Woohoo!! GA Gov. vetoes religious liberty bill; Muslims must bake Mohammed cake; Gays must cater too

[RoshawnMarkwees]

He didn't have a lot of choice, economically, did he?

You see, a LOT of the people in this country think Christians have the right to live as they wish, but not to tell others how to live and to pass judgment on them. That's the line.

But that isn't what is happening. Homofascists are forcing Christians (too scared to challenge the more draconian muslims) to acquiesce to and accommodate their homosexuality regardless of its conflict with Christians' religious beliefs.

'Homofascists'? They're ordering a cake from people that sell cakes.

If selling cakes conflicts with your religious beliefs, then you probably shouldn't sell cakes for a living. I'd give the same advice to the Buddhist considering working at the slaughter house.

Not exactly an appropriate comparison. It's not the selling of cakes, it's the selling of a cake for one particular purpose, which is a celebration of something said people find morally repugnant.

Its a job where that scenario is predictable and foreseeable. If your religion prevents that, find a job that is compatible with your religion.

They don't reschedule the super bowl because working on Sundays was against Steve Young's religion.

"Bake or else". It's a far cry from "Give me liberty or give me death".

I don't see why Christians insist that they should be immune from generally applicable laws if they disagree with them.

And why are conservative conceptions of 'liberty' so often tied to treating other people like pieces of shit?

Why should a person with the talent and passion for baking, or photography, be forced to give it up just because they don't want to work for one particular type of customer, especially when it involves a non-necessary service that is easily obtainable elsewhere?

And if we continue with your logic, everyone who was in business before Gay Weddings became a legal thing should be grandfathered in so they don't have to comply.

It's not being immune, its about enforcing idiotic laws (or idiotic interpretation of laws) that limit one person's liberty at the expense of another's. Why is a gay persons hurt feelings over having to go to another baker greater than the baker's hurt feelings over having to bake a cake they don't want to bake?

So treating the bakers "like shit" is A-OK, because you disagree with them, right?

But they're not denying service to homos. They are merely requesting that their beliefs be allowed. They shouldn't be forced to bake a homo cake for heteros or homos. But they can't deny baking cakes in general to either. Homofascists don't seem to grasp this.

 

[martybegan]

But that isn't what is happening. Homofascists are forcing Christians (too scared to challenge the more draconian muslims) to acquiesce to and accommodate their homosexuality regardless of its conflict with Christians' religious beliefs.

'Homofascists'? They're ordering a cake from people that sell cakes.

If selling cakes conflicts with your religious beliefs, then you probably shouldn't sell cakes for a living. I'd give the same advice to the Buddhist considering working at the slaughter house.

Not exactly an appropriate comparison. It's not the selling of cakes, it's the selling of a cake for one particular purpose, which is a celebration of something said people find morally repugnant.

Its a job where that scenario is predictable and foreseeable. If your religion prevents that, find a job that is compatible with your religion.

They don't reschedule the super bowl because working on Sundays was against Steve Young's religion.

"Bake or else". It's a far cry from "Give me liberty or give me death".

I don't see why Christians insist that they should be immune from generally applicable laws if they disagree with them.

And why are conservative conceptions of 'liberty' so often tied to treating other people like pieces of shit?

Why should a person with the talent and passion for baking, or photography, be forced to give it up just because they don't want to work for one particular type of customer, especially when it involves a non-necessary service that is easily obtainable elsewhere?

Because they can't act within the requirements of the law and treat their customers in a manner consistent with the minimum business practices required by their state.

And intra state commerce is undeniably within the authority of a State to regulate.

Again, being Christian doesn't make you immune to any law you disagree with. It never has.

The laws were designed to fight economic and political discrimination of an entire class of people as a whole, not to protect the feelings of individuals. All businesses are not Public Accommodations.

Regulating commerce by any body of government does not remove an individuals own rights unless a compelling government interest is involved, and hurt feelings are not a compelling government interest.

 

[Skylar]

But that isn't what is happening. Homofascists are forcing Christians (too scared to challenge the more draconian muslims) to acquiesce to and accommodate their homosexuality regardless of its conflict with Christians' religious beliefs.

