Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
Excuse me? What business does not meet the definition of public accommodation, the baker? Did you completely miss the ruling that the thread is about?
[
So I guess the 2nd amendment is not the only one you hate.
Not a first Amendment issue, guy.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
Businesses don't have religions. Businesses have to comply with all the laws applicable to businesses.
[
So I guess the 2nd amendment is not the only one you hate.
Not a first Amendment issue, guy.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
Businesses don't have religions. Businesses have to comply with all the laws applicable to businesses.
The people in the business can have a religion, and these laws inhibit their free exercise. What is it about forcing people to do something they don't morally agree with via government action that gives you such a hard on?
Not a first Amendment issue, guy.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
Businesses don't have religions. Businesses have to comply with all the laws applicable to businesses.
The people in the business can have a religion, and these laws inhibit their free exercise. What is it about forcing people to do something they don't morally agree with via government action that gives you such a hard on?
corporations are incorporated in order to shield their owners from personal liability and were never viewed as people for any purpose other than the ability to sue in court or be the subject of the jurisdiction of the courts. corporations have no religion. and any judge saying they were "people" for any purpose would have been laughed off the bench until the wingnut brigade's terrible decision in citizens united.
and while it is amusing to see people use religion to justify hatred and bigotry, it's no more legal than not serving someone black because you don't like them... or someone jewish or anything else that offends your sensibilities.
That wasn't my point.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.
I'm not in Denver or Seattle, here you can't force a baker to make a Bob and Joe wedding cake with two males on it, do you get it? That would be a gay cake, not that the cake itself engages in homosexual unions. Gays are not the only people who's opinions matter and pretending that there's a national law that says so is wrong. You are free to be as wrong as you want for as long as you want.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.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.
The baker was asked to make a wedding cake, period. Not a "gay" cake, a wedding cake. The baker was not asked to provide a product or item they don't normally provide.
The people in the business can have a religion, and these laws inhibit their free exercise. What is it about forcing people to do something they don't morally agree with via government action that gives you such a hard on?
corporations are incorporated in order to shield their owners from personal liability and were never viewed as people for any purpose other than the ability to sue in court or be the subject of the jurisdiction of the courts. corporations have no religion. and any judge saying they were "people" for any purpose would have been laughed off the bench until the wingnut brigade's terrible decision in citizens united.
and while it is amusing to see people use religion to justify hatred and bigotry, it's no more legal than not serving someone black because you don't like them... or someone jewish or anything else that offends your sensibilities.
Show me in the bible a condemnation of a person because of their skin. However there is plenty of condemnation of homosexual acts in all 3 monotheistic religion's basic texts.
Jim Crow laws were forced on businesses by the government, even if a lunch counter wanted to serve people together they couldn't. And a serving a gay person at a lunch counter is not the same as being forced to attend and endorse their wedding, which being a baker or a photographer for one does.
Tell me what is easier, going through all this to purge people who disagree with you out of normal society, or just going to another damn baker/photographer who WILL take their business?
I'm not in Denver or Seattle, here you can't force a baker to make a Bob and Joe wedding cake with two males on it, do you get it? That would be a gay cake, not that the cake itself engages in homosexual unions. Gays are not the only people who's opinions matter and pretending that there's a national law that says so is wrong. You are free to be as wrong as you want for as long as you want.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.
The baker was asked to make a wedding cake, period. Not a "gay" cake, a wedding cake. The baker was not asked to provide a product or item they don't normally provide.
For the couple, they said they always believed they were in the right and it was important to pursue the case for future customers.
“We’ve already been discriminated there,” Mullins said. “We’ve already been treated badly.
“The next time a gay couple wanders in there asking for a wedding cake, they won’t have the experience we had.
“They will have a responsible experience and leave feeling respected.”
The homosexual couple could have just gone to a business that actually wanted to work with them, but they chose to make an issue out of it. It's how the PC Police operates - when someone dares to cross them, they choose to punish them. They are not required to do so, but they pretend as if they are.
It's all about control.
