Anti-Gay cake jerk gets told to take a hike.

[emilynghiem]

Not at all really. Homsexuality is not a belief system. It is not a lifestyle choice. As such you cannot compare the struggle of homosexuals against discrimination in all aspects of their daily lives with the "struggle" of religious bigots to deify their bigotry. The analogy simply doesn't work.

1. I'm not saying homosexuality itself is the belief system,
but I'm saying the BELIEFS about homosexuality are equal on both sides.
Neither are proven, both are faith based, so the decisions must remain free choice of the people
without fear of punishment by govt.

2. progay advocates also have no right to mandate their bigotry.
If people are that bigoted against the other, they should stay away from each other and not do business together.

As a taxpayer who has to pay for court costs everytime lawsuits come up.
If the Courts set a bad precedent that beliefs can be dictated by a judge,
I am affected as a citizen who believes in mediation and consensus,
and saving resources to fund historic and environmental preservation instead of lawsuits over beliefs.

I will likely have to sue or petition to stop this nonsense.
Why should I have to struggle financially to save 2-3 national historic landmarks
in Houston alone, facing destruction without funding except by private citizens, while millions if not
billions of dollars are spent on litigation or legislative battles over BELIEFS that are not govt jurisdiction?

Until and unless we can prove WHICH cases of homosexuality are natural or unnatural,
both beliefs for or against or whatever are equally protected by laws.

Neither side has the right to be so bigoted against the other they harass each other.
And neither should abuse laws to establish one belief over the other.

Either sign agreements to mediate disputes by consensus,
or don't do business together.

orogenicman
maybe the laws that need to be passed are banning people of conflicting beliefs
from doing business together in ways that invoke costs to the public with lawsuits or legislative battles
that waste time and resources since both beliefs should be respected equally and kept OUT of govt!!!

 

[Ame®icano]

The rightwing dinosaurs continue to be annihilated by the asteroid of progess.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

"The Lord of the Rings," Comrade?

The Bible.

orogenicman
The Constitution. And yes, liberals treat it like living fiction that can be revised without going through Constitutional Amendments and full representation of the entire nation, but only their party agenda and leaders have divine right to establish beliefs by federal laws and govt authority. Some new religion we must all bow to because secular beliefs are treated differently from beliefs that can be blamed on a named religion. And this is not considered discrimination by creed. Just like Blacks or Women or Immigrants are not considered equal, and even gays and transgender have more rights to defend beliefs over Christians and other citizens called bigots.

So hypocritical. She is discriminating against him, because her ideology views it as discriminatory![/There is little difference.

If I didn't want to cater a clan rally, under the leftist interpretation I would have to regardless of my beliefs!

Only if you win.

Look, you of the left are itching for a shooting war. you push and attack in hopes of provoking. What astounds me is that you think you'll come out on top. No one actually wins in a civil war, idiot.

Wow, this is the typical tripe of fundamentalist loonies - threating a civil war over cake. Congratulations. Instead, I highly recommend a food fight at fifty paces.

As compared to gays threatening to burn someone out over pizza?

I don't condone violence, ever. Next.

But you're excellent at avoiding answering the question. You whine and moan about the religious starting wars and give a pass to threats of violence by the homos. In short you're pathetic and your premise is weak. Next

What question did I not answer? The question was "...As compared to gays threatening to burn someone out over pizza?" My answer was "I don't condone violence, ever". Is this in any way unclear?

You're missing the point...maybe...you're sitting there claiming the religious want a war, it's not the religious suing, making threats, etc etc. They just want to be left alone....but the swarming homos won't allow that in their quest to appear normal and push their lifestyle down the throats of everyone

 

[emilynghiem]

And yet another member of the American Taliban gets spanked for being a jerk. Happy days.


The Colorado Civil Rights Division, which earlier ruled a Christian bakery could not refuse to make a wedding cake for a “same-sex” marriage, has denied any discrimination took place when another bakery turned down a request to make cakes that including Bible verses labeling homosexual conduct as sin.

Last week, the state agency ruled that Denver’s Azucar Bakery did not discriminate against William Jack, a Christian from Castle Rock, by refusing to make two cakes with “groomsmen” X’d out and Bible verses the following Bible verses: “God hates sin. Psalm 45:7,” “Homosexuality is a detestable sin. Leviticus 18:2,” “God loves sinners” and “While we were yet sinners Christ died for us. Romans 5:8.”

He told the civil rights agency he ordered the cakes with the imagery and biblical verses to convey that same-sex marriage is, in his words, “un-biblical and inappropriate.”