'Homofascists'? They're ordering a cake from people that sell cakes.

If selling cakes conflicts with your religious beliefs, then you probably shouldn't sell cakes for a living. I'd give the same advice to the Buddhist considering working at the slaughter house.

Not exactly an appropriate comparison. It's not the selling of cakes, it's the selling of a cake for one particular purpose, which is a celebration of something said people find morally repugnant.

Its a job where that scenario is predictable and foreseeable. If your religion prevents that, find a job that is compatible with your religion.

They don't reschedule the super bowl because working on Sundays was against Steve Young's religion.

"Bake or else". It's a far cry from "Give me liberty or give me death".

I don't see why Christians insist that they should be immune from generally applicable laws if they disagree with them.

And why are conservative conceptions of 'liberty' so often tied to treating other people like pieces of shit?

Why should a person with the talent and passion for baking, or photography, be forced to give it up just because they don't want to work for one particular type of customer, especially when it involves a non-necessary service that is easily obtainable elsewhere?

And if we continue with your logic, everyone who was in business before Gay Weddings became a legal thing should be grandfathered in so they don't have to comply.

It's not being immune, its about enforcing idiotic laws (or idiotic interpretation of laws) that limit one person's liberty at the expense of another's. Why is a gay persons hurt feelings over having to go to another baker greater than the baker's hurt feelings over having to bake a cake they don't want to bake?

So treating the bakers "like shit" is A-OK, because you disagree with them, right?

But they're not denying service to homos. They are merely requesting that their beliefs be allowed. They shouldn't be forced to bake a homo cake for heteros or homos. But they can't deny baking cakes in general to either. Homofascists don't seem to grasp this.

Their beliefs are allowed. They just don't excuse them from the law.

If you have a 'belief' that you shouldn't have to pay taxes....you're not excepted from that legal obligation either.

Sorry to break it to Christians....but the law applies to you too. You're not special and you're not exempt.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

But that isn't what is happening. Homofascists are forcing Christians (too scared to challenge the more draconian muslims) to acquiesce to and accommodate their homosexuality regardless of its conflict with Christians' religious beliefs.

'Homofascists'? They're ordering a cake from people that sell cakes.

If selling cakes conflicts with your religious beliefs, then you probably shouldn't sell cakes for a living. I'd give the same advice to the Buddhist considering working at the slaughter house.

Not exactly an appropriate comparison. It's not the selling of cakes, it's the selling of a cake for one particular purpose, which is a celebration of something said people find morally repugnant.

Its a job where that scenario is predictable and foreseeable. If your religion prevents that, find a job that is compatible with your religion.

They don't reschedule the super bowl because working on Sundays was against Steve Young's religion.

"Bake or else". It's a far cry from "Give me liberty or give me death".

I don't see why Christians insist that they should be immune from generally applicable laws if they disagree with them.

And why are conservative conceptions of 'liberty' so often tied to treating other people like pieces of shit?

Why should a person with the talent and passion for baking, or photography, be forced to give it up just because they don't want to work for one particular type of customer, especially when it involves a non-necessary service that is easily obtainable elsewhere?

Because they can't act within the requirements of the law and treat their customers in a manner consistent with the minimum business practices required by their state.

And intra state commerce is undeniably within the authority of a State to regulate.

Again, being Christian doesn't make you immune to any law you disagree with. It never has.

The law can't force people to abandon their faith. The law prevents businesses from denying service because of someone's condition or religion but it can't force the acquiescence to behavior or religion either. You can't force a muslim to pray to Jesus and use religious freedom as the reason.

 

[Skylar]

'Homofascists'? They're ordering a cake from people that sell cakes.

If selling cakes conflicts with your religious beliefs, then you probably shouldn't sell cakes for a living. I'd give the same advice to the Buddhist considering working at the slaughter house.

Not exactly an appropriate comparison. It's not the selling of cakes, it's the selling of a cake for one particular purpose, which is a celebration of something said people find morally repugnant.

Its a job where that scenario is predictable and foreseeable. If your religion prevents that, find a job that is compatible with your religion.

They don't reschedule the super bowl because working on Sundays was against Steve Young's religion.

"Bake or else". It's a far cry from "Give me liberty or give me death".

