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.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
I wish I could buy some cakes from this business..
I like their style.
Baker Who Won?t Make Cakes for Same-Sex Weddings Appeals Mandatory Re-Education Order
The commissions order requires Phillips to design wedding cakes for same-sex ceremonies in violation of his beliefs, institute re-education classes for his staff on the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act and send quarterly compliance reports to the commission for two years.
::::::::::
This is the issue at the heart of the appeal: Phillips claims the government should not be forcing business owners to betray their consciences and convey what they do not believe. Even more importantly, he says, the government should not be in the business of rehabilitating consciences or re-educating its citizens to change their moral beliefs about the definition of marriage.
Repeal the equal access laws then....then businesses everywhere can refuse service to blacks, to women, to hispanics, to handicapped too.
Probably not, as most progressives don't have the balls to sue Muslims or sic the government on them. Its a combination of being pussies, and their inability to contradict dark people.
Wow...that was really pathetic. Not up to your usual standards today.
If a Muslim bakery (lots of those, I'm sure) refused to bake a wedding cake that they advertised out of their catalog and they were in a locality that protects gays from discrimination, they would be sued.
The truth hurts, doesn't it? Your side goes for the easy points, because of your basic cowardice in being progressives. You just can't stand people disapproving of your lifestyle, so obviously the only response is to try to ruin said people.
There is nothing in the bible that says it's a sin to be of a different race. Segregation was discriminatory, plain and simple. However this baker does not refuse to serve gays. He only declined to bake them a cake for a gay wedding as he cannot participate in or support any gay themed event, otherwise he'd be in violation of his faith. Not following the teachings of his faith would be equivalent to renouncing his faith. He has a strong case, and the ruling will get overturned ... unless someone repeals the First Amendment before then.I believe he has a strong chance of getting that order overturned. No one should be forced to choose between his faith and his livelihood. Had he known that he would be forced to choose between the two, he would not have opened up the shop in 1993. It's not fair after 20 years in business to ask him now to renounce his faith.
It's not fair to have gay people being denied a service open to everyone else just because they are gay. That's a greater travesty.
Btw, Southerners believed 50 years ago that it was against their religion to desegregate. So this religion excuse is nonsense. If he serves the general public, he must serve every group in the public.
Christians are at liberty to practice their ignorance and hate in accordance with what they perceive to be the tenets of their faith, but they are not at liberty to seek to codify that ignorance and hate.
I understand that we're all on a message board and not writing for publication but it's entirely unwarranted to claim that expressing one's opinions or acting on one's beliefs is the same as codifying something. No one is arguing that their position become law, they're arguing that liberal totalitarians lift their jackboots off the throats of people and allow them to exercise their human rights.
Code:
A Muslim isn't going to custom design your queer wedding cake either. In fact, he just might hang you.
An American Muslim that owns a bakery in a locality that protects sexual orientation from discrimination will bake the cake if it is a cake they provide. It really is that simple.
Probably not, as most progressives don't have the balls to sue Muslims or sic the government on them. Its a combination of being pussies, and their inability to contradict dark people.
Couldn't queers just get their cakes somewhere else without the fascist charade....
Course they could
Couldn't them darkies just keep quit and eat in the back room instead of demanding to sit up at the counter, or just go somewhere else to eat?
Course they could have.......
Wow...that was really pathetic. Not up to your usual standards today.
If a Muslim bakery (lots of those, I'm sure) refused to bake a wedding cake that they advertised out of their catalog and they were in a locality that protects gays from discrimination, they would be sued.
The truth hurts, doesn't it? Your side goes for the easy points, because of your basic cowardice in being progressives. You just can't stand people disapproving of your lifestyle, so obviously the only response is to try to ruin said people.
Right...fighting discrimination, those are the "easy points".
Is that what the Civil Rights Act is, blacks, women, religious...all can't stand people disapproving of their "lifestyle"?
You go with that while you're trying to get that CRA repealed.
If they're anti-gay homophobes, they are not Christian.
But, from what I've seen, most people who say they're christian are just haters who carry bibles.
Either way, their stated religion has nothing to do with human rights or our constitution.
Jesus said marriage is a man and woman. Jesus zChrist is an anti-gay homophobe. Read your constitution about freedom of religion.
Jesus was actually talking about divorce at the time...but don't let facts get in the way of your religiously based anti gay bigotry. Segregationists did the same thing...used the bible in the most vile ways like you are. You make Jesus sad.
I'm not out to spare the feelings of totalitarians. Rape a woman and you impose yourself on her. Rape a person's human rights by imposing your agenda on them against their will.
If you don't like being a rapist of human rights, then don't rape people's human rights. Pretty simple, right?
So..let me get this clear. You are calling me a rapist.
Are you raping my human rights? Are you being a totalitarian?
If you're raping my human rights by forcing me to associate with someone I don't want to associate with, (for instance, forcing a woman to be attended by a male gynecologist instead of a female gynecologist of her choice) then you're a rapist of human rights.
If you don't like people seeing you as a raper of human rights, then don't rape people's human rights. Pretty simple, isn't it?
Here's the important thing - the victim of your attack doesn't care that you think you're doing something good by raping them of their human rights. Your good motivations don't wash away your totalitarian crimes.
So..let me get this clear. You are calling me a rapist.
Are you raping my human rights? Are you being a totalitarian?
If you're raping my human rights by forcing me to associate with someone I don't want to associate with, (for instance, forcing a woman to be attended by a male gynecologist instead of a female gynecologist of her choice) then you're a rapist of human rights.
