California chef won't serve customers wearing MAGA hats

[Grace Is Stoked]

In my opinion a restaurant or business should either serve everybody equally or a restaurant or business should be able to refuse service to anybody for whatever reason equally. You can’t really have it be somewhere in the middle. I think in this owners case he would have been better off to ban hats or headwear in general without sharing a political angle to it instead of only MAGA hats. Treat it like you would a nice restaurant requiring certain dress wear or things you can’t wear but just don’t make it political in nature and you probably wouldn’t have as much press and troubles.

The problem in the cake story is that government stepped in, a clear violation of his constitutional rights.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Homosexual practices are forbidden in all Christian religions; actually forbidden in most religions. The state took action against the baker for not wanting to participate in a homosexual wedding, thus prohibiting his free exercise thereof.

I would actually disagree that it is forbidden in all Christian denominations. Even though my husband and I consider ourselves non-denominational Christians now, I was raised in a Quaker household and he was raised Presbyterian. I was raised and taught in our meetings and in our home that we are all equal in the eyes of God. If a heterosexual couple like my husband and I are allowed to marry before God then so should a homosexual couple. I understand though that many denominations those beliefs are considered blasphemous. When it comes to choice regarding a baker and what he provides I would say that a baker should always have the right to decide what services he or she wants to offer and what they are comfortable doing for others. I'm also not sure that simply making a cake is truly participating in the wedding anymore or less than the store that provides the dresses or tuxedos is participating. But I understand that's debatable.

 

[ThisIsMe]

So in order for you NOT TO BE A HYPOCRITE, I guess you believe the bakers had every right to refuse to bake that cake! Right?

The maga guys have the choice to wear the hat or not. Being Gay is not a matter of choice you fucking clown.

We have been down this road before, so, you remember, he didnt refuse to do business with gay people, he refused to bake a cake specifically for a gay wedding, exercising his freedom to practice religion, because he felt baking a cake for that ceremony would be akin to hin being involved in that ceremony.

Having said that, I think this San Mateo guy is within his right to operate his business the way he sees fit, and I think repubs shouldn't be fighting this.

This is exactly what repubs were talking about during the bakery incident and I think fighting this one is missing an opportunity. Let the dems set the precedent on this by allowing this guy to refuse business to maga hat wearers, that way, down the line, they have no argument when it happens again.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

In my opinion a restaurant or business should either serve everybody equally or a restaurant or business should be able to refuse service to anybody for whatever reason equally. You can’t really have it be somewhere in the middle. I think in this owners case he would have been better off to ban hats or headwear in general without sharing a political angle to it instead of only MAGA hats. Treat it like you would a nice restaurant requiring certain dress wear or things you can’t wear but just don’t make it political in nature and you probably wouldn’t have as much press and troubles.

The problem in the cake story is that government stepped in, a clear violation of his constitutional rights.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Homosexual practices are forbidden in all Christian religions; actually forbidden in most religions. The state took action against the baker for not wanting to participate in a homosexual wedding, thus prohibiting his free exercise thereof.

I would actually disagree that it is forbidden in all Christian denominations. Even though my husband and I consider ourselves non-denominational Christians now, I was raised in a Quaker household and he was raised Presbyterian. I was raised and taught in our meetings and in our home that we are all equal in the eyes of God. If a heterosexual couple like my husband and I are allowed to marry before God then so should a homosexual couple. I understand though that many denominations those beliefs are considered blasphemous. When it comes to choice regarding a baker and what he provides I would say that a baker should always have the right to decide what services he or she wants to offer and what they are comfortable doing for others. I'm also not sure that simply making a cake is truly participating in the wedding anymore or less than the store that provides the dresses or tuxedos is participating. But I understand that's debatable.

Your religion teaches that? How can a religion (Christian) teach that when God himself said that homosexual activity is an abomination to him? Do they also support murder and cheating on your spouse?

I never said anybody was unequal in God's eyes, especially those from a Christian prospective since it is taught that any and all can be forgiven PROVIDED they discontinue their transgressions and repent. I was raised Catholic and attended a Catholic school for my primary years of education. While I stopped following any specific religion once I became an adult, I kind of remember things I was taught; especially since we had a religion class every single school day.

As for the baker, he has served the homosexual couple on several occasions. He even said he would bake a cake for them, just not customize it to their wedding. They would be welcome to do anything they wanted with that cake afterwards, but he didn't want to do it.

