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

[Rikurzhen]

Actually we're forcing him to act like a grownup, and a business, not a church.

You're forcing him to "act like a grownup" by using a gun to force him to bake a cake rather than just buying a cake from someone who wants to bake it.



Nice demonstration of grown up there...

There's no gun drama queen.

What happens to that baker if he refuses to comply with the Court's instructions?

 

[bodecea]

A lot of things would be awesome, just not likely. There is no political will. Even the tribble head Rand Paul is backing of his bullshit on the Civil Rights Act, denying he ever said anything about it. Why? Because there is no political will to get rid of PA laws or to make changes to the Civil Rights Act.

In fact, the political will is in the other direction, protect gays like all the other minorities are protected. Did you know that you can fire people for being gay in about 30 states but a majority of Americans don't think you can and believe you shouldn't' be able to?

Civil Rights rulings are not popularity contests. When the Supreme Court ruled on Roe vs. Wade and Hobby Lobby, those rulings seriously pissed off some segments of society.

So just because a ruling in politically unpopular doesn't close the issue down.

Secondly, the political popularity and the likelihood of a court overturning are not factors set in stone, they're reactive to events and civilizational progress.

Maybe you've noticed what I've noticed, the opposition to anti-discrimination laws has been growing louder and louder because more and more people are noticing that they trample on the human right of free association and they're willing to jettison everything, and take the discrimination, so long as freedom can be restored to people. This used to be a very rare argument a decade ago but look at this thread - a number of people have made that argument.

The civil rights reform of the coming few decades is probably going to be to gut ant-discrimination laws due to their anti-Human Rights oppressive qualities.

What a sad thing.

 

[bodecea]

The intolerant of you liberals is really something to behold. Quit forcing people to be nice.

Actually we're forcing him to act like a grownup, and a business, not a church.

You're not my Mom, so take your "forcing me to act" bit and shove it. How would you like religious folks using the bludgeon of law to force you to attend church?

Used to do that...didn't work out well.

 

[dblack]

Civil Rights rulings are not popularity contests. When the Supreme Court ruled on Roe vs. Wade and Hobby Lobby, those rulings seriously pissed off some segments of society.

So just because a ruling in politically unpopular doesn't close the issue down.

Secondly, the political popularity and the likelihood of a court overturning are not factors set in stone, they're reactive to events and civilizational progress.

Maybe you've noticed what I've noticed, the opposition to anti-discrimination laws has been growing louder and louder because more and more people are noticing that they trample on the human right of free association and they're willing to jettison everything, and take the discrimination, so long as freedom can be restored to people. This used to be a very rare argument a decade ago but look at this thread - a number of people have made that argument.

The civil rights reform of the coming few decades is probably going to be to gut ant-discrimination laws due to their anti-Human Rights oppressive qualities.

I do sense that people are starting to notice the creepy authoritarian core of these kinds of laws, and starting to question the whole concept. Hopefully popular revulsion at racism has reached critical mass, so that we can jettison the semi-poisonous "cure" of PA style laws.

This entire anti-discrimination mindset reveals the totaliltarianism at the heart of liberals.

The role of government is to govern the people. Liberals see the role of government as reforming people, molding people. They'd object to government forcing people to attend church, not because government is using its power to stomp on people's freedoms but because government is using that power for an end that liberals don't like. Government using that power to force people to be nice, sure let's give the government more jackboot power because there are some throats over there in Aisle #3 that don't yet have a jackboot pressing down on them.

Like a frog which is slowly being boiled, it sometimes jumps out of the water and people don't always immediately notice the tyranny of liberals but piece by piece the tyranny begins to reveal itself.

Sometimes society needs a reset after it becomes obvious that it's been going down the wrong path for a long time. Reagan did that with his economic realignment - people realized 90% top marginal tax rates were a reflection of having gone down a wrong path.

Sure. I don't take the chorus of naysayers very seriously. They want to proclaim our defeat and declare that nothing will ever change, but sometimes it does. They used to say the same thing about drug legalization. Anyway, the more the conservatives (and let's face it, in the strictest sense that's what they are) come in here and say "nothing to see here, move along", the more I'm convinced we're on the right track.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Again show me where miscegenation is accepted in the bible.

and its all about acceptance, no matter how much you deny it.

