Why Must We Abandon Our Religious Beliefs to Operate A Business?

[WorldWatcher]

Sifting through the details of this case reminds me of the first time I went into a strip bar. I remember the women were all wearing "pasties" - these little covers over their nipples. I asked about it and someone said it was a state law. And I remembered imagining lawmakers, deliberating on this law - discussing the size and material required for the nipple coverings.

My thought at the time was similar to my reaction now. Is this really the kind of shit we want government worrying about?

>>>>

 

[Skull Pilot]

FYI the cake doesn't sanctify anything. It's a cake that is all it is.

But let's use your example.

Does making a cake for a murderer sanctify murder?
Does making a cake for an adulterer sanctify adultery?

You see IDGAF if people refuse service but I will tell them when they are inconsistent and hypocritical.

No one will tell me why the gay sin is somehow worse than all the other sins that a cake baker will ignore

a cake for a murderer? as in "CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR FIRST MURDER" ??? I do believe that a baker should not be required to create such a cake. Regarding the
cake for a homosexual marriage-------we were not provided
with ENOUGH INFORMATION

I see you , like everyone else, avoided my question.

If making a cake for a gay guy is a sin why isn't making a cake for any other sinner a sin?

Maybe it would be, but I doubt murderers announce the fact they are murderers and ask for a cake to celebrate their murder(s)?

It doesn't matter does it?

Or is ignorance of sin an excuse?

If you don’t know a person has sinned (ie murdered in your example) you don’t know, do you????

Isn't it your duty to ask I mean if serving sinners endangers your immortal soul why take the risk?

 

[danielpalos]

but if you're not committing the gay sin how is baking a cake for someone who is gay a sin?

None. Of. Your. Business.

Maybe you should write this down, because you absolutely SUCK at remembering to quit being a nosy, controlling busybody.

Still not an answer to what is a very simple question

And it happens to be a relevant question because that is the argument used by the bakers as a reason why they refuse to serve gay sinners but will serve any other sinners willing to pay for their wares.

Why is the gay sin so much worse than all the other sins committed by their customers?

No, and it's not GOING to be an answer to your question, because you're not entitled to one. It's NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. "What color panties are you wearing?" is also a simple question, but I wouldn't answer THAT, either, because it's personal and it assumes that it is okay for you to ask things that are NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.

Speaking of simple things, why can't YOU understand a simple concept like minding your own business?

If the baker wants to engage in this conversation, then feel free to go ask him. THIS particular debate, however, is with ME, and MY position is that the First Amendment guarantees me the right to exercise my religious beliefs without any need whatsoever to explain, justify, or ask approval for them.

Decide who you want to talk to, and make it so.

Do you think your right to religious freedom is absolute and trumps other rights?

I believe that the Constitution is the Supreme law of the land. I don't believe same-sex marriage is a right. Why don't you show me in the Constitution where marriage is a right.

freedom of association and contract are considered, natural rights.

 

[Skull Pilot]

In Colorado, the state where Masterpiece Cakes is, it is illegal to discriminate based on sexual orientation.

Mr. Phillips, admits he makes wedding cakes, he refused service not because he didn't make wedding cakes - he refused service based on who the sexual orientation of the customers.


>>>>

the requested cake was not SPECIFIC to homo-sexuality?

No it looked like any other wedding cake.

There was no writing on it, the people would have provided their own top figurines and could have put them on the cake themselves

They said it was for a same-sex wedding. The baker doesn't believe in queer marriage, and that's his right.

So what?

The cake was no different than any other cake. His refusal of service violated the public accommodation laws.

There is no exemption. He might believe interracial marriage is a sin too would he be justified in refusing service there too?

And I really don't care but if you want to be consistent ( and I don't think you do) then you would be just fine with your boss being able to fire you because of your religion if he didn't agree with it.

"So what". Exactly. You leftists demand respect, but you somehow think you don't have to show any.

I'm no leftists and you haven't been around very long if you think I am.

I just don't take everything people say as the truth.

The baker didn't give a shit about serving all the other sinners in the world did he?

SO answer the question

Do you think an employer should be able to fire people because he disagrees with their religion?

 

[Tilly]

It IS illegal to terminate an employee based on discrimination on race or gender------

In Colorado, the state where Masterpiece Cakes is, it is illegal to discriminate based on sexual orientation.

Mr. Phillips, admits he makes wedding cakes, he refused service not because he didn't make wedding cakes - he refused service based on who the sexual orientation of the customers.


>>>>

the requested cake was not SPECIFIC to homo-sexuality?

No it looked like any other wedding cake.

There was no writing on it, the people would have provided their own top figurines and could have put them on the cake themselves

They said it was for a same-sex wedding. The baker doesn't believe in queer marriage, and that's his right.

