Baker must make gay cakes

[Quantum Windbag]

If gays want two boy dollies on their cake they can go to their local Walmart and buy two boy dollies. Don't force the baker to do something that goes against his conscience. See how easy that is?

We only see how easy it is for you and most others on the right to maintain your ignorance and hate.

Again, no one is being ‘forced’ to do anything, where public accommodations laws are being appropriately and consistently applied. It’s incumbent upon business owners to know, understand, and comply with the laws as a condition of doing business; they can’t decide to follow some laws and ignore others, just as any other resident of Colorado is expected to follow the law.

What makes infringing on religious liberty appropriate?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Then what you're saying is that Charles Manson can force a baker to bake a cake with an outline of a knife sticking out of Sharon Tate's stomach? The baker must comply?

Any day the Left cannot "force" a business to "comply" with them is like a day without sunshine!

.

the RIGHT isn't allowed to jim crow people you don't like.

again, get over it.

The right is not the side that is making up laws that interfere with people's rights.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is that baker killing his neighbors for working on Sunday like the bible says to?

Or maybe he's working on Sunday himself.

Businesses are public accommedations. this argument was made 50 years ago when they didn't want to serve blacks.

The Baker doesn't have a leg to stand on. If he doesn't want to make cakes for gays, he should close down his bakery.

Being black is not condemned in the Bible. Being homosexual is.

And fortunately the bible and other religious dogma are legally and Constitutionally irrelevant.

Gay Americans constitute a class of persons entitled to Constitutional protections (Romer v. Evans (1996), Lawrence v. Texas (2003)), where the states and local jurisdictions may not seek to subject them to disadvantage, regardless the dogma of ignorance and hate propagated by the bible.

That isn't what the First Amendment says.

 

[Katzndogz]

Gays may someday find themselves in a position where they cannot find a bakery in their locale that makes wedding cakes at all except for those personally known. They will sue to their hearts content and still not win.

Possible, but highly unlikely on any great scale which is why it's time to think about repealing Public Accommodation laws in general as they apply to private businesses. I agree with Barry Goldwater that they were wrong, although I can recognize at the time they were considered needful.

The reality is that more and more people are finding no moral objection to same-sex relationships and one of the main skews being age. Old people have moral objections, but the vast majority of younger generations don't and that is the attitude that will be carried forward in time.


>>>>

Yet, the physical attacks on gays are always carried out by younger people rather than older.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If gays want two boy dollies on their cake they can go to their local Walmart and buy two boy dollies. Don't force the baker to do something that goes against his conscience. See how easy that is?

This isn't about logic or cost or convenience or "public accommodations" or laws or anything like that.



It's about making a statement and increasing control.



.

It is exactly about public accommodation laws. Don't like 'em, repeal them all, but don't get all whiny because in some places they apply to the fags too.

I've been told that if I live in a rural area where nobody wants to serve my gay ass, I should move. Doesn't that apply to people that live in localities with these business laws?

I have no problem with public accommodation laws that makes sense. They stop making sense when they tell me that any business that offers a service to the public is prohibited from running a credit check before they sell an expensive automobile because it might insult a black person.

 

[hjmick]

How does one make a cake gay?

 

[Iceweasel]

The law in Colorado protects sexual orientation in public accommodation. You are not going to overturn public accommodation law. You aren't going to overturn Colorado's equal protection.

It isn't equal protection to make a guy bake a gay themed cake if he doesn't want to. And don't be so quick about the 'thou shall never overturn...' mantra. Many states have had laws that proved to be unconstitutional. All it takes is the right catalyst to make it to the Supreme Court where I don't believe it will pass muster.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

if you can't do your job, you should go into another business. your personal prejudices do not allow you to discriminate against people who wish to access your business... not based on race, religion or gender or other things protected constitutionally.

now if they don't have the money to pay for the service you provide, you DO get to say you won't serve them.

otherwise, find another job/business. that goes for bakers, pharmacists, doctors or anyone else offering a public service who wants to use their religion to justify hate.

if a baker said he refused to work for christians, the wingers would be standing in front of the business threatening to shut it down.

Then what you're saying is that Charles Manson can force a baker to bake a cake with an outline of a knife sticking out of Sharon Tate's stomach? The baker must comply?

Is that cake in their catalogue? Does the business advertise "no special orders refused"?

It doesn't have to, idiot. Even if it accepts special orders there are plenty of reasons to turn down special orders that fall outside its business. For instance, they are perfectly free to not make a cake it the customer requests it be made with a deadly poison.