I already did. I posted over a half dozen bible quotes used by segregationists and anti miscegenation. It doesn't matter if YOU believe it's sinful, they did. How come your bigotry trumps theirs?

Its not my bigotry. I'm fighting for the rights of people to run their businesses as the please. I have no issue selling anything to gay people.

Business owners are at liberty to run their businesses as they please in the context of all manner of necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory policies.

Examples of these regulatory policies include but are not limited to:

An employer may not work an employee in excess of 40 hours in a week without paying him overtime.

An employer may not pay an employee a wage below the minimum wage.

An employer must maintain safe working conditions.

An employer must ensure the goods and services provided the general public meet health and safety standards.

Employers must obtain businesses licenses, are subject to government inspections, and must comport with zoning and similar property restrictions.

And employers are subject to Federal, state, and local public accommodations laws prohibiting discriminatory practices with regard to selling goods and services to patrons, to ensure the integrity of local markets and all interrelated markets, in accordance with Commerce Clause jurisprudence.

Professional business owners know and understand that being subject to various regulatory policies is a part of doing business, where the vast majority conduct themselves as professionals and follow the regulatory policies accordingly.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

This entire anti-discrimination mindset reveals the totaliltarianism at the heart of liberals.

Actually not.

Liberals possess the correct understanding of the meaning of a free society and the sanctity of individual liberty, where citizens are subject solely to the rule of law, not men – as men are incapable of ruling justly; those seeking to repeal or invalidate public accommodations laws is proof of that.

Indeed, conservative advocacy of discrimination against gay Americans in violation of the Constitution and its case law is the true manifestation of totalitarianism.

 

[martybegan]

I already did. I posted over a half dozen bible quotes used by segregationists and anti miscegenation. It doesn't matter if YOU believe it's sinful, they did. How come your bigotry trumps theirs?

Its not my bigotry. I'm fighting for the rights of people to run their businesses as the please. I have no issue selling anything to gay people.

Business owners are at liberty to run their businesses as they please in the context of all manner of necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory policies.

Examples of these regulatory policies include but are not limited to:

An employer may not work an employee in excess of 40 hours in a week without paying him overtime.

An employer may not pay an employee a wage below the minimum wage.

An employer must maintain safe working conditions.

An employer must ensure the goods and services provided the general public meet health and safety standards.

Employers must obtain businesses licenses, are subject to government inspections, and must comport with zoning and similar property restrictions.

And employers are subject to Federal, state, and local public accommodations laws prohibiting discriminatory practices with regard to selling goods and services to patrons, to ensure the integrity of local markets and all interrelated markets, in accordance with Commerce Clause jurisprudence.

Professional business owners know and understand that being subject to various regulatory policies is a part of doing business, where the vast majority conduct themselves as professionals and follow the regulatory policies accordingly.

None of those are in the constitution, they are LAWS, not rights. the others also don't impinge upon the morality or those under them.

You must really get a hard on making people do things against their belief structure, its kind of sad actually.

Free association? Fuck it, if I don't agree with the persons moral compass.

Progressives are nothing but a bunch of assholes.

 

[martybegan]

This entire anti-discrimination mindset reveals the totaliltarianism at the heart of liberals.

Actually not.

Liberals possess the correct understanding of the meaning of a free society and the sanctity of individual liberty, where citizens are subject solely to the rule of law, not men – as men are incapable of ruling justly; those seeking to repeal or invalidate public accommodations laws is proof of that.

Indeed, conservative advocacy of discrimination against gay Americans in violation of the Constitution and its case law is the true manifestation of totalitarianism.

Where in the constitution does it control people from discriminating against each other?

The constitution, with the exception of owning slaves and transporting booze into localities that forbid it, is a limit on GOVERNMENT, not PEOPLE.