So what?

The cake was no different than any other cake. His refusal of service violated the public accommodation laws.

There is no exemption. He might believe interracial marriage is a sin too would he be justified in refusing service there too?

And I really don't care but if you want to be consistent ( and I don't think you do) then you would be just fine with your boss being able to fire you because of your religion if he didn't agree with it.

I think if the baker is baking the cake to order it’s differemt.
This from a recent case:


Calif. Court Rules Christian Baker Cannot Be Forced to Make Cake for Same-Sex Wedding

"No artist, having placed their work for public sale, may refuse to sell for an unlawful discriminatory purpose. No baker may place their wares in a public display case, open their shop, and then refuse to sell because of race, religion, gender, or gender identification.
The difference here is that the cake in question is not yet baked. The State is not petitioning the court to order defendants to sell cake. The State asks this court to compel Miller to use her talents to design and create a cake she has not yet conceived with the knowledge that her work will be displayed in celebration of a marital union her religion forbids.

For this court to force such compliance would do violence to the essentials of Free Speech guaranteed under the First Amendment," he added.

The Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund which represented Miller in the case said Lampe's ruling represented a win for religious liberty.

 

[danielpalos]

The activists and their queer friends are always crying about others forcing their beliefs on them, then the asswipes go out of their way to target Christian businesses and destroy them if they don't submit. Hypocritical trash. Don't compromise with the vermin. Destroy them.

Imagine all those christian businesses destroyed.....what is it? In the 1000s? 100,000s?

One is one too many. Don't like it when citizens stand up, do ya.

Stand up? You call it standing up when a business whines about being persecuted because they don't want to follow the business laws they promised to when receiving their business license? Standing up? I call it being whiny, lying bigot. If I had my way, it would all be solved by just taking their business licenses away.

Of course, that's because you're a fascist and don't believe in Constitutional rights for Christians.

Good and True Christians don't claim moral Standards on a for-the-profit-of-lucre basis.

 

[dblack]

Do you think an employer should be able to fire people because he disagrees with their religion?

When it comes to decisions about who we associate with - who we work for, who we serve, who hire or fire - government shouldn't be allowed to second guess our reasons.

 

[Skull Pilot]

In Colorado, the state where Masterpiece Cakes is, it is illegal to discriminate based on sexual orientation.

Mr. Phillips, admits he makes wedding cakes, he refused service not because he didn't make wedding cakes - he refused service based on who the sexual orientation of the customers.


>>>>

the requested cake was not SPECIFIC to homo-sexuality?

No it looked like any other wedding cake.

There was no writing on it, the people would have provided their own top figurines and could have put them on the cake themselves

They said it was for a same-sex wedding. The baker doesn't believe in queer marriage, and that's his right.

So what?

The cake was no different than any other cake. His refusal of service violated the public accommodation laws.

There is no exemption. He might believe interracial marriage is a sin too would he be justified in refusing service there too?

And I really don't care but if you want to be consistent ( and I don't think you do) then you would be just fine with your boss being able to fire you because of your religion if he didn't agree with it.

I think if the baker is baking the cake to order it’s differemt.
This from a recent case:


Calif. Court Rules Christian Baker Cannot Be Forced to Make Cake for Same-Sex Wedding

"No artist, having placed their work for public sale, may refuse to sell for an unlawful discriminatory purpose. No baker may place their wares in a public display case, open their shop, and then refuse to sell because of race, religion, gender, or gender identification.
The difference here is that the cake in question is not yet baked. The State is not petitioning the court to order defendants to sell cake. The State asks this court to compel Miller to use her talents to design and create a cake she has not yet conceived with the knowledge that her work will be displayed in celebration of a marital union her religion forbids.

For this court to force such compliance would do violence to the essentials of Free Speech guaranteed under the First Amendment," he added.

The Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund which represented Miller in the case said Lampe's ruling represented a win for religious liberty.

Well we disagree there.

But lets apply the refusal thing to other situations.

If your boss decides that employing women is a sin can he fire them all?
If your boss thinks employing people in mixed marriages is a sin can he fire them for it?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Do you think an employer should be able to fire people because he disagrees with their religion?

When it comes to decisions about who we associate with - who we work for, who we serve, who hire or fire - government shouldn't be allowed to second guess our reasons.

So is that a yes or a no to the question?

 

[dblack]

Do you think an employer should be able to fire people because he disagrees with their religion?

When it comes to decisions about who we associate with - who we work for, who we serve, who hire or fire - government shouldn't be allowed to second guess our reasons.

So is that a yes or a no to the question?

That's an unequivocal 'yes'.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Do you think an employer should be able to fire people because he disagrees with their religion?

When it comes to decisions about who we associate with - who we work for, who we serve, who hire or fire - government shouldn't be allowed to second guess our reasons.