So shove your attempt to show how smart you are in the stupid file and keep your pathetic trap shut before you end up setting the LGBTQ movement back even further than they are going to end up as is.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Panel: Baker must make cakes for gay weddings


You have to, or else!
\

So much for private businesses and "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone".

And our Freedoms continue to go down the toilet.

So much for conservatives respecting the Constitution.

Once again, there is no Constitutional right to a wedding cake.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

^^^ I'm not sure what you mean by this, but okay.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

I know you don't, JO, and that is the really sad thing about it......

I don't know about that. I may not have known what you were meaning, but I do know that a person would have taken the time to explain what it is that you were saying to me if they knew what you were saying to me and since you have not explained what you were saying to me yet, I can not help but wonder what it is that is going on in your mind. Do you even know what it is that you were saying to me?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Being black is not condemned in the Bible. Being homosexual is.

And yet the bible WAS used to justify anti miscegenation laws AND slavery. Good fucking thing it's Constitutionally irrelevant.

And the Koran is being used to justify hanging homosexuals in Iran, but for some obscure reason, all you care about is wedding cakes.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That baker looks like a butch gay, so I don't understand why he wouldn't bake for his own kind.

Oh, that's right. His religious beliefs do not override sexual orientation. Good.

Did you notice that he doesn't even bake cakes as part of his business, yet he still has to bake a cake for a gay wedding? Tell me how that isn't slavery.

because he gets paid a fair wage for his services?

Fair is a totally arbitrary term. Perhaps he might consider a fair wage for a gay cake to me $25 million.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Excellent, odd that he no longer makes wedding cakes but will appeal. His views are shared by 20th century fascists, communists, and 21st century Russins. He could move there, except Archbishop Kirill, (Putin's confessor) says there are no Christians in the US, and favors Russian Orthodox as well.

Why is it odd? If you had a business, and were being forced to provide a service you don't provide to the public simply because some asshole came in and demanded it, wouldn't you appeal the ruling? Or would you simply bow down to the infinite wisdom of the state?

State law prohibits businesses from refusing to serve customers based on their sexual orientation.

he can either follow the law or go to jail or whatever. Its not very complicated.

Or fight to change an unfair law, kinda the way MLK did. I know that would destroy your progressive little mind, but it does actually work.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Anecdotal, unsubstantiated, subjective, and irrelevant.



It is to the extent that neither may be subject to discriminatory measures, and where both are entitled to protections as mandated by public accommodations laws.



Anecdotal, unsubstantiated, subjective, and irrelevant.

This is an issue concerning the Constitution, the law, and responsible governance and public policy only, having nothing to do with religion; where religious beliefs are not being ‘violated’ and where religious beliefs may not be used as ‘justification’ to discriminate against gay Americans and ignore just, proper, and Constitutional laws.

Being gay is a choice, a belief, and a lifestyle.
Being Christian is a choice, a belief, and a lifestyle.

If gays shouldn't be forced to follow or cater to a Christian standard then why should a Christian be forced to follow or cater to the LGBT/NAMBLA (LGBTN) community and their standards? Stop discriminating against Christians.

This fails as a false comparison fallacy, as no Christian is being ‘forced’ to follow or do anything, as opposed to laws seeking to deny gay Americans their civil liberties.

Pubic accommodations laws in no way prohibit or interfere with religious practice, where Christians remain at liberty to practice their faith as they see fit. Providing goods or services to gay patrons is not an ‘endorsement’ of homosexuality, nor does it compel Christians to engage in ‘homosexual acts.’

Moreover, the right to religious expression is not absolute, and subject to reasonable restrictions, including disallowing discrimination predicated on religious dogma.

Religion is not a license to discriminate, nor is it justification to ignore or disregard the law.

You keep repeating this like you think no one can prove you are wrong, despite the fact that I have already proved you wrong more than once.

 

[bodecea]

Being black is not condemned in the Bible. Being homosexual is.

And yet the bible WAS used to justify anti miscegenation laws AND slavery. Good fucking thing it's Constitutionally irrelevant.

And the Koran is being used to justify hanging homosexuals in Iran, but for some obscure reason, all you care about is wedding cakes.

We care very much about what is going on in Iran....but tell us what we can do about that?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That's not what I asked.

What you asked was a falsity. It never happened. Since the baker didn't refuse to serve gay people all you really have is a hypothetical. IF the baker had refused to serve gay people would that be an exercise of religion? Then of course you are bollixed up by the fact that he didn't refuse to serve anyone.