If you don't like people seeing you as a raper of human rights, then don't rape people's human rights. Pretty simple, isn't it?
Here's the important thing - the victim of your attack doesn't care that you think you're doing something good by raping them of their human rights. Your good motivations don't wash away your totalitarian crimes.
No one is forcing you to open a business to serve the public. Your rape allegory denigrates victims of rape. The victims in this case are the customers, not the business owner.
Couldn't queers just get their cakes somewhere else without the fascist charade....
Course they could
Couldn't them darkies just keep quit and eat in the back room instead of demanding to sit up at the counter, or just go somewhere else to eat?
Course they could have.......
LOL, another willfully ignorant liberal who doesn't grasp that Jim Crow was ... government ...
Are you raping my human rights? Are you being a totalitarian?
If you're raping my human rights by forcing me to associate with someone I don't want to associate with, (for instance, forcing a woman to be attended by a male gynecologist instead of a female gynecologist of her choice) then you're a rapist of human rights.
If you don't like people seeing you as a raper of human rights, then don't rape people's human rights. Pretty simple, isn't it?
Here's the important thing - the victim of your attack doesn't care that you think you're doing something good by raping them of their human rights. Your good motivations don't wash away your totalitarian crimes.
No one is forcing you to open a business to serve the public. Your rape allegory denigrates victims of rape. The victims in this case are the customers, not the business owner.
No one forced the queers to target a Christian business either, but they did.
No one is forcing you to open a business to serve the public. Your rape allegory denigrates victims of rape. The victims in this case are the customers, not the business owner.
No one forced the queers to target a Christian business either, but they did.
Maybe they were impressed with his artful talent for making wedding cakes? It was a business open to the public, and in Co. businesses cannot discriminate against customers based on sexual orientation.
The truth hurts, doesn't it? Your side goes for the easy points, because of your basic cowardice in being progressives. You just can't stand people disapproving of your lifestyle, so obviously the only response is to try to ruin said people.
Right...fighting discrimination, those are the "easy points".
Is that what the Civil Rights Act is, blacks, women, religious...all can't stand people disapproving of their "lifestyle"?
You go with that while you're trying to get that CRA repealed.
Who wants it repealed, I want it fixed so it focuses on government only (and by extension companies that work for the government) leaving private businesses to do what they please. What I WOULD require is that a business post online and at a storefront those people and services they DO NOT want to provide. Let the market handle them, not government.
Jesus said marriage is a man and woman. Jesus zChrist is an anti-gay homophobe. Read your constitution about freedom of religion.
Jesus was actually talking about divorce at the time...but don't let facts get in the way of your religiously based anti gay bigotry. Segregationists did the same thing...used the bible in the most vile ways like you are. You make Jesus sad.
Yes, he was asked about divorce. He also told them what marriage is. You can't explain divorce rules without knowing what marriage is. Why do you hurt the baby Jesus?
Jesus was actually talking about divorce at the time...but don't let facts get in the way of your religiously based anti gay bigotry. Segregationists did the same thing...used the bible in the most vile ways like you are. You make Jesus sad.
Yes, he was asked about divorce. He also told them what marriage is. You can't explain divorce rules without knowing what marriage is. Why do you hurt the baby Jesus?
He was only speaking of it in regards to divorce. He was being the original feminist, telling MEN that they can't throw away their wives willy nilly.
There was no legally sanctioned same sex unions in his time. Nothing in the bible condemns loving consenting adult same sex relationships.
Right...fighting discrimination, those are the "easy points".
Is that what the Civil Rights Act is, blacks, women, religious...all can't stand people disapproving of their "lifestyle"?
You go with that while you're trying to get that CRA repealed.
Who wants it repealed, I want it fixed so it focuses on government only (and by extension companies that work for the government) leaving private businesses to do what they please. What I WOULD require is that a business post online and at a storefront those people and services they DO NOT want to provide. Let the market handle them, not government.
So you've been fighting for this legislation? You've contacted your legislators? Started a people's initiative? A useless online petition?
Even Paul has abandoned his "we don't need the CRA" bullshit.
Yes, he was asked about divorce. He also told them what marriage is. You can't explain divorce rules without knowing what marriage is. Why do you hurt the baby Jesus?
He was only speaking of it in regards to divorce. He was being the original feminist, telling MEN that they can't throw away their wives willy nilly.
There was no legally sanctioned same sex unions in his time. Nothing in the bible condemns loving consenting adult same sex relationships.
Romans first chapter and First Corinthians 6:9-10.
Who wants it repealed, I want it fixed so it focuses on government only (and by extension companies that work for the government) leaving private businesses to do what they please. What I WOULD require is that a business post online and at a storefront those people and services they DO NOT want to provide. Let the market handle them, not government.
So you've been fighting for this legislation? You've contacted your legislators? Started a people's initiative? A useless online petition?
Even Paul has abandoned his "we don't need the CRA" bullshit.
I live in NYC, contacting my legislator is moot. What i support is politicians who think less government is better government, and hope they get around to the portions of the CRA that are stupid sooner or later.
And we do need the CRA, just the parts that force government to be fair and neutral.
He was only speaking of it in regards to divorce. He was being the original feminist, telling MEN that they can't throw away their wives willy nilly.
There was no legally sanctioned same sex unions in his time. Nothing in the bible condemns loving consenting adult same sex relationships.
Romans first chapter and First Corinthians 6:9-10.
I will repeat...no where does the bible condemn loving, committed same sex relationships. The chapters you quoted have nothing to do with loving, committed same sex relationships.
