Baker Who Won’t Make Cakes for Same-Sex Weddings Appeals Mandatory Re-Education Order

[Mac1958]

I'm asking you to show me where the laws aren't being enforced, illegals are still illegal right, and tell me why someone who breaks the law and gets nailed for it is somehow unfair?

I've never said the laws aren't being enforced, have I?

No, I just pointed out your selective attention to those laws.

When I see the American Left defending the laws against illegals, I'll take them seriously about a Christian not wanting to bake a cake.

What kind of defense are you looking for? The last time I checked illegal was still illegal, and crossing the border was still against the law but the reasons for doing so matter greatly, and that is worked out in our formal and lawful process, we don't just shoot them.

Perhaps it's actually possible that you don't see the defense that the American Left puts up for illegal aliens on a daily, hourly basis. All over. Everywhere.

Not much I can do about that.

.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I've never said the laws aren't being enforced, have I?

No, I just pointed out your selective attention to those laws.

When I see the American Left defending the laws against illegals, I'll take them seriously about a Christian not wanting to bake a cake.

What kind of defense are you looking for? The last time I checked illegal was still illegal, and crossing the border was still against the law but the reasons for doing so matter greatly, and that is worked out in our formal and lawful process, we don't just shoot them.

Perhaps it's actually possible that you don't see the defense that the American Left puts up for illegal aliens on a daily, hourly basis. All over. Everywhere.

Not much I can do about that.

.

Defending the human rights of people who come here illegally, and came here illegally, has nothing to with not defending the laws on the books. They are illegal. The question is what to do about that, especially the ones who have been here decades, and the children of those who know no other life but here.

If I defend a speeder who was racing to the hospital with a sick child, it doesn't mean I'm opposed to all traffic laws. If I defend something you sent a child here hoping they would have a better life it doesn't mean I think there should be no laws against doing so. The reasons for breaking the law matter. In the case of the baker, his reasons aren't good enough so he got nailed.

 

[Ibentoken]

Jesus referenced what was marriage at the time, in relation to divorce. His position on gay marriage, like most other issues, is entirely unknown.

But hey, his position that is known, on divorce, certainly doesn't seem to stop anybody in modern America. Just as with most of what he said, it's ignored.

There was no such thing as gay marriage. Marriage has always been defined as a woman and man until recently. Homosexuality was condemned.

There was never such a thing as gay marriage until contemporary times, I agree. That wasn't the question. The question was regarding the statement that Jesus said marriage was only between a man and a woman. Matthew 19 does quote Jesus talking about marriage between men and women, but it does not say he would not recognize gay marriage. It does not say nothing else is marriage. That was the statement that I questioned. In general, Jesus's statements were inclusive, not exclusive, and he did not put up barriers between people and belief, he tore them down. Why would he condemn people not harming anyone? I don't see him doing that.

I draw a clear distinction between "marriage" and "government marriage." Jesus did not talk about government being involved in marriage at all, yet today somehow government gets to define it. I don't recognize government's right to do that. I don't see the point of government being involved in any marriage.

There was no such thing as gay marriage. You're erecting a false premise.

 

[Ibentoken]

I disagree, the courts disagree, and so do most Americans. Carry on...

Again, there is no way you don't grasp that it is far simpler to go to the baker down the street and it makes no sense want to give your money to a homophobe. Government power is your objective. These laws regulating businesses are so unnecessary, so few business owners want to turn away any paying customer. Again that's why Jim Crow was implemented by government, to force us to. You just love government.

I love the government when it does what it should, like saying you can't open the No ******* or Jews gas station.

******* and Jews don't violate my religious beliefs. Forcing me to be a part of your queer wedding does.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Again, there is no way you don't grasp that it is far simpler to go to the baker down the street and it makes no sense want to give your money to a homophobe. Government power is your objective. These laws regulating businesses are so unnecessary, so few business owners want to turn away any paying customer. Again that's why Jim Crow was implemented by government, to force us to. You just love government.

I love the government when it does what it should, like saying you can't open the No ******* or Jews gas station.

******* and Jews don't violate my religious beliefs. Forcing me to be a part of your queer wedding does.

Then don't go into the wedding business because they are allowed to get married now.