Customizing a cake is sort of an art, just like painting, writing music, or even being a tattoo artist. The baker didn't want to use his creativity to help celebrate an event the was against his religious beliefs. It would be similar to asking a black baker to make a cake for a KKIK meeting in his town. There are just some things people find offensive. In this case, I also believe it was a violation of the bakers constitutional rights.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So in order for you NOT TO BE A HYPOCRITE, I guess you believe the bakers had every right to refuse to bake that cake! Right?

The maga guys have the choice to wear the hat or not. Being Gay is not a matter of choice you fucking clown.

We have been down this road before, so, you remember, he didnt refuse to do business with gay people, he refused to bake a cake specifically for a gay wedding, exercising his freedom to practice religion, because he felt baking a cake for that ceremony would be akin to hin being involved in that ceremony.

Having said that, I think this San Mateo guy is within his right to operate his business the way he sees fit, and I think repubs shouldn't be fighting this.

This is exactly what repubs were talking about during the bakery incident and I think fighting this one is missing an opportunity. Let the dems set the precedent on this by allowing this guy to refuse business to maga hat wearers, that way, down the line, they have no argument when it happens again.

I don't think anybody from the right is fighting this, just simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the left. All of the comments I've read so far from the right said he could do whatever he wants. It's his business and if he wants to put it in jeopardy, it's his bank account that will suffer.

 

[Dana7360]

San Mateo restaurant owner says customers will not be served if they are wearing a "Make America Great Again" hat.

Kenji Lopez-Alt of Wursthall Restaurant tweeted that it would be the "same as if you come in wearing a swastika, white hood, or any other symbol of intolerance and hate."

The tweet has gotten mixed reactions. Some people say refusing to get to know someone or serve someone based on what they're wearing is unfair. Other replies on Twitter support the chef and say they're now more likely to go to the restaurant.

Restaurant owner won't serve customers wearing MAGA hats

If bakeries can refuse to serve LGBTQ customers - why can't this restaurant refuse to serve racists? Sounds reasonable to me. What do you think?

Mods: I tried to do a search but couldn't find an existing thread. I apologize if I have duplicated.

I would serve them.

They are Americans. Yes they are racists but I'm not. Their money spends the same as anyone else's.

 

[Grace Is Stoked]

In my opinion a restaurant or business should either serve everybody equally or a restaurant or business should be able to refuse service to anybody for whatever reason equally. You can’t really have it be somewhere in the middle. I think in this owners case he would have been better off to ban hats or headwear in general without sharing a political angle to it instead of only MAGA hats. Treat it like you would a nice restaurant requiring certain dress wear or things you can’t wear but just don’t make it political in nature and you probably wouldn’t have as much press and troubles.

The problem in the cake story is that government stepped in, a clear violation of his constitutional rights.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Homosexual practices are forbidden in all Christian religions; actually forbidden in most religions. The state took action against the baker for not wanting to participate in a homosexual wedding, thus prohibiting his free exercise thereof.

I would actually disagree that it is forbidden in all Christian denominations. Even though my husband and I consider ourselves non-denominational Christians now, I was raised in a Quaker household and he was raised Presbyterian. I was raised and taught in our meetings and in our home that we are all equal in the eyes of God. If a heterosexual couple like my husband and I are allowed to marry before God then so should a homosexual couple. I understand though that many denominations those beliefs are considered blasphemous. When it comes to choice regarding a baker and what he provides I would say that a baker should always have the right to decide what services he or she wants to offer and what they are comfortable doing for others. I'm also not sure that simply making a cake is truly participating in the wedding anymore or less than the store that provides the dresses or tuxedos is participating. But I understand that's debatable.

Your religion teaches that? How can a religion (Christian) teach that when God himself said that homosexual activity is an abomination to him? Do they also support murder and cheating on your spouse?

I never said anybody was unequal in God's eyes, especially those from a Christian prospective since it is taught that any and all can be forgiven PROVIDED they discontinue their transgressions and repent. I was raised Catholic and attended a Catholic school for my primary years of education. While I stopped following any specific religion once I became an adult, I kind of remember things I was taught; especially since we had a religion class every single school day.

As for the baker, he has served the homosexual couple on several occasions. He even said he would bake a cake for them, just not customize it to their wedding. They would be welcome to do anything they wanted with that cake afterwards, but he didn't want to do it.