 

[dblack]

I already did. I posted over a half dozen bible quotes used by segregationists and anti miscegenation. It doesn't matter if YOU believe it's sinful, they did. How come your bigotry trumps theirs?

Its not my bigotry. I'm fighting for the rights of people to run their businesses as the please. I have no issue selling anything to gay people.

Business owners are at liberty to run their businesses as they please in the context of all manner of necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory policies.

Listen. I know you think that Commerce Clause gives government the power to arbitrarily dictate our economic decisions (and that the General Welfare Clause gives them the power to dictate everything else), but we think that you, and your precious case law, are wrong - a poison that's eating away at the foundations of liberty - and we're going to fight you, regardless of how many times you declare it to be a done deal.

 

[Mad Scientist]

If I was in that Cake Business's shoes I would have just made a terrible cake for them. And when they complained about it I'd apologize and refund them their money.

 

[Spoonman]

If he offers wedding cakes as a business to the public, he cannot pick and choose which group he serves or not serves....same applies if he were to say he cannot design a cake for an interracial couple....or he refuses to design a cake for an interfaith couple.

The intolerant of you liberals is really something to behold. Quit forcing people to be nice.

Actually we're forcing him to act like a grownup, and a business, not a church.

what gives you the right to force anybody to do anything?

 

[Ibentoken]

My opinion, the court's opinion, the opinion of the majority, not that it matters, and 60 years of legal reasoning and good results for society. Go piss into the wind some more you damn infant.

This is a new law and two queers deliberately targeted the business owner to test the law. Now go fuck yourself, loser.

Bullshit, and it's not a new law, just a new minority that is being protected. Laws like this have been on the books for decades. Grow up and deal with it.

Exactly. I agree. The left created a new protected minority. Corrupt.

 

[Ibentoken]

Government doesn't give rights.

 

[Ibentoken]

If he offers wedding cakes as a business to the public, he cannot pick and choose which group he serves or not serves....same applies if he were to say he cannot design a cake for an interracial couple....or he refuses to design a cake for an interfaith couple.

The intolerant of you liberals is really something to behold. Quit forcing people to be nice.

Actually we're forcing him to act like a grownup, and a business, not a church.

There is so much in your post that reveals the corrupt bullying thought process of the left.

 

[dblack]

The intolerant of you liberals is really something to behold. Quit forcing people to be nice.

Actually we're forcing him to act like a grownup, and a business, not a church.

what gives you the right to force anybody to do anything?

Or the delusion he has anything to do with it?

 

[Ibentoken]

Actually we're forcing him to act like a grownup, and a business, not a church.

You're not my Mom, so take your "forcing me to act" bit and shove it. How would you like religious folks using the bludgeon of law to force you to attend church?

If your mom is like that of the other selfish children here, I'd spank her first and then have her spank some common sense and human decency into you! Oh, but you can't tell me what to do, nah nah nahhhh so there!!!!!!!! What a bunch of fucking infants you guys are...

I'd turn you in for assault and abuse and forcing another person to commit assault and abuse. You're just another leftist corrupt bully.

 

[bodecea]

Its not my bigotry. I'm fighting for the rights of people to run their businesses as the please. I have no issue selling anything to gay people.

Business owners are at liberty to run their businesses as they please in the context of all manner of necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory policies.

Listen. I know you think that Commerce Clause gives government the power to arbitrarily dictate our economic decisions (and that the General Welfare Clause gives them the power to dictate everything else), but we think that you, and your precious case law, are wrong - a poison that's eating away at the foundations of liberty - and we're going to fight you, regardless of how many times you declare it to be a done deal.

Then repeal the law....it's as simple as that.

 

[bodecea]

Government doesn't give rights.

But government regulates businesses. Or do you disagree with that?

 

[Ibentoken]

Government doesn't give rights.

But government regulates businesses. Or do you disagree with that?

Yep, and government has overstepped here. Where does government get it's power?

 

[bodecea]

Government doesn't give rights.

But government regulates businesses. Or do you disagree with that?

Yep, and government has overstepped here. Where does government get it's power?

If you don't like the law...repeal it. It's really that simple.