And if being gay is such a sin, what difference does it make what they do, you'd always be against it unless they threw themselves into a volcano, which you would be only too happy to help with I'm sure.

 

[jasonnfree]

I love the government when it does what it should, like saying you can't open the No ******* or Jews gas station.

******* and Jews don't violate my religious beliefs. Forcing me to be a part of your queer wedding does.

Then don't go into the wedding business because they are allowed to get married now.

And if being gay is such a sin, what difference does it make what they do, you'd always be against it unless they threw themselves into a volcano, which you would be only too happy to help with I'm sure.

Why would anybody force someone in the food business to make a product they don't want to produce? Who knows what they might put in it. I don't even send food back that was cooked wrong, like steak too undercooked or whatever. The cook could do anything to your order.

 

[jasonnfree]

I've never said the laws aren't being enforced, have I?

No, I just pointed out your selective attention to those laws.

When I see the American Left defending the laws against illegals, I'll take them seriously about a Christian not wanting to bake a cake.

What kind of defense are you looking for? The last time I checked illegal was still illegal, and crossing the border was still against the law but the reasons for doing so matter greatly, and that is worked out in our formal and lawful process, we don't just shoot them.

Perhaps it's actually possible that you don't see the defense that the American Left puts up for illegal aliens on a daily, hourly basis. All over. Everywhere.

Not much I can do about that.

.

Employers being fined for hiring illegals would put a stop to illegal immigration. It's a pretty steep fine. I don't see any republicans pushing the issue. I mean republican politicians.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

******* and Jews don't violate my religious beliefs. Forcing me to be a part of your queer wedding does.

Then don't go into the wedding business because they are allowed to get married now.

And if being gay is such a sin, what difference does it make what they do, you'd always be against it unless they threw themselves into a volcano, which you would be only too happy to help with I'm sure.

Why would anybody force someone in the food business to make a product they don't want to produce? Who knows what they might put in it. I don't even send food back that was cooked wrong, like steak too undercooked or whatever. The cook could do anything to your order.

People with morals don't tamper with food, and they also do their damn jobs, like bake cakes.

 

[bodecea]

There was no such thing as gay marriage. Marriage has always been defined as a woman and man until recently. Homosexuality was condemned.

There was never such a thing as gay marriage until contemporary times, I agree. That wasn't the question. The question was regarding the statement that Jesus said marriage was only between a man and a woman. Matthew 19 does quote Jesus talking about marriage between men and women, but it does not say he would not recognize gay marriage. It does not say nothing else is marriage. That was the statement that I questioned. In general, Jesus's statements were inclusive, not exclusive, and he did not put up barriers between people and belief, he tore them down. Why would he condemn people not harming anyone? I don't see him doing that.

I draw a clear distinction between "marriage" and "government marriage." Jesus did not talk about government being involved in marriage at all, yet today somehow government gets to define it. I don't recognize government's right to do that. I don't see the point of government being involved in any marriage.

There was no such thing as gay marriage. You're erecting a false premise.

There is just marriage. And...as of now in many states...that includes marriage between interfaith couples, interracial couples, different gender couples and same gender couples.

 

[bodecea]

Again, there is no way you don't grasp that it is far simpler to go to the baker down the street and it makes no sense want to give your money to a homophobe. Government power is your objective. These laws regulating businesses are so unnecessary, so few business owners want to turn away any paying customer. Again that's why Jim Crow was implemented by government, to force us to. You just love government.

I love the government when it does what it should, like saying you can't open the No ******* or Jews gas station.

******* and Jews don't violate my religious beliefs. Forcing me to be a part of your queer wedding does.

Who cares about YOUR religious beliefs....these are secular laws we are referring to.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

******* and Jews don't violate my religious beliefs. Forcing me to be a part of your queer wedding does.

Then don't go into the wedding business because they are allowed to get married now.

And if being gay is such a sin, what difference does it make what they do, you'd always be against it unless they threw themselves into a volcano, which you would be only too happy to help with I'm sure.

Why would anybody force someone in the food business to make a product they don't want to produce? Who knows what they might put in it. I don't even send food back that was cooked wrong, like steak too undercooked or whatever. The cook could do anything to your order.