I don't see why Christians insist that they should be immune from generally applicable laws if they disagree with them.

And why are conservative conceptions of 'liberty' so often tied to treating other people like pieces of shit?

Why should a person with the talent and passion for baking, or photography, be forced to give it up just because they don't want to work for one particular type of customer, especially when it involves a non-necessary service that is easily obtainable elsewhere?

Because they can't act within the requirements of the law and treat their customers in a manner consistent with the minimum business practices required by their state.

And intra state commerce is undeniably within the authority of a State to regulate.

Again, being Christian doesn't make you immune to any law you disagree with. It never has.

The laws were designed to fight economic and political discrimination of an entire class of people as a whole, not to protect the feelings of individuals. All businesses are not Public Accommodations.

Says who?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

But that isn't what is happening. Homofascists are forcing Christians (too scared to challenge the more draconian muslims) to acquiesce to and accommodate their homosexuality regardless of its conflict with Christians' religious beliefs.

'Homofascists'? They're ordering a cake from people that sell cakes.

If selling cakes conflicts with your religious beliefs, then you probably shouldn't sell cakes for a living. I'd give the same advice to the Buddhist considering working at the slaughter house.

They forced promotion of a behavior that conflicts with their religious beliefs. Your argument is extremely dishonest.

They're 'forced' to follow the law....and treat customers the same regardless of their sexual orientation, race, religion, etc.. The same laws that everyone else follows. Laws that don't target Christians or anyone else.

This religiously based sovereign citizen nonsense where Christians should only have to follow laws that they agree with? isn't how our country operates nor should.

And is it only Christian dogma that trumps civil law? Or do place US civil law beneath Sharia law as well?

That's right. They have to treat the customers the same. And they can't be forced to bake a homo cake for heteros either.

There's no such thing as 'homo cake'. Cake doesn't have a sexual orientation...as it doesn't have sex. Its inanimate.

There's just cake.

Yes there is. That is the entire argument. It's never been about baking a cake. It's about endorsing the behavior using the cake to do so.

 

[guno]

Good !!!! let the whining and crying commence


Atlanta (CNN)Under increasing pressure from major corporations that do business in Georgia, Gov. Nathan Deal announced Monday he will veto a bill that critics say would have curtailed the rights of Georgia's LGBT community.

House Bill 757 would have given faith-based organizations in Georgia the option to deny services and jobs to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. Supporters said the measure was meant to protect religious freedom, while opponents have described it as "anti-LGBT" and "appalling."

Georgia governor to veto LGBT bill - CNN.com

 

[martybegan]

'Homofascists'? They're ordering a cake from people that sell cakes.

If selling cakes conflicts with your religious beliefs, then you probably shouldn't sell cakes for a living. I'd give the same advice to the Buddhist considering working at the slaughter house.

Not exactly an appropriate comparison. It's not the selling of cakes, it's the selling of a cake for one particular purpose, which is a celebration of something said people find morally repugnant.

Its a job where that scenario is predictable and foreseeable. If your religion prevents that, find a job that is compatible with your religion.

They don't reschedule the super bowl because working on Sundays was against Steve Young's religion.

"Bake or else". It's a far cry from "Give me liberty or give me death".

I don't see why Christians insist that they should be immune from generally applicable laws if they disagree with them.

And why are conservative conceptions of 'liberty' so often tied to treating other people like pieces of shit?

Why should a person with the talent and passion for baking, or photography, be forced to give it up just because they don't want to work for one particular type of customer, especially when it involves a non-necessary service that is easily obtainable elsewhere?

And if we continue with your logic, everyone who was in business before Gay Weddings became a legal thing should be grandfathered in so they don't have to comply.

It's not being immune, its about enforcing idiotic laws (or idiotic interpretation of laws) that limit one person's liberty at the expense of another's. Why is a gay persons hurt feelings over having to go to another baker greater than the baker's hurt feelings over having to bake a cake they don't want to bake?

So treating the bakers "like shit" is A-OK, because you disagree with them, right?

But they're not denying service to homos. They are merely requesting that their beliefs be allowed. They shouldn't be forced to bake a homo cake for heteros or homos. But they can't deny baking cakes in general to either. Homofascists don't seem to grasp this.