Customizing a cake is sort of an art, just like painting, writing music, or even being a tattoo artist. The baker didn't want to use his creativity to help celebrate an event the was against his religious beliefs. It would be similar to asking a black baker to make a cake for a KKIK meeting in his town. There are just some things people find offensive. In this case, I also believe it was a violation of the bakers constitutional rights.

My religion doesn't have a creed or static dogma like Catholicism and other faiths have so it's going to be tough for you to relate to me and I to you. For me it's not about taking a sentence of the Bible and being inflexible in its meaning. Inequality is more than just what a nation's law says in equal. Using prortions of the Bible that can lead to discrimination and inequality is not what I, or we, believe to be what Jesus taught and what God intended. In my opinion God wouldn't give us a book that teaches us to treat others in an unequal or discriminatory way and so therefor I don't think that we should use it to do something like that.

I understand what you are saying about how the baker feels that it violates his religious beliefs and his constitutional rights. I was just letting you know that there are religions that view the homosexuals wanting a cake for their wedding to be equal to the heterosexual couple and shouldn't be discriminated against. I personally think that a business owner should be able to decide how they serve the public, but I personally also wish they would be more open minded and open hearted in their beliefs towards other people.

 

[ThisIsMe]

So in order for you NOT TO BE A HYPOCRITE, I guess you believe the bakers had every right to refuse to bake that cake! Right?

The maga guys have the choice to wear the hat or not. Being Gay is not a matter of choice you fucking clown.

We have been down this road before, so, you remember, he didnt refuse to do business with gay people, he refused to bake a cake specifically for a gay wedding, exercising his freedom to practice religion, because he felt baking a cake for that ceremony would be akin to hin being involved in that ceremony.

Having said that, I think this San Mateo guy is within his right to operate his business the way he sees fit, and I think repubs shouldn't be fighting this.

This is exactly what repubs were talking about during the bakery incident and I think fighting this one is missing an opportunity. Let the dems set the precedent on this by allowing this guy to refuse business to maga hat wearers, that way, down the line, they have no argument when it happens again.

I don't think anybody from the right is fighting this, just simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the left. All of the comments I've read so far from the right said he could do whatever he wants. It's his business and if he wants to put it in jeopardy, it's his bank account that will suffer.

Yep, it is his right. A private business owner should be allowed to run his business as he sees fit. People that dont like it can protest with their wallet. There is always another restaurant willing to take your money....

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

In my opinion a restaurant or business should either serve everybody equally or a restaurant or business should be able to refuse service to anybody for whatever reason equally. You can’t really have it be somewhere in the middle. I think in this owners case he would have been better off to ban hats or headwear in general without sharing a political angle to it instead of only MAGA hats. Treat it like you would a nice restaurant requiring certain dress wear or things you can’t wear but just don’t make it political in nature and you probably wouldn’t have as much press and troubles.

The problem in the cake story is that government stepped in, a clear violation of his constitutional rights.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Homosexual practices are forbidden in all Christian religions; actually forbidden in most religions. The state took action against the baker for not wanting to participate in a homosexual wedding, thus prohibiting his free exercise thereof.

I would actually disagree that it is forbidden in all Christian denominations. Even though my husband and I consider ourselves non-denominational Christians now, I was raised in a Quaker household and he was raised Presbyterian. I was raised and taught in our meetings and in our home that we are all equal in the eyes of God. If a heterosexual couple like my husband and I are allowed to marry before God then so should a homosexual couple. I understand though that many denominations those beliefs are considered blasphemous. When it comes to choice regarding a baker and what he provides I would say that a baker should always have the right to decide what services he or she wants to offer and what they are comfortable doing for others. I'm also not sure that simply making a cake is truly participating in the wedding anymore or less than the store that provides the dresses or tuxedos is participating. But I understand that's debatable.

Your religion teaches that? How can a religion (Christian) teach that when God himself said that homosexual activity is an abomination to him? Do they also support murder and cheating on your spouse?

I never said anybody was unequal in God's eyes, especially those from a Christian prospective since it is taught that any and all can be forgiven PROVIDED they discontinue their transgressions and repent. I was raised Catholic and attended a Catholic school for my primary years of education. While I stopped following any specific religion once I became an adult, I kind of remember things I was taught; especially since we had a religion class every single school day.

As for the baker, he has served the homosexual couple on several occasions. He even said he would bake a cake for them, just not customize it to their wedding. They would be welcome to do anything they wanted with that cake afterwards, but he didn't want to do it.