Because it makes Progressives "feel good."

 

[The2ndAmendment]

I love the government when it does what it should, like saying you can't open the No ******* or Jews gas station.

******* and Jews don't violate my religious beliefs. Forcing me to be a part of your queer wedding does.

Who cares about YOUR religious beliefs....these are secular laws we are referring to.

It's a secular law that prohibits the Free Exercise of Religion. The 14th Amendment applies the 1st Amendment to state and local laws too. If the Government can compel "re education" on all beliefs contrary to the Government Thought Parameters, then they can, by prohibiting all other possible beliefs, establish their Thought Parameters through negation. That is why the First Amendment strictly mentions "establish" and "prohibit," because prohibiting beliefs leads to the establishment of an "approved belief," by leaving no alternatives.

 

[jasonnfree]

Then don't go into the wedding business because they are allowed to get married now.

And if being gay is such a sin, what difference does it make what they do, you'd always be against it unless they threw themselves into a volcano, which you would be only too happy to help with I'm sure.

Why would anybody force someone in the food business to make a product they don't want to produce? Who knows what they might put in it. I don't even send food back that was cooked wrong, like steak too undercooked or whatever. The cook could do anything to your order.

People with morals don't tamper with food, and they also do their damn jobs, like bake cakes.

How do you know that the person you are forcing to do something they don't want to do has morals? The best policy is to shop where your business is welcome anyway.

 

[Listening]

I love the government when it does what it should, like saying you can't open the No ******* or Jews gas station.

******* and Jews don't violate my religious beliefs. Forcing me to be a part of your queer wedding does.

Who cares about YOUR religious beliefs....these are secular laws we are referring to.

Yes, we are seeing them all the time.

You have to serve people you don't want to (loss of liberty).

You have to have health insurance that you don't want (loss of liberty).

You guys are batting a 1000.

 

[jknowgood]

Then don't go into the wedding business because they are allowed to get married now.

And if being gay is such a sin, what difference does it make what they do, you'd always be against it unless they threw themselves into a volcano, which you would be only too happy to help with I'm sure.

Why would anybody force someone in the food business to make a product they don't want to produce? Who knows what they might put in it. I don't even send food back that was cooked wrong, like steak too undercooked or whatever. The cook could do anything to your order.

People with morals don't tamper with food, and they also do their damn jobs, like bake cakes.

So jesse Jackson is immoral? He spit in white peoples food. Another immoral liberal, called out by a liberal. Too funny.

 

[Rikurzhen]

The law requires "Full and Equal" access to goods and services sold. Offering a subset of goods and services to one group and full goods and services is not "full and equal".>>>>

Just like Federal law supersedes State law and State law supersedes Municipal law, Human Rights supersedes administrative law.

Putting the interests of a orderly commercial sphere above the human right to Free Association is a mistake and eventually a case will come before the Supreme Court and this error in law will be remedied.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Doesn't matter. Discrimination is against the law.

I'm eager to read your plan for how liberals plan on forcing women who discriminate against male gynecologists to stop their discriminating behavior and be examined by these men?

 

[Ibentoken]

I love the government when it does what it should, like saying you can't open the No ******* or Jews gas station.

******* and Jews don't violate my religious beliefs. Forcing me to be a part of your queer wedding does.

Who cares about YOUR religious beliefs....these are secular laws we are referring to.

Who cares about My religious beliefs? The founding fathers cared and put it in the Constitution to protect me from nasty trash like you.

 

[Listening]

Doesn't matter. Discrimination is against the law.

I'm eager to read your plan for how liberals plan on forcing women who discriminate against male gynecologists to stop their discriminating behavior and be examined by these men?

They'll also have to be re-educated.

 

[bodecea]

Why would anybody force someone in the food business to make a product they don't want to produce? Who knows what they might put in it. I don't even send food back that was cooked wrong, like steak too undercooked or whatever. The cook could do anything to your order.

People with morals don't tamper with food, and they also do their damn jobs, like bake cakes.

So jesse Jackson is immoral? He spit in white peoples food. Another immoral liberal, called out by a liberal. Too funny.

It is kind of funny how RWrs seem to listen to Jesse Jackson more than LWrs do.