Their beliefs are allowed. They just don't excuse them from the law.

If you have a 'belief' that you shouldn't have to pay taxes....you're not excepted from that legal obligation either.

Sorry to break it to Christians....but the law applies to you too. You're not special and you're not exempt.

If you force them to go against their beliefs over something as trivial as hurt feelings, they aren't really being allowed.

And not paying taxes constitutes actual harm to the government entities in question, and the constituents in question, so the comparison doesn't really work.

So only people progressives like are "special"? Got it.

Again, all you are arguing is that someone's butthurt is more equal than someone else's butthurt, and government gets to decide who's feelings are more important.

 

[Baron]

Good !!!! let the whining and crying commence


Atlanta (CNN)Under increasing pressure from major corporations that do business in Georgia, Gov. Nathan Deal announced Monday he will veto a bill that critics say would have curtailed the rights of Georgia's LGBT community.

House Bill 757 would have given faith-based organizations in Georgia the option to deny services and jobs to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. Supporters said the measure was meant to protect religious freedom, while opponents have described it as "anti-LGBT" and "appalling."

Georgia governor to veto LGBT bill - CNN.com

LGBT 'community' shall claim their 'rights' in Hell.

 

[martybegan]

Not exactly an appropriate comparison. It's not the selling of cakes, it's the selling of a cake for one particular purpose, which is a celebration of something said people find morally repugnant.

Its a job where that scenario is predictable and foreseeable. If your religion prevents that, find a job that is compatible with your religion.

They don't reschedule the super bowl because working on Sundays was against Steve Young's religion.

"Bake or else". It's a far cry from "Give me liberty or give me death".

I don't see why Christians insist that they should be immune from generally applicable laws if they disagree with them.

And why are conservative conceptions of 'liberty' so often tied to treating other people like pieces of shit?

Why should a person with the talent and passion for baking, or photography, be forced to give it up just because they don't want to work for one particular type of customer, especially when it involves a non-necessary service that is easily obtainable elsewhere?

Because they can't act within the requirements of the law and treat their customers in a manner consistent with the minimum business practices required by their state.

And intra state commerce is undeniably within the authority of a State to regulate.

Again, being Christian doesn't make you immune to any law you disagree with. It never has.

The laws were designed to fight economic and political discrimination of an entire class of people as a whole, not to protect the feelings of individuals. All businesses are not Public Accommodations.

Says who?

If one knows the history of actual, government mandated discrimination, and the political and economic reasons behind it, it is fairly obvious.

 

[guno]

Good !!!! let the whining and crying commence


Atlanta (CNN)Under increasing pressure from major corporations that do business in Georgia, Gov. Nathan Deal announced Monday he will veto a bill that critics say would have curtailed the rights of Georgia's LGBT community.

House Bill 757 would have given faith-based organizations in Georgia the option to deny services and jobs to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. Supporters said the measure was meant to protect religious freedom, while opponents have described it as "anti-LGBT" and "appalling."

Georgia governor to veto LGBT bill - CNN.com

LGBT 'community' shall claim their 'rights' in Hell.

it's your hell goyim you burn in it

 

[Skylar]

'Homofascists'? They're ordering a cake from people that sell cakes.

If selling cakes conflicts with your religious beliefs, then you probably shouldn't sell cakes for a living. I'd give the same advice to the Buddhist considering working at the slaughter house.

They forced promotion of a behavior that conflicts with their religious beliefs. Your argument is extremely dishonest.

They're 'forced' to follow the law....and treat customers the same regardless of their sexual orientation, race, religion, etc.. The same laws that everyone else follows. Laws that don't target Christians or anyone else.

This religiously based sovereign citizen nonsense where Christians should only have to follow laws that they agree with? isn't how our country operates nor should.

And is it only Christian dogma that trumps civil law? Or do place US civil law beneath Sharia law as well?

That's right. They have to treat the customers the same. And they can't be forced to bake a homo cake for heteros either.

There's no such thing as 'homo cake'. Cake doesn't have a sexual orientation...as it doesn't have sex. Its inanimate.

There's just cake.