Customizing a cake is sort of an art, just like painting, writing music, or even being a tattoo artist. The baker didn't want to use his creativity to help celebrate an event the was against his religious beliefs. It would be similar to asking a black baker to make a cake for a KKIK meeting in his town. There are just some things people find offensive. In this case, I also believe it was a violation of the bakers constitutional rights.

My religion doesn't have a creed or static dogma like Catholicism and other faiths have so it's going to be tough for you to relate to me and I to you. For me it's not about taking a sentence of the Bible and being inflexible in its meaning. Inequality is more than just what a nation's law says in equal. Using prortions of the Bible that can lead to discrimination and inequality is not what I, or we, believe to be what Jesus taught and what God intended. In my opinion God wouldn't give us a book that teaches us to treat others in an unequal or discriminatory way and so therefor I don't think that we should use it to do something like that.

I understand what you are saying about how the baker feels that it violates his religious beliefs and his constitutional rights. I was just letting you know that there are religions that view the homosexuals wanting a cake for their wedding to be equal to the heterosexual couple and shouldn't be discriminated against. I personally think that a business owner should be able to decide how they serve the public, but I personally also wish they would be more open minded and open hearted in their beliefs towards other people.

How does one be "open minded" and adhering to their religion at the same time if their religion believes what they are doing is sinful? If a Christian baker does bake a cake for (what he considers) an event that is considered an abomination of God, is that being open minded or hypocritical?

 

[Denizen]

Everyone knows MAGA-hat people from Donald Trump trailertown don't eat at expensive restaurants.

 

[Grace Is Stoked]

In my opinion a restaurant or business should either serve everybody equally or a restaurant or business should be able to refuse service to anybody for whatever reason equally. You can’t really have it be somewhere in the middle. I think in this owners case he would have been better off to ban hats or headwear in general without sharing a political angle to it instead of only MAGA hats. Treat it like you would a nice restaurant requiring certain dress wear or things you can’t wear but just don’t make it political in nature and you probably wouldn’t have as much press and troubles.

The problem in the cake story is that government stepped in, a clear violation of his constitutional rights.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Homosexual practices are forbidden in all Christian religions; actually forbidden in most religions. The state took action against the baker for not wanting to participate in a homosexual wedding, thus prohibiting his free exercise thereof.

I would actually disagree that it is forbidden in all Christian denominations. Even though my husband and I consider ourselves non-denominational Christians now, I was raised in a Quaker household and he was raised Presbyterian. I was raised and taught in our meetings and in our home that we are all equal in the eyes of God. If a heterosexual couple like my husband and I are allowed to marry before God then so should a homosexual couple. I understand though that many denominations those beliefs are considered blasphemous. When it comes to choice regarding a baker and what he provides I would say that a baker should always have the right to decide what services he or she wants to offer and what they are comfortable doing for others. I'm also not sure that simply making a cake is truly participating in the wedding anymore or less than the store that provides the dresses or tuxedos is participating. But I understand that's debatable.

Your religion teaches that? How can a religion (Christian) teach that when God himself said that homosexual activity is an abomination to him? Do they also support murder and cheating on your spouse?

I never said anybody was unequal in God's eyes, especially those from a Christian prospective since it is taught that any and all can be forgiven PROVIDED they discontinue their transgressions and repent. I was raised Catholic and attended a Catholic school for my primary years of education. While I stopped following any specific religion once I became an adult, I kind of remember things I was taught; especially since we had a religion class every single school day.

As for the baker, he has served the homosexual couple on several occasions. He even said he would bake a cake for them, just not customize it to their wedding. They would be welcome to do anything they wanted with that cake afterwards, but he didn't want to do it.

Customizing a cake is sort of an art, just like painting, writing music, or even being a tattoo artist. The baker didn't want to use his creativity to help celebrate an event the was against his religious beliefs. It would be similar to asking a black baker to make a cake for a KKIK meeting in his town. There are just some things people find offensive. In this case, I also believe it was a violation of the bakers constitutional rights.

My religion doesn't have a creed or static dogma like Catholicism and other faiths have so it's going to be tough for you to relate to me and I to you. For me it's not about taking a sentence of the Bible and being inflexible in its meaning. Inequality is more than just what a nation's law says in equal. Using prortions of the Bible that can lead to discrimination and inequality is not what I, or we, believe to be what Jesus taught and what God intended. In my opinion God wouldn't give us a book that teaches us to treat others in an unequal or discriminatory way and so therefor I don't think that we should use it to do something like that.

