State Takes Legal Action to Seize $135K From Bakers Who Refused to Make Cake for Lesbian Couple

[bripat9643]

What about pedophiles? Don't they have a right to be served? What about Nazis? Does a Jewish baker have the right to refuse serving them?

THERE IT IS!

There what is? Are you clapping because someone threw you a sardine?

Congratulations for making the connection we've all been waiting for.

Oh, you mean between gays and pedophiles? I'm not the one to make the connection. I just note it when I observe it.

Of course you're not the one making the connection.........

So do pedophiles have a right to be served or not?

 

[bripat9643]

Oh, you mean between gays and pedophiles? I'm not the one to make the connection. I just note it when I observe it.

Very few gay people are pedophiles.

But then, nearly all pedophiles are gay.

I've read that something like half of all child molesters are gay, whereas they only makeup 3% of the population.

 

[bodecea]

THERE IT IS!

There what is? Are you clapping because someone threw you a sardine?

Congratulations for making the connection we've all been waiting for.

Oh, you mean between gays and pedophiles? I'm not the one to make the connection. I just note it when I observe it.

Of course you're not the one making the connection.........

So do pedophiles have a right to be served or not?

Pedophiles are criminals. It is disturbing that you don't seem to grasp that.

 

[Dot Com]

Where in the constitution does it state you lose your rights when you open a business?

Where does it state that you can lose your right to own a gun if you're a criminal? Same place...

There is a compelling government interest, plus due process was involved. Its the same concept that allows a person to be incarcerated, or placed on parole or probation.

Great, same answer to your question. A process was used, and it's both valid and constitutional.

Which doesn't make it right. When all you have is appeal to authority, you don't really have your own position.

"Appeal to authority".....in other words, ask to be protected from UNLAWFUL discrimination by the government......the horror!

I know right?

One can only hope that they are also charged interest until its paid-in-full to Uncle Sam

 

[ChrisL]

Good geebus! I have 100 quotes to answer and most in this thread. I can't answer all those , so if someone wanted to ask me something, you'll have to ask again.

 

[ChrisL]

Why didn't you guys cry when PA laws first appeared in the 60s?

Probably because I was in lindergarten.

Why such ignorance? Do you not understand the way our laws work and the reason why they exist? Are you advocating for Americans to discriminate against gay people?

I'm not advocating it, but the freedom to associate also means the freedom to no associate for whatever reason you deem appropriate.

That applies to your personal life, yes. Not with your business practice. Not for "whatever" reason. Nope.

That's your opinion, which has no basis in logic whatsoever. It's purely a personal whim. You can't give a legitimate reason for forcing people to associate with people they don't want to have anything to do with. The notion appears noxious the minute it's stated. So how do you justify it?

Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything. Your avatar is so fitting, you angry little man.

 

[JoeB131]

Pope John Paul II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Never be an absolutist, it makes you look stupid.

John Paul II was a scumbag. He hid the fact his Church was molesting children for decades.

The Shame of John Paul II: How the Sex Abuse Scandal Stained His Papacy

Should a pope who turned his back on the worst crisis in modern Catholic history be exalted as a saint? Lawsuits by victims, numerous prosecutions and news coverage of bishops who enabled abuse are the shadow story of John Paul’s twenty-six-year pontificate, during which time he responded to continuing allegations of clergy abuse with denial and inertia. American dioceses and religious orders alone have spent nearly $2 billion on legal actions and treatment of sex offenders, an aching scandal at incalculable cost to the church’s stature.

On the other hand, the pope looked askance at liberation theology, believing the Latin American grassroots movement to be an extension of the Marxism that had subjugated Poland. And he was conflicted on the role of progressive Latin American clergy who were allied with the poor and resisted persecution by death squads.

Moreover, on the greatest internal crisis facing the church, the pope failed, time and again, to take decisive action in response to clear evidence of a criminal underground in the priesthood, a subculture that sexually traumatized tens of thousands of youngsters. Despite a 1984 warning memo from the Rev. Thomas Doyle, then a canon lawyer in the Vatican Embassy in Washington, and a ninety-three-page report on the problem co-written by Doyle in 1985, which was sent to every American bishop, John Paul ordered no outreach to victims, no binding policy to rid the priesthood of deviants. In 1989 the US conference of bishops sent experts in canon law to Rome, seeking a streamlined process for defrocking child molesters rather than waiting for the byzantine Vatican bureaucracy and final word from the pope. John Paul refused. Litigation and prosecutions spread, but the pope remained passive.

 

[JoeB131]

Joe, I think you know that I'm not religious or even spiritual...but to say religion has done no good things, well that's ridiculous.

Don't buy it. Sorry. The best thing we could do is outlaw all the churches and close every last one of these frauds down.

 

[JoeB131]

The whole premise of PA laws was to fight systemic discrimination that had definable economic impacts on those discriminated against. It wasn't to protect the feelings of people. In the current state of society one baker not wanting to bake a cake for a gay wedding is not systemic, and is not economic harm.

People should only be forced to do things against their will when there is a compelling government interest.

Getting rid of HOmophobes is compelling governemnt interest.

We're done here.

 

[bripat9643]

There what is? Are you clapping because someone threw you a sardine?

Congratulations for making the connection we've all been waiting for.

Oh, you mean between gays and pedophiles? I'm not the one to make the connection. I just note it when I observe it.

Of course you're not the one making the connection.........

So do pedophiles have a right to be served or not?

Pedophiles are criminals. It is disturbing that you don't seem to grasp that.

Not after they have served their time. They are citizens, just like queers.

