you, and like a coward, using government to do it instead of doing it yourself.

Progressives are always tough guys/girls when authority is behind them.

So, let me get this straight. "Fairness" equals "Discrimination". And 'Beliefs" equals "justification".

Fairness equals determining which impact is worse, two people having to go to another baker, or using government to force people to comply with something against their beliefs. In the case of Jim Crow, the side was on force, in this situation, the side is on the gay couple going somewhere else.

So, "fairness" is making Gay customers settle for less? Fairness is a customer not being discriminated against simply because of who they are. Fairness is equal access to vendors who provide the services for every other customer. Fairness does not mean because you are Gay or Black or Asian or Latino you the customer must seek out alternatives.

The impact on Gay customers is the perpetuation of petty repression by those who are more filled with hate and fear than true Christian love.

As Gays are not committing any crime, presumably they are wearing shirts and shoes, pose not physical threat to the business or its employees and yet you think it's 'fair' for them to be denied simply because they are Gay.

Does that mean petty repression is fair?

 

[bripat9643]

Unless the baker advertises Hitler cakes, he/she doesn't have to bake a Hitler cake. The baker wouldn't bake a Hitler cake for anyone. But if the baker agrees to bake a Hitler cake for me, she/he can't refuse to bake one for you.

So what if the baker advertises heterosexual wedding cakes?

Why would a baker care? Do they sell other cakes to gays? Maybe gays use other cakes during sexual acts.

You didn't answer the question, weasel.

 

[bripat9643]

In this situation you shouldn't have to make the choice to begin with.

A choice of "We don't serve n*ggers here"?

I thought we settled that 50 years ago

And if we would allow it today, we would all be a lot more honest with each other. Back then the force of government was firmly on the side of the segregationists, without that government force, they couldn't really survive unless they were some small niche business, or in a town entirely full of hard on racists.

50 years ago we established the role of business in the public domain

Discrimination against customers you find "yucky" is not allowed

In response to government mandated discrimination is said domain. The original systemic discrimination that existed does no longer. The tools we used then are no longer needed, but are continued because people like you love forcing your will on others.

The signs said......."We" don't serve colored here

not

"The government mandates we are not allowed to serve colored here


You would think that 50 years later, business would have gotten the word about discriminating. Now its....If we wrap it in religious freedom to discriminate, we can do what we want

It doesn't matter what the sign said, it's what the law said that mattered.

 

[martybegan]

As I've explained many times in the past, "Godwin's law" is bullshit. It was conceived by a liberal to protect liberals from the inevitable comparisons that were bound to be made between their beliefs and the beliefs of Nazis.

It was the Nazis who enabled discrimination against German Jews,

much like you RWnuts want to enable discrimination against American gays.

Your side is advocating government persecution of people for their beliefs over something as trivial as a wedding cake. All the enabling is on your side this time.

Its not about fairness to you, its about punishing those who disagree with you, and like a coward, using government to do it instead of doing it yourself.

Progressives are always tough guys/girls when authority is behind them.

So, let me get this straight. "Fairness" equals "Discrimination". And 'Beliefs" equals "justification".

Fairness equals determining which impact is worse, two people having to go to another baker, or using government to force people to comply with something against their beliefs. In the case of Jim Crow, the side was on force, in this situation, the side is on the gay couple going somewhere else.

So, "fairness" is making Gay customers settle for less? Fairness is a customer not being discriminated against simply because of who they are. Fairness is equal access to vendors who provide the services for every other customer. Fairness does not mean because you are Gay or Black or Asian or Latino you the customer must seek out alternatives.

The impact on Gay customers is the perpetuation of petty repression by those who are more filled with hate and fear than true Christian love.

As Gays are not committing any crime, presumably they are wearing shirts and shoes, pose not physical threat to the business or its employees and yet you think it's 'fair' for them to be denied simply because they are Gay.

Does that mean petty repression is fair?

So only the few bakers that refuse to serve gays are able to make the best cakes? How do you know they are settling for less? By your opinion of religious people, I surprised to learn you think they even have the skills to make good cakes.

The impact on gay customers is less than the impact of forcing people to act against their will in this case, in a non-essential service. The use of government to force these people to comply is far worse than having to spend a few more minutes finding another baker, and any hurt feewings. Considering you don't seem to give a rats ass about the bakers feelings, it only comes down to who you like better, and that isn't how government is supposed to work.