Marjorie Silva, the owner of the bakery, told Jack that she would make him the Bible-shaped cakes, but would not decorate them with the biblical verses and the image of the groomsmen that he requested. Instead, she offered to provide him with icing and a pastry bag so he could write or draw whatever messages he wished on the cakes.


Gay cakes protected anti- gay cakes not

So hypocritical. She is discriminating against him, because her ideology views it as discriminatory![/There is little difference.

If I didn't want to cater a clan rally, under the leftist interpretation I would have to regardless of my beliefs!

Absolutely not! I don't think Christians should be protected by any law. Public floggings and crucifixions will be implemented soon, and you will all be forced to get gay married to illegal aliens. Your only hope is widespread use of those tinfoil hats.

Only if you win.

Look, you of the left are itching for a shooting war. you push and attack in hopes of provoking. What astounds me is that you think you'll come out on top. No one actually wins in a civil war, idiot.

Wow, this is the typical tripe of fundamentalist loonies - threating a civil war over cake. Congratulations. Instead, I highly recommend a food fight at fifty paces.

orogenicman Did you say the same over the gay lawsuits that started this?

Erm, no. This is the first time I recommended a food fight instead of a civil war.

where a gay couple filed a complaint against a wedding photographer forced to fight but pay a 7,000 fine?

Why isn't that making a big deal over nothing, when they weren't forced to get services from this vendor?

Are you saying it is okay for gay couples to sue over wedding cakes, boycott and shut down businesses.
That's not a big deal over a cake? But fighting back to save a business is overdoing it? What???

The two instances are not similar. In one, a person was refused service altogether because they were homosexuals. In the other, a person wasn't refused service, but only refused to write hate messages on a cake that she offered to cook and provide the icing and tools for writing said hate speech.

So would the equivalent be for the business to subcontract out the contested work
to a willing subcontractor that will provide the services in question? I agree with that solution,
to have a referral network of vendors that can step in and do some of the work otherwise at issue.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

<snip.

Right. The party that wants more gun control is looking to start a shooting war. Do you ever proof read this stuff before you post?

<snip>

The party that wants to start a shooting war want's to disarm the enemy.

That confuses you?

This, for instance.

You are no different than the Nazis, the Bolsheviks, the Khmer Rouge, the Sandinista, et al. The question is, will the decent people let you get away with it this time?

The Nazis were far right, dude. But since you brought them up first, Godwin's law. You lose. Congratulations.

Well yeah, an autocratic system with strict social and economic controls from the central authority, which controls the means of production with a series of 5 year plans produced by the government - I mean it's easily as right wing as the Khmer Rouge or the cultural revolution...

ROFL

You morons and your big lie.

Try thinking sometime - just to see what it's like...

 

[emilynghiem]

The Bible.

Ah, you are ignorant.

Oh please, you're breaking my heart.

Dear orogenicman
the message in the Bible is about humanity progressing from
retributive justice and top-down authority and rule
to restorative justice and equal responsibility for governance
that unites man's civil laws of justice based on reason and conscience
with divine collective laws of the universe we didn't create ourselves
but naturally live under as human beings undergoing a learning curve of social development
toward establishing truth, equal justice and lasting peace.

You can call that fiction or fantasy,
or you can see that all people believe in some form or process of justice
and we are learning how to manage diversity while seeking truth, justice and peace.

 

[Uncensored2008]

No she did not refuse to serve anyone. She simply refused to write hate speech on a cake she was asked to make. She offered to make the cake. By the way, she is a Catholic.

So she made the cake with the verses?

Oh wait, you're just lying.

Carry on...

 

[orogenicman]

Not at all really. Homsexuality is not a belief system. It is not a lifestyle choice. As such you cannot compare the struggle of homosexuals against discrimination in all aspects of their daily lives with the "struggle" of religious bigots to deify their bigotry. The analogy simply doesn't work.

1. I'm not saying homosexuality itself is the belief system,
but I'm saying the BELIEFS about homosexuality are equal on both sides.
Neither are proven, both are faith based, so the decisions must remain free choice of the people
without fear of punishment by govt.

Well, that is a ridiculous claim. Certainly the "belief about homosexuality is not the same on both sides. One side says live and let live, the other side does not. One side simply wants to be treated the same as everyone else, while the other side uses derogatory language (queers, fagots, fudge packers, etc.) and refuses to conduct business with LGBT people based on religious bigotry, and has even maimed and killed LGBT over their gayness. LGBT people wanting to be treated as ordinary citizens is not faith-based, but refusing to provide them with a service because of a religious belief certainly is.