If you offer a service to the public, then you are subject to public accommodation laws.
If the service you offer to the public includes baking cakes, then you are subject to public accommodation laws pertaining to baking cakes.
No, you cannot be forced to bake "mature themed" cakes as that is another type of service.
No, you cannot be forced to write "The questions in this thread are mostly an admission ignorance with some on the conservative side being deliberately obtuse" because that too would be a different kind of service.
If you opened up a shop that offered adult themed cakes with offensive messages, then that service would be subject to public accommodation... and special zoning!...laws.

Except this is not about public accommodation laws because these businesses do not meet the constitutional definition of public accommodations.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

And yet the bible WAS used to justify anti miscegenation laws AND slavery. Good fucking thing it's Constitutionally irrelevant.

And the Koran is being used to justify hanging homosexuals in Iran, but for some obscure reason, all you care about is wedding cakes.

We care very much about what is going on in Iran....but tell us what we can do about that?

You can Tweet about it, like you did with the girls, that is working out pretty well, isn't it?

All I am saying is that, perhaps, you should take on the big things before yo accuse me of hating you because I won't show up at your wedding.

 

[WorldWatcher]

You do realize there are 50 states, right? It depends on if a state has such a law, how it is written and the transaction involved. In WA, we cannot discriminate due to sexual orientation but even then it doesn't state that you have to accommodate their orientation. That's where a lot of folks get confused.

Below is the WA law, could you explain what you mean? I'm not sure what you mean by you can't discriminate but you don't have to accommodate blacks, asians, Jews, Muslims, Irish, men or women, straights or gays, Army Veterans, etc..

RCW 49.60.215
Unfair practices of places of public resort, accommodation, assemblage, amusement — Trained dog guides and service animals.

(1) It shall be an unfair practice for any person or the person's agent or employee to commit an act which directly or indirectly results in any distinction, restriction, or discrimination, or the requiring of any person to pay a larger sum than the uniform rates charged other persons, or the refusing or withholding from any person the admission, patronage, custom, presence, frequenting, dwelling, staying, or lodging in any place of public resort, accommodation, assemblage, or amusement, except for conditions and limitations established by law and applicable to all persons, regardless of race, creed, color, national origin, sexual orientation, sex, honorably discharged veteran or military status, status as a mother breastfeeding her child, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability: PROVIDED, That this section shall not be construed to require structural changes, modifications, or additions to make any place accessible to a person with a disability except as otherwise required by law: PROVIDED, That behavior or actions constituting a risk to property or other persons can be grounds for refusal and shall not constitute an unfair practice.

RCW 49.60.215: Unfair practices of places of public resort, accommodation, assemblage, amusement ? Trained dog guides and service animals.​

>>>>

I did. I'll try to break it down smaller for you. If you charged a gay man more you would violate the law. Or refused to serve him based on his sexual preferences. There's nothing that states you must accommodate his desire to produce a homosexual theme of sorts. Seattle goes further and fines you if you don't but there is nothing in state law that would require a sign maker to produce a banner that says "Homosexuality is great".

Ahhh - So the law says if a baker sells wedding cakes they can't refuse to sell wedding cakes to a customer because they are black, asian, Jewish, Muslim, straight or gay, male or female, a service veteran, etc.

On the other hand a baker does not have to bake a penis shaped cake to either gays or straights for a bachelor party.



OK, ya I agree that's a valid application of the law.



>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

Gays may someday find themselves in a position where they cannot find a bakery in their locale that makes wedding cakes at all except for those personally known. They will sue to their hearts content and still not win.

Possible, but highly unlikely on any great scale which is why it's time to think about repealing Public Accommodation laws in general as they apply to private businesses. I agree with Barry Goldwater that they were wrong, although I can recognize at the time they were considered needful.

The reality is that more and more people are finding no moral objection to same-sex relationships and one of the main skews being age. Old people have moral objections, but the vast majority of younger generations don't and that is the attitude that will be carried forward in time.


>>>>

Yet, the physical attacks on gays are always carried out by younger people rather than older.

One would believe that most "physical attacks" in general are committed by younger people, not just attacks on gays.


Do you have anything showing that it's old people committing "physical attacks" on straights and young people only make "physical attacks" on gays?




>>>>

 

[ScienceRocks]

I'd just shit in the cake and mark on the cake, gay wedding cake!