So is that a yes or a no to the question?

That's an unequivocal 'yes'.

OK

I don't disagree with you but given the fact that we have laws to prevent such actions then until those laws are repealed anyone violating them will face the consequences.

In the long run I think it is an ill advised business decision to fire people because of their religion since we seem to have a lowering tolerance to such things

 

[Tilly]

a cake for a murderer? as in "CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR FIRST MURDER" ??? I do believe that a baker should not be required to create such a cake. Regarding the
cake for a homosexual marriage-------we were not provided
with ENOUGH INFORMATION

I see you , like everyone else, avoided my question.

If making a cake for a gay guy is a sin why isn't making a cake for any other sinner a sin?

Maybe it would be, but I doubt murderers announce the fact they are murderers and ask for a cake to celebrate their murder(s)?

It doesn't matter does it?

Or is ignorance of sin an excuse?

If you don’t know a person has sinned (ie murdered in your example) you don’t know, do you????

Isn't it your duty to ask I mean if serving sinners endangers your immortal soul why take the risk?

I don’t know if it’s a duty to ask, I’m not religious, maybe someone who is can answer. BUT I would imagine not knowing means it isn’t a sin, as one can’t possibly know everything about a customer or even another person in general and can’t be expected to. People generally don’t announce their ‘sins’ to others, but clearly this is not the case when a same sex couple order a wedding cake.
Also. there is probably the issue of repentance. A gay person ordering a wedding cake for a wedding to someone of the same sex clearly isn’t repenting.

 

[danielpalos]

Do you think an employer should be able to fire people because he disagrees with their religion?

When it comes to decisions about who we associate with - who we work for, who we serve, who hire or fire - government shouldn't be allowed to second guess our reasons.

Common sense under the common law should mean, not-for-profit status if you want to complain about morals.

 

[dblack]

Do you think an employer should be able to fire people because he disagrees with their religion?

When it comes to decisions about who we associate with - who we work for, who we serve, who hire or fire - government shouldn't be allowed to second guess our reasons.

So is that a yes or a no to the question?

That's an unequivocal 'yes'.

OK

I don't disagree with you but given the fact that we have laws to prevent such actions then until those laws are repealed anyone violating them will face the consequences.

It's my understanding that the point of the thread is discussing whether it should be illegal. The fact of the matter is that the law does violate religious freedom, as well as the more fundamental freedom of association. It should be struck down.

 

[danielpalos]

Do you think an employer should be able to fire people because he disagrees with their religion?

When it comes to decisions about who we associate with - who we work for, who we serve, who hire or fire - government shouldn't be allowed to second guess our reasons.

So is that a yes or a no to the question?

That's an unequivocal 'yes'.

OK

I don't disagree with you but given the fact that we have laws to prevent such actions then until those laws are repealed anyone violating them will face the consequences.

It's my understanding that the point of the thread is discussing whether it should be illegal. The fact of the matter is that he law does violate religious freedom, as well as the more fundamental freedom of association. It should be struck down.

for-profit means for the bottom line, not morals.

 

[Tilly]

the requested cake was not SPECIFIC to homo-sexuality?

No it looked like any other wedding cake.

There was no writing on it, the people would have provided their own top figurines and could have put them on the cake themselves

They said it was for a same-sex wedding. The baker doesn't believe in queer marriage, and that's his right.

So what?

The cake was no different than any other cake. His refusal of service violated the public accommodation laws.

There is no exemption. He might believe interracial marriage is a sin too would he be justified in refusing service there too?

And I really don't care but if you want to be consistent ( and I don't think you do) then you would be just fine with your boss being able to fire you because of your religion if he didn't agree with it.

I think if the baker is baking the cake to order it’s differemt.
This from a recent case:


Calif. Court Rules Christian Baker Cannot Be Forced to Make Cake for Same-Sex Wedding

"No artist, having placed their work for public sale, may refuse to sell for an unlawful discriminatory purpose. No baker may place their wares in a public display case, open their shop, and then refuse to sell because of race, religion, gender, or gender identification.
The difference here is that the cake in question is not yet baked. The State is not petitioning the court to order defendants to sell cake. The State asks this court to compel Miller to use her talents to design and create a cake she has not yet conceived with the knowledge that her work will be displayed in celebration of a marital union her religion forbids.

For this court to force such compliance would do violence to the essentials of Free Speech guaranteed under the First Amendment," he added.

The Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund which represented Miller in the case said Lampe's ruling represented a win for religious liberty.

Well we disagree there.

But lets apply the refusal thing to other situations.

If your boss decides that employing women is a sin can he fire them all?
If your boss thinks employing people in mixed marriages is a sin can he fire them for it?

I’m not aware of anything in the bible that says employing people in mixed marriages or employing women is a sin.