2. progay advocates also have no right to mandate their bigotry.
If people are that bigoted against the other, they should stay away from each other and not do business together.

How is it that a person who walks into a bakery and asked to be served is exhibiting bigotry? Please explain.

As a taxpayer who has to pay for court costs everytime lawsuits come up.
If the Courts set a bad precedent that beliefs can be dictated by a judge,
I am affected as a citizen who believes in mediation and consensus,
and saving resources to fund historic and environmental preservation instead of lawsuits over beliefs.

This is not about what you believe. If you believe that gays are evil or immoral, you have a right to that belief. You do not have a right to act on that belief by negatively impacting the lives of others.

I will likely have to sue or petition to stop this nonsense.

Good luck with that.

Why should I have to struggle financially to save 2-3 national historic landmarks
in Houston alone, facing destruction without funding except by private citizens, while millions if not
billions of dollars are spent on litigation or legislative battles over BELIEFS that are not govt jurisdiction?

One has nothing to do with the other. Next.

Until and unless we can prove WHICH cases of homosexuality are natural or unnatural, both beliefs for or against or whatever are equally protected by laws.

What are you suggesting here?

Neither side has the right to be so bigoted against the other they harass each other.
And neither should abuse laws to establish one belief over the other.

Everyone abuses the law if they can get away with it. Your point?

Either sign agreements to mediate disputes by consensus,
or don't do business together.

Or simply do the decent thing and conduct business with people regardless of who they love.

maybe the laws that need to be passed are banning people of conflicting beliefs
from doing business together in ways that invoke costs to the public with lawsuits or legislative battles
that waste time and resources since both beliefs should be respected equally and kept OUT of govt!!!

People have a right to redress grievances. You didn't know this? Huh.[/quote]

 

[Ame®icano]

The party that wants to start a shooting war want's to disarm the enemy.

 

[orogenicman]

And yet another member of the American Taliban gets spanked for being a jerk. Happy days.


The Colorado Civil Rights Division, which earlier ruled a Christian bakery could not refuse to make a wedding cake for a “same-sex” marriage, has denied any discrimination took place when another bakery turned down a request to make cakes that including Bible verses labeling homosexual conduct as sin.

Last week, the state agency ruled that Denver’s Azucar Bakery did not discriminate against William Jack, a Christian from Castle Rock, by refusing to make two cakes with “groomsmen” X’d out and Bible verses the following Bible verses: “God hates sin. Psalm 45:7,” “Homosexuality is a detestable sin. Leviticus 18:2,” “God loves sinners” and “While we were yet sinners Christ died for us. Romans 5:8.”

He told the civil rights agency he ordered the cakes with the imagery and biblical verses to convey that same-sex marriage is, in his words, “un-biblical and inappropriate.”

Marjorie Silva, the owner of the bakery, told Jack that she would make him the Bible-shaped cakes, but would not decorate them with the biblical verses and the image of the groomsmen that he requested. Instead, she offered to provide him with icing and a pastry bag so he could write or draw whatever messages he wished on the cakes.


Gay cakes protected anti- gay cakes not

What happened to your mantra, "bake the cake", fucking hypocrite.

She offered to bake the cake, farking moron.

First no one was talking to you, but how about this scenario. A faghadist walks into a Christian bakery demanding a fag wedding cake. Would you think it would be OK for them to bake the cake and tell the fags to decorate and set it up themselves?

First, I don't need your permission to respond to a post. This is a public forum. If you want to have a private conversation, you are posting in the wrong forum. Second, I am not under any obligation to answer questions from bigots who can't seem to resist labeling people with derogatory names in public forums. Capiche.

First I have no problem with gays, on the other hand I have a big problem with radical fag activist that want to force their lifestyle choices on everyone else. If they want to be treated like everyone else maybe they should start acting like everyone else and stop trying to destroy anyone who objects to their choices. I've got some gay friends who are embarrassed by the faghadist. You refused to answer my question because your answer would show you to be the hypocrite you are, just like PMH. So go on ignoring reality and we'll keep laughing at you.

The fact that you used the phrase "radical fag activists" in the same sentence where you declared yourself to "have no problem with gays" leads me to believe you are deluded, and thus, ignore your own reality. Being gay is not a choice. To what question did I not respond?

 

[Ame®icano]

The fact that you used the phrase "radical fag activists" in the same sentence where you declared yourself to "have no problem with gays" leads me to believe you are deluded, and thus, ignore your own reality. Being gay is not a choice. To what question did I not respond?

You do know the difference in between radical fag activists and gays, right?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Well, that is a ridiculous claim. Certainly the "belief about homosexuality is not the same on both sides. One side says live and let live, the other side does not.