Gays have to face the fact, that until the major religions are gone from the face of the earth, their lifestyle is seen as sinful, they will never gain the acceptance of these people, and using government to either force acceptance or social banishment is counter productive, petty, and just plain wrong.

 

[deaddogseye]

Hey Melissa, as of yesterday, you'll be cutting two checks, one for 75K and another for 60K. Hope it was worth it to you.

As for "defending" yourself, just bake the stupid cake. Doing what you already do for a living is hardly too much to ask.

I just don't understand why these bakers etc don't just make the gays the worst, most overpriced, poorly done cake ever made (advance payment required, of course). Its the perfect free market response and will put an end to this real fast

 

[Statistikhengst]

Hey Melissa, as of yesterday, you'll be cutting two checks, one for 75K and another for 60K. Hope it was worth it to you.

As for "defending" yourself, just bake the stupid cake. Doing what you already do for a living is hardly too much to ask.

I just don't understand why these bakers etc don't just make the gays the worst, most overpriced, poorly done cake ever made (advance payment required, of course). Its the perfect free market response and will put an end to this real fast

Plocha. Oycheny plocha. Bladya!

 

[Nosmo King]

It was the Nazis who enabled discrimination against German Jews,

much like you RWnuts want to enable discrimination against American gays.

Your side is advocating government persecution of people for their beliefs over something as trivial as a wedding cake. All the enabling is on your side this time.

Its not about fairness to you, its about punishing those who disagree with you, and like a coward, using government to do it instead of doing it yourself.

Progressives are always tough guys/girls when authority is behind them.

So, let me get this straight. "Fairness" equals "Discrimination". And 'Beliefs" equals "justification".

Fairness equals determining which impact is worse, two people having to go to another baker, or using government to force people to comply with something against their beliefs. In the case of Jim Crow, the side was on force, in this situation, the side is on the gay couple going somewhere else.

So, "fairness" is making Gay customers settle for less? Fairness is a customer not being discriminated against simply because of who they are. Fairness is equal access to vendors who provide the services for every other customer. Fairness does not mean because you are Gay or Black or Asian or Latino you the customer must seek out alternatives.

The impact on Gay customers is the perpetuation of petty repression by those who are more filled with hate and fear than true Christian love.

As Gays are not committing any crime, presumably they are wearing shirts and shoes, pose not physical threat to the business or its employees and yet you think it's 'fair' for them to be denied simply because they are Gay.

Does that mean petty repression is fair?

So only the few bakers that refuse to serve gays are able to make the best cakes? How do you know they are settling for less? By your opinion of religious people, I surprised to learn you think they even have the skills to make good cakes.

The impact on gay customers is less than the impact of forcing people to act against their will in this case, in a non-essential service. The use of government to force these people to comply is far worse than having to spend a few more minutes finding another baker, and any hurt feewings. Considering you don't seem to give a rats ass about the bakers feelings, it only comes down to who you like better, and that isn't how government is supposed to work.

Gays have to face the fact, that until the major religions are gone from the face of the earth, their lifestyle is seen as sinful, they will never gain the acceptance of these people, and using government to either force acceptance or social banishment is counter productive, petty, and just plain wrong.

The bakers who refuse service to Gays may be the only baker in town. They may be the best baker in town. And for you to comment on what you think are my thoughts about Christians is uncalled for. I have a very high opinion of Christians as I am one myself. I do, however, have a very low opinion of ignorant homophobes adopting a patina of Christianity to shield them from legal action after their bigotry harms innocent customers.

Why did you intentionally misspell 'feelings' when referring to homosexuals yet correctly spell it when referring to bigots?

Now, surely there will be those clad in ecclesiastical robes preaching about the supposed sinfulness of a homosexual lifestyle. That's all well and good in a church. But that vitriol has no place in public commerce. Suppose that same "preacher": told his congregation that Mexicans are inferior human specimens. Should those acolytes of hatred then extend that twisted philosophy to their businesses? Is that considered fair?

We were admonished bty the Lord to 'judge not lest ye be judged' and yet, these alleged Christians are using an obscure passage in a letter from Paul to a congregation in Rome to continue their petty repressions.