 

[bodecea]

In Colorado, the state where Masterpiece Cakes is, it is illegal to discriminate based on sexual orientation.

Mr. Phillips, admits he makes wedding cakes, he refused service not because he didn't make wedding cakes - he refused service based on who the sexual orientation of the customers.


>>>>

the requested cake was not SPECIFIC to homo-sexuality?

No it looked like any other wedding cake.

There was no writing on it, the people would have provided their own top figurines and could have put them on the cake themselves

They said it was for a same-sex wedding. The baker doesn't believe in queer marriage, and that's his right.

So what?

The cake was no different than any other cake. His refusal of service violated the public accommodation laws.

There is no exemption. He might believe interracial marriage is a sin too would he be justified in refusing service there too?

And I really don't care but if you want to be consistent ( and I don't think you do) then you would be just fine with your boss being able to fire you because of your religion if he didn't agree with it.

I think if the baker is baking the cake to order it’s differemt.
This from a recent case:


Calif. Court Rules Christian Baker Cannot Be Forced to Make Cake for Same-Sex Wedding

"No artist, having placed their work for public sale, may refuse to sell for an unlawful discriminatory purpose. No baker may place their wares in a public display case, open their shop, and then refuse to sell because of race, religion, gender, or gender identification.
The difference here is that the cake in question is not yet baked. The State is not petitioning the court to order defendants to sell cake. The State asks this court to compel Miller to use her talents to design and create a cake she has not yet conceived with the knowledge that her work will be displayed in celebration of a marital union her religion forbids.

For this court to force such compliance would do violence to the essentials of Free Speech guaranteed under the First Amendment," he added.

The Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund which represented Miller in the case said Lampe's ruling represented a win for religious liberty.

Watch what happens to that case on appeal.

 

[bodecea]

No it looked like any other wedding cake.

There was no writing on it, the people would have provided their own top figurines and could have put them on the cake themselves

They said it was for a same-sex wedding. The baker doesn't believe in queer marriage, and that's his right.

So what?

The cake was no different than any other cake. His refusal of service violated the public accommodation laws.

There is no exemption. He might believe interracial marriage is a sin too would he be justified in refusing service there too?

And I really don't care but if you want to be consistent ( and I don't think you do) then you would be just fine with your boss being able to fire you because of your religion if he didn't agree with it.

I think if the baker is baking the cake to order it’s differemt.
This from a recent case:


Calif. Court Rules Christian Baker Cannot Be Forced to Make Cake for Same-Sex Wedding

"No artist, having placed their work for public sale, may refuse to sell for an unlawful discriminatory purpose. No baker may place their wares in a public display case, open their shop, and then refuse to sell because of race, religion, gender, or gender identification.
The difference here is that the cake in question is not yet baked. The State is not petitioning the court to order defendants to sell cake. The State asks this court to compel Miller to use her talents to design and create a cake she has not yet conceived with the knowledge that her work will be displayed in celebration of a marital union her religion forbids.

For this court to force such compliance would do violence to the essentials of Free Speech guaranteed under the First Amendment," he added.

The Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund which represented Miller in the case said Lampe's ruling represented a win for religious liberty.

Well we disagree there.

But lets apply the refusal thing to other situations.

If your boss decides that employing women is a sin can he fire them all?
If your boss thinks employing people in mixed marriages is a sin can he fire them for it?

I’m not aware of anything in the bible that says employing people in mixed marriages or employing women is a sin.

And there's nothing in the bible about baking cakes for wedding receptions either but it still didn't stop christians from using it as an excuse to make mixed marriages illegal.

On October 28, 1964, after waiting almost a year for a response to their motion, the ACLU attorneys brought a class action suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. This prompted the county court judge in the case, Leon M. Bazile, to issue a ruling on the long-pending motion to vacate. Echoing Johann Friedrich Blumenbach's 18th-century interpretation of race, the local court wrote:

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.[16]

From Loving v. Virginia - Wikipedia

 

[WorldWatcher]

Watch what happens to that case on appeal.

The order was about an injuction. The case hasn't been heard yet.


>>>>

 

[Skull Pilot]

Do you think an employer should be able to fire people because he disagrees with their religion?

When it comes to decisions about who we associate with - who we work for, who we serve, who hire or fire - government shouldn't be allowed to second guess our reasons.

So is that a yes or a no to the question?

That's an unequivocal 'yes'.

OK

I don't disagree with you but given the fact that we have laws to prevent such actions then until those laws are repealed anyone violating them will face the consequences.

It's my understanding that the point of the thread is discussing whether it should be illegal. The fact of the matter is that the law does violate religious freedom, as well as the more fundamental freedom of association. It should be struck down.

Wouldas shouldas and couldas have little to do with reality