Correct.

Homosexuals gained the live and let live a decade or more ago. But your side will not allow that - you must CRUSH those who don't openly celebrate homosexuality. There is no "live and let live" with you - all must scrape and bow before the homosexuals. Queers can do what they want with any consenting adult they choose, but that isn't what the left seeks. Instead you storm into the businesses of those who disagree with the sexual choices of the queers, and you use the implied violence of the state to force them to participate against their will in that which they abhor.

Obviously this was never about equal treatment, and always was intended as a vehicle to crush civil rights.

But you are right, your side will never live and let live, you will attack every right and freedom that America leaves undefended. The left seeks an authoritarian system and will stop at nothing to get it.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Congratulations, you found another double standard from the left. Not a hard thing to do.

There is no double-standard. One is a happy gay couple, and the other is an anti-gay American Taliban asshole. She doesn't make hate cakes, and that's what he wanted. She didn't refuse to serve him because of his faith, she's Catholic, she refused to serve because of his hated. They saw through his BS, and so should you.

With that, at 21K, I'm on break. See ya, maybe.

The one is a sinner, the Christian knows the truth, unlike liars like you.

 

[orogenicman]

Oh please, you're breaking my heart.

"The Lord of the Rings" is the best selling work of fiction of all time.

Due to your ignorance, driven by your bigotry, you offered a stupid answer.

Hey, you're a bigot - you're going to be stupid. The two are tied.

I said most popular, not best selling. A lot of bibles have been handed out freely, and so weren't sold. And since Lord of the Rings has only been around since the 1940s, while the Bible has been around for some 1700 years, I'd say the latter has had a lot more exposure. But hey, if you want to argue that your book is not as popular as another work of fiction, that's fine by me.

 

[orogenicman]

Well, that is a ridiculous claim. Certainly the "belief about homosexuality is not the same on both sides. One side says live and let live, the other side does not.

Correct.

Homosexuals gained the live and let live a decade or more ago.

<snip>

If that were true, every state would allow gay marriage. There wouldn't be Christian bakers refusing service. There wouldn't be gays getting beaten and killed.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I said most popular, not best selling. A lot of bibles have been handed out freely, and so weren't sold. And since Lord of the Rings has only been around since the 1940s, while the Bible has been around for some 1700 years, I'd say the latter has had a lot more exposure. But hey, if you want to argue that your book is not as popular as another work of fiction, that's fine by me.

You said something really fucking stupid.

You said it because you are a bigot, and were driven by bigotry rather than rationality.

 

[Uncensored2008]

If that were true, every state would allow gay marriage. There wouldn't be Christian bakers refusing service. There wouldn't be gays getting beaten and killed.

Wow, the stupid runs deep in this one.

No, marriage is not a right, it is a religious institution with civil overtones that society developed to encourage the male to remain during rearing of offspring.

"Live and let live" means that queers are unmolested by laws or mobs - period,

You will not offer the same to Christians. Mobs of leftists attack Christians on virtually a daily basis. This thread is the crowing of a leftist that Christians were denied equal protection under the law.

I understand, your real goal is to end civil rights and by extension, the Constitutional republic. You believe you can isolate Christians and strip them of civil rights. But it hasn't worked out quite the way the party rulers planned, so far.

 

[orogenicman]

I said most popular, not best selling. A lot of bibles have been handed out freely, and so weren't sold. And since Lord of the Rings has only been around since the 1940s, while the Bible has been around for some 1700 years, I'd say the latter has had a lot more exposure. But hey, if you want to argue that your book is not as popular as another work of fiction, that's fine by me.

You said something really fucking stupid.

You said it because you are a bigot, and were driven by bigotry rather than rationality.

Oh, you mean where I said that the Bible is the most popular work of fiction? I said it because it is true.

 

[orogenicman]

If that were true, every state would allow gay marriage. There wouldn't be Christian bakers refusing service. There wouldn't be gays getting beaten and killed.

Wow, the stupid runs deep in this one.

No, marriage is not a right, it is a religious institution with civil overtones that society developed to encourage the male to remain during rearing of offspring.

Marriage is a legal union of couples as spouses, regulated by the state in which the couple lives. Religions do not have a legal right to marry anyone outside of state regulation.

"Live and let live" means that queers are unmolested by laws or mobs - period,

And yet, here you are molesting them with your language. I won't justify the rest of your rant with a response.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Oh, you mean where I said that the Bible is the most popular work of fiction? I said it because it is true.

Whether you believe the Bible or not, it is not a "work of fiction," you uneducated dolt.