By the time the Left has achieved its goal of a pure European-style Social Democracy with an Authoritarian central bureaucracy -- maybe, what, 15 to 20 years -- most of us will have been conditioned to conform to their sanctioned worldview or else. A nice, comfortable little mediocrity for which we will all have to settle. Tough shit.
.
or he could have just adhered to the law and made the cake.
Conform.
Comply.
Do not question authority.
Do not challenge that with which you disagree.
The American Left truly has become what it used to hate.
.
corporations are incorporated in order to shield their owners from personal liability and were never viewed as people for any purpose other than the ability to sue in court or be the subject of the jurisdiction of the courts. corporations have no religion. and any judge saying they were "people" for any purpose would have been laughed off the bench until the wingnut brigade's terrible decision in citizens united.
and while it is amusing to see people use religion to justify hatred and bigotry, it's no more legal than not serving someone black because you don't like them... or someone jewish or anything else that offends your sensibilities.
Show me in the bible a condemnation of a person because of their skin. However there is plenty of condemnation of homosexual acts in all 3 monotheistic religion's basic texts.
Jim Crow laws were forced on businesses by the government, even if a lunch counter wanted to serve people together they couldn't. And a serving a gay person at a lunch counter is not the same as being forced to attend and endorse their wedding, which being a baker or a photographer for one does.
Tell me what is easier, going through all this to purge people who disagree with you out of normal society, or just going to another damn baker/photographer who WILL take their business?
When Religious Liberty Was Used To Justify Racism Instead Of Homophobia
Because the Bible Tells me So
are you so simple that you believe that this case doesn't have implications for other businesses?The gays in Colorado are just delusional! There is no other way to put it. They actually think that Jack Phillips is going to bake wedding cakes for same sex couples! The couple who brought the complaint actually think that they are benefiting future same sex couples!
Bakery Will Stop Making Wedding Cakes After Losing Discrimination Case « CBS Denver
For the couple, they said they always believed they were in the right and it was important to pursue the case for future customers.
Weve already been discriminated there, Mullins said. Weve already been treated badly.
The next time a gay couple wanders in there asking for a wedding cake, they wont have the experience we had.
They will have a responsible experience and leave feeling respected.
They will respectfully be told that Masterpiece Bakery doesn't make wedding cakes. I hope that the gays in Colorado appreciate all the respect they will get.
corporations are incorporated in order to shield their owners from personal liability and were never viewed as people for any purpose other than the ability to sue in court or be the subject of the jurisdiction of the courts. corporations have no religion. and any judge saying they were "people" for any purpose would have been laughed off the bench until the wingnut brigade's terrible decision in citizens united.
and while it is amusing to see people use religion to justify hatred and bigotry, it's no more legal than not serving someone black because you don't like them... or someone jewish or anything else that offends your sensibilities.
Show me in the bible a condemnation of a person because of their skin. However there is plenty of condemnation of homosexual acts in all 3 monotheistic religion's basic texts.
Jim Crow laws were forced on businesses by the government, even if a lunch counter wanted to serve people together they couldn't. And a serving a gay person at a lunch counter is not the same as being forced to attend and endorse their wedding, which being a baker or a photographer for one does.
Tell me what is easier, going through all this to purge people who disagree with you out of normal society, or just going to another damn baker/photographer who WILL take their business?
When Religious Liberty Was Used To Justify Racism Instead Of Homophobia
Because the Bible Tells me So
corporations are incorporated in order to shield their owners from personal liability and were never viewed as people for any purpose other than the ability to sue in court or be the subject of the jurisdiction of the courts. corporations have no religion. and any judge saying they were "people" for any purpose would have been laughed off the bench until the wingnut brigade's terrible decision in citizens united.
and while it is amusing to see people use religion to justify hatred and bigotry, it's no more legal than not serving someone black because you don't like them... or someone jewish or anything else that offends your sensibilities.
Show me in the bible a condemnation of a person because of their skin. However there is plenty of condemnation of homosexual acts in all 3 monotheistic religion's basic texts.