 

[bripat9643]

Joe, I think you know that I'm not religious or even spiritual...but to say religion has done no good things, well that's ridiculous.

Don't buy it. Sorry. The best thing we could do is outlaw all the churches and close every last one of these frauds down.

It would be smarter to outlaw government and shutting every one of these frauds down.

 

[bripat9643]

Probably because I was in lindergarten.

Why such ignorance? Do you not understand the way our laws work and the reason why they exist? Are you advocating for Americans to discriminate against gay people?

I'm not advocating it, but the freedom to associate also means the freedom to no associate for whatever reason you deem appropriate.

That applies to your personal life, yes. Not with your business practice. Not for "whatever" reason. Nope.

That's your opinion, which has no basis in logic whatsoever. It's purely a personal whim. You can't give a legitimate reason for forcing people to associate with people they don't want to have anything to do with. The notion appears noxious the minute it's stated. So how do you justify it?

Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything. Your avatar is so fitting, you angry little man.

PA laws definitely force people to do things. Apparently you don't understand the meaning of "law" or "force."

Now, how do you justify forcing people to associate with other people they don't want to have anything to do with?

 

[JoeB131]

It would be smarter to outlaw government and shutting every one of these frauds down.

So why haven't you moved to Somalia yet?

I mean, if you are so keen on "no government', you should move to that Libertarian Paradise.

 

[bripat9643]

It would be smarter to outlaw government and shutting every one of these frauds down.

So why haven't you moved to Somalia yet?

I mean, if you are so keen on "no government', you should move to that Libertarian Paradise.

It's not libertarian. Somalia has lots of government. It's divided up into dozens of fiefdoms just like the did during the Middle Ages.

 

[JoeB131]

PA laws definitely force people to do things. Apparently you don't understand the meaning of "law" or "force."

Now, how do you justify forcing people to associate with other people they don't want to have anything to do with?

But the bakers have a solution. If they don't want to associate with gays, they have the option of not owning a business gays might want to patronize.

Even smarter, not having the wife invite the Lesbians over to buy a cake and then have the husband scream bible verses at them. It's like, "not smart business". you kind of want people to buy the stuff you sell.

 

[bripat9643]

PA laws definitely force people to do things. Apparently you don't understand the meaning of "law" or "force."

Now, how do you justify forcing people to associate with other people they don't want to have anything to do with?

But the bakers have a solution. If they don't want to associate with gays, they have the option of not owning a business gays might want to patronize.

Even smarter, not having the wife invite the Lesbians over to buy a cake and then have the husband scream bible verses at them. It's like, "not smart business". you kind of want people to buy the stuff you sell.

Yeah, and the victim of a mugging has a solution: turn over his wallet to the mugger if he doesn't want a bullet between the eyes.

That's the leftist conception of "choice," alright.

Leftists can't help revealing their totalitarian cloven hoof.

 

[Dot Com]

PA laws definitely force people to do things. Apparently you don't understand the meaning of "law" or "force."

Now, how do you justify forcing people to associate with other people they don't want to have anything to do with?

But the bakers have a solution. If they don't want to associate with gays, they have the option of not owning a business gays might want to patronize.

Even smarter, not having the wife invite the Lesbians over to buy a cake and then have the husband scream bible verses at them. It's like, "not smart business". you kind of want people to buy the stuff you sell.

PLUS they sicked the god squad on them via FB (according to bodey). Not smart.

 

[ChrisL]

Why such ignorance? Do you not understand the way our laws work and the reason why they exist? Are you advocating for Americans to discriminate against gay people?

I'm not advocating it, but the freedom to associate also means the freedom to no associate for whatever reason you deem appropriate.

That applies to your personal life, yes. Not with your business practice. Not for "whatever" reason. Nope.

That's your opinion, which has no basis in logic whatsoever. It's purely a personal whim. You can't give a legitimate reason for forcing people to associate with people they don't want to have anything to do with. The notion appears noxious the minute it's stated. So how do you justify it?

Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything. Your avatar is so fitting, you angry little man.

PA laws definitely force people to do things. Apparently you don't understand the meaning of "law" or "force."

Now, how do you justify forcing people to associate with other people they don't want to have anything to do with?

No they do not. Nobody is forcing you to open a public accommodation business. If you can't abide by the laws, then don't open a business that caters to the public.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm not advocating it, but the freedom to associate also means the freedom to no associate for whatever reason you deem appropriate.

That applies to your personal life, yes. Not with your business practice. Not for "whatever" reason. Nope.

That's your opinion, which has no basis in logic whatsoever. It's purely a personal whim. You can't give a legitimate reason for forcing people to associate with people they don't want to have anything to do with. The notion appears noxious the minute it's stated. So how do you justify it?

Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything. Your avatar is so fitting, you angry little man.

PA laws definitely force people to do things. Apparently you don't understand the meaning of "law" or "force."

Now, how do you justify forcing people to associate with other people they don't want to have anything to do with?

No they do not. Nobody is forcing you to open a public accommodation business. If you can't abide by the laws, then don't open a business that caters to the public.

And a mugger doesn't force you to hand over your wallet. You have the option of taking a bullet between the eyes.

Those are the kind of "choices" that fascist leftwing thugs like you believe in.

 

[bodecea]

Oh, you mean between gays and pedophiles? I'm not the one to make the connection. I just note it when I observe it.

Very few gay people are pedophiles.

But then, nearly all pedophiles are gay.

I've read that something like half of all child molesters are gay, whereas they only makeup 3% of the population.

And what periodical on pedophiles did you read that in?