Yes there is. That is the entire argument. It's never been about baking a cake. It's about endorsing the behavior using the cake to do so.

Its cake. They're getting married and want a wedding cake....so they go to a place that makes and sells wedding cakes.

That's about it.

 

[Baron]

it's your hell goyim you burn in it

LGBT completely will burn in Hell.If you Jews do not believe in is not my business.

 

[Skylar]

Not exactly an appropriate comparison. It's not the selling of cakes, it's the selling of a cake for one particular purpose, which is a celebration of something said people find morally repugnant.

Its a job where that scenario is predictable and foreseeable. If your religion prevents that, find a job that is compatible with your religion.

They don't reschedule the super bowl because working on Sundays was against Steve Young's religion.

"Bake or else". It's a far cry from "Give me liberty or give me death".

I don't see why Christians insist that they should be immune from generally applicable laws if they disagree with them.

And why are conservative conceptions of 'liberty' so often tied to treating other people like pieces of shit?

Why should a person with the talent and passion for baking, or photography, be forced to give it up just because they don't want to work for one particular type of customer, especially when it involves a non-necessary service that is easily obtainable elsewhere?

And if we continue with your logic, everyone who was in business before Gay Weddings became a legal thing should be grandfathered in so they don't have to comply.

It's not being immune, its about enforcing idiotic laws (or idiotic interpretation of laws) that limit one person's liberty at the expense of another's. Why is a gay persons hurt feelings over having to go to another baker greater than the baker's hurt feelings over having to bake a cake they don't want to bake?

So treating the bakers "like shit" is A-OK, because you disagree with them, right?

But they're not denying service to homos. They are merely requesting that their beliefs be allowed. They shouldn't be forced to bake a homo cake for heteros or homos. But they can't deny baking cakes in general to either. Homofascists don't seem to grasp this.

Their beliefs are allowed. They just don't excuse them from the law.

If you have a 'belief' that you shouldn't have to pay taxes....you're not excepted from that legal obligation either.

Sorry to break it to Christians....but the law applies to you too. You're not special and you're not exempt.

If you force them to go against their beliefs over something as trivial as hurt feelings, they aren't really being allowed.

Nonsense. If you had a belief that you shouldn't have to pay taxes, you're not exempt from taxation. Nor are you exempt from PA laws because you don't believe black people should be able to eat in public.

A state can regulate intrastate commerce. And setting minimum standards of conduct for commerce in their state is perfectly reasonable.

Even if a Christians imagines they are exempt from the law.

 

[aris2chat]

business boycotts were too much of a bite?

and NC's is being challenged in court.

 

[Kosh]

Good !!!! let the whining and crying commence


Atlanta (CNN)Under increasing pressure from major corporations that do business in Georgia, Gov. Nathan Deal announced Monday he will veto a bill that critics say would have curtailed the rights of Georgia's LGBT community.

House Bill 757 would have given faith-based organizations in Georgia the option to deny services and jobs to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. Supporters said the measure was meant to protect religious freedom, while opponents have described it as "anti-LGBT" and "appalling."

Georgia governor to veto LGBT bill - CNN.com

This is another reason why the far left is more dangerous than ISIS!

 

[bucs90]

They forced promotion of a behavior that conflicts with their religious beliefs. Your argument is extremely dishonest.

They're 'forced' to follow the law....and treat customers the same regardless of their sexual orientation, race, religion, etc.. The same laws that everyone else follows. Laws that don't target Christians or anyone else.

This religiously based sovereign citizen nonsense where Christians should only have to follow laws that they agree with? isn't how our country operates nor should.

And is it only Christian dogma that trumps civil law? Or do place US civil law beneath Sharia law as well?

That's right. They have to treat the customers the same. And they can't be forced to bake a homo cake for heteros either.

There's no such thing as 'homo cake'. Cake doesn't have a sexual orientation...as it doesn't have sex. Its inanimate.

There's just cake.

Yes there is. That is the entire argument. It's never been about baking a cake. It's about endorsing the behavior using the cake to do so.

Its cake. They're getting married and want a wedding cake....so they go to a place that makes and sells wedding cakes.

That's about it.

I think the issue isn't just selling a cake.