Jim Crow laws were forced on businesses by the government, even if a lunch counter wanted to serve people together they couldn't. And a serving a gay person at a lunch counter is not the same as being forced to attend and endorse their wedding, which being a baker or a photographer for one does.
Tell me what is easier, going through all this to purge people who disagree with you out of normal society, or just going to another damn baker/photographer who WILL take their business?
When Religious Liberty Was Used To Justify Racism Instead Of Homophobia
Because the Bible Tells me So
I'm not in Denver or Seattle, here you can't force a baker to make a Bob and Joe wedding cake with two males on it, do you get it? That would be a gay cake, not that the cake itself engages in homosexual unions. Gays are not the only people who's opinions matter and pretending that there's a national law that says so is wrong. You are free to be as wrong as you want for as long as you want.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.
The baker was asked to make a wedding cake, period. Not a "gay" cake, a wedding cake. The baker was not asked to provide a product or item they don't normally provide.
Show me in the bible a condemnation of a person because of their skin. However there is plenty of condemnation of homosexual acts in all 3 monotheistic religion's basic texts.
Jim Crow laws were forced on businesses by the government, even if a lunch counter wanted to serve people together they couldn't. And a serving a gay person at a lunch counter is not the same as being forced to attend and endorse their wedding, which being a baker or a photographer for one does.
Tell me what is easier, going through all this to purge people who disagree with you out of normal society, or just going to another damn baker/photographer who WILL take their business?
When Religious Liberty Was Used To Justify Racism Instead Of Homophobia
Because the Bible Tells me So
It was used, but abolitionists used the bible as well. There is no clear cut language condemning being black as sinful. There IS clear cut language condemning homosexuality as sinful.
Show me in the bible a condemnation of a person because of their skin. However there is plenty of condemnation of homosexual acts in all 3 monotheistic religion's basic texts.
Jim Crow laws were forced on businesses by the government, even if a lunch counter wanted to serve people together they couldn't. And a serving a gay person at a lunch counter is not the same as being forced to attend and endorse their wedding, which being a baker or a photographer for one does.
Tell me what is easier, going through all this to purge people who disagree with you out of normal society, or just going to another damn baker/photographer who WILL take their business?
When Religious Liberty Was Used To Justify Racism Instead Of Homophobia
Because the Bible Tells me So
It was used, but abolitionists used the bible as well. There is no clear cut language condemning being black as sinful. There IS clear cut language condemning homosexuality as sinful.
I'm not in Denver or Seattle, here you can't force a baker to make a Bob and Joe wedding cake with two males on it, do you get it? That would be a gay cake, not that the cake itself engages in homosexual unions. Gays are not the only people who's opinions matter and pretending that there's a national law that says so is wrong. You are free to be as wrong as you want for as long as you want.The baker was asked to make a wedding cake, period. Not a "gay" cake, a wedding cake. The baker was not asked to provide a product or item they don't normally provide.
Your profile says "Washington State", the State Public Accommodation law is not just limited to Seattle. If you sell goods and services in the state you cannot refuse based on the customer being Alack or Asian, Christian or Jew, Mexican or Irish, male or female, gay or straight, 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.
>>>>
are you so simple that you believe that this case doesn't have implications for other businesses?The gays in Colorado are just delusional! There is no other way to put it. They actually think that Jack Phillips is going to bake wedding cakes for same sex couples! The couple who brought the complaint actually think that they are benefiting future same sex couples!
Bakery Will Stop Making Wedding Cakes After Losing Discrimination Case « CBS Denver
For the couple, they said they always believed they were in the right and it was important to pursue the case for future customers.
Weve already been discriminated there, Mullins said. Weve already been treated badly.
The next time a gay couple wanders in there asking for a wedding cake, they wont have the experience we had.
They will have a responsible experience and leave feeling respected.
They will respectfully be told that Masterpiece Bakery doesn't make wedding cakes. I hope that the gays in Colorado appreciate all the respect they will get.