A vanilla cake is $30. A gay dude walks in and wants to buy it. Ok. No problem. Why do we even need to know he's gay unless he brings it up? Just buy the cake.

But when he comes in and say "Me and my gay boyfriend are getting married and having a gay wedding. You must attend it and cater it. I want 10 vanilla cakes served at the wedding. You will be there."

That's the difference.

If I walk into a Muslim bakery...and I despise Islam...I can still buy a cake they have on display for public purchase.

But if I'm having a party to paint pictures of Mohammed in pig blood and serve pork and hire strippers....should I be able to force Allah's Holy Bakery to cater it?

No. I shouldn't be able to force them to do that.

 

[Skylar]

They're 'forced' to follow the law....and treat customers the same regardless of their sexual orientation, race, religion, etc.. The same laws that everyone else follows. Laws that don't target Christians or anyone else.

This religiously based sovereign citizen nonsense where Christians should only have to follow laws that they agree with? isn't how our country operates nor should.

And is it only Christian dogma that trumps civil law? Or do place US civil law beneath Sharia law as well?

That's right. They have to treat the customers the same. And they can't be forced to bake a homo cake for heteros either.

There's no such thing as 'homo cake'. Cake doesn't have a sexual orientation...as it doesn't have sex. Its inanimate.

There's just cake.

Yes there is. That is the entire argument. It's never been about baking a cake. It's about endorsing the behavior using the cake to do so.

Its cake. They're getting married and want a wedding cake....so they go to a place that makes and sells wedding cakes.

That's about it.

I think the issue isn't just selling a cake.

A vanilla cake is $30. A gay dude walks in and wants to buy it. Ok. No problem. Why do we even need to know he's gay unless he brings it up? Just buy the cake.

But when he comes in and say "Me and my gay boyfriend are getting married and having a gay wedding. You must attend it and cater it. I want 10 vanilla cakes served at the wedding. You will be there."

That's the difference.

If I walk into a Muslim bakery...and I despise Islam...I can still buy a cake they have on display for public purchase.

But if I'm having a party to paint pictures of Mohammed in pig blood and serve pork and hire strippers....should I be able to force Allah's Holy Bakery to cater it?

No. I shouldn't be able to force them to do that.

So if the couple is happy to pick up their cake rather than have it delivered.....you're cool?

 

[bucs90]

A Guy Walked Into a Muslim Bakery and Ordered a Gay Wedding Cake...

A man in Dearborn, Michigan went to multiple Muslim bakeries to order gay wedding cakes. They told him no.

Did I miss the parade of fags in Dearborn trying to shut them down???

Liberals....how is it you all somehow missed these bigoted homo phobic bakeries in Dearborn?

Until you all swarm them....I can't take this issue seriously as anything other than just a way to **** with Christians.

 

[Skylar]

Its a job where that scenario is predictable and foreseeable. If your religion prevents that, find a job that is compatible with your religion.

They don't reschedule the super bowl because working on Sundays was against Steve Young's religion.

I don't see why Christians insist that they should be immune from generally applicable laws if they disagree with them.

And why are conservative conceptions of 'liberty' so often tied to treating other people like pieces of shit?

Why should a person with the talent and passion for baking, or photography, be forced to give it up just because they don't want to work for one particular type of customer, especially when it involves a non-necessary service that is easily obtainable elsewhere?

Because they can't act within the requirements of the law and treat their customers in a manner consistent with the minimum business practices required by their state.

And intra state commerce is undeniably within the authority of a State to regulate.

Again, being Christian doesn't make you immune to any law you disagree with. It never has.

The laws were designed to fight economic and political discrimination of an entire class of people as a whole, not to protect the feelings of individuals. All businesses are not Public Accommodations.

Says who?

If one knows the history of actual, government mandated discrimination, and the political and economic reasons behind it, it is fairly obvious.

So lets look at the Oregon law where they explicitly included sexual discrimination as something that wasn't allowed in commerce in the state.

Make your argument that they didn't intend it to cover a gay couple trying to buy a wedding cake. Specifically, with that law, and that State.

Because the State of Oregon clearly disagrees. Are you arguing that you know Oregon law and its intent better than the State of Oregon does?