I understand what you are saying about how the baker feels that it violates his religious beliefs and his constitutional rights. I was just letting you know that there are religions that view the homosexuals wanting a cake for their wedding to be equal to the heterosexual couple and shouldn't be discriminated against. I personally think that a business owner should be able to decide how they serve the public, but I personally also wish they would be more open minded and open hearted in their beliefs towards other people.

How does one be "open minded" and adhering to their religion at the same time if their religion believes what they are doing is sinful? If a Christian baker does bake a cake for (what he considers) an event that is considered an abomination of God, is that being open minded or hypocritical?

It could be argued that the real sin is being committed by the baker in that he or she is sinning against another by discriminating against them based on a judgment of the homosexuals perceived or assumed sin. The baker in essence is saying that they are unequal to him in Gods eyes which is not his place to say that. I hope that makes sense. Quaker and Catholic are pretty different in a lot of ways so i'm trying to understand

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The problem in the cake story is that government stepped in, a clear violation of his constitutional rights.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Homosexual practices are forbidden in all Christian religions; actually forbidden in most religions. The state took action against the baker for not wanting to participate in a homosexual wedding, thus prohibiting his free exercise thereof.

I would actually disagree that it is forbidden in all Christian denominations. Even though my husband and I consider ourselves non-denominational Christians now, I was raised in a Quaker household and he was raised Presbyterian. I was raised and taught in our meetings and in our home that we are all equal in the eyes of God. If a heterosexual couple like my husband and I are allowed to marry before God then so should a homosexual couple. I understand though that many denominations those beliefs are considered blasphemous. When it comes to choice regarding a baker and what he provides I would say that a baker should always have the right to decide what services he or she wants to offer and what they are comfortable doing for others. I'm also not sure that simply making a cake is truly participating in the wedding anymore or less than the store that provides the dresses or tuxedos is participating. But I understand that's debatable.

Your religion teaches that? How can a religion (Christian) teach that when God himself said that homosexual activity is an abomination to him? Do they also support murder and cheating on your spouse?

I never said anybody was unequal in God's eyes, especially those from a Christian prospective since it is taught that any and all can be forgiven PROVIDED they discontinue their transgressions and repent. I was raised Catholic and attended a Catholic school for my primary years of education. While I stopped following any specific religion once I became an adult, I kind of remember things I was taught; especially since we had a religion class every single school day.

As for the baker, he has served the homosexual couple on several occasions. He even said he would bake a cake for them, just not customize it to their wedding. They would be welcome to do anything they wanted with that cake afterwards, but he didn't want to do it.

Customizing a cake is sort of an art, just like painting, writing music, or even being a tattoo artist. The baker didn't want to use his creativity to help celebrate an event the was against his religious beliefs. It would be similar to asking a black baker to make a cake for a KKIK meeting in his town. There are just some things people find offensive. In this case, I also believe it was a violation of the bakers constitutional rights.

My religion doesn't have a creed or static dogma like Catholicism and other faiths have so it's going to be tough for you to relate to me and I to you. For me it's not about taking a sentence of the Bible and being inflexible in its meaning. Inequality is more than just what a nation's law says in equal. Using prortions of the Bible that can lead to discrimination and inequality is not what I, or we, believe to be what Jesus taught and what God intended. In my opinion God wouldn't give us a book that teaches us to treat others in an unequal or discriminatory way and so therefor I don't think that we should use it to do something like that.

I understand what you are saying about how the baker feels that it violates his religious beliefs and his constitutional rights. I was just letting you know that there are religions that view the homosexuals wanting a cake for their wedding to be equal to the heterosexual couple and shouldn't be discriminated against. I personally think that a business owner should be able to decide how they serve the public, but I personally also wish they would be more open minded and open hearted in their beliefs towards other people.

How does one be "open minded" and adhering to their religion at the same time if their religion believes what they are doing is sinful? If a Christian baker does bake a cake for (what he considers) an event that is considered an abomination of God, is that being open minded or hypocritical?

It could be argued that the real sin is being committed by the baker in that he or she is sinning against another by discriminating against them based on a judgment of the homosexuals perceived or assumed sin. The baker in essence is saying that they are unequal to him in Gods eyes which is not his place to say that. I hope that makes sense. Quaker and Catholic are pretty different in a lot of ways so i'm trying to understand

No, not at all. Nobody said anything about being unequal. Going back to my earlier scenario, do you think a black baker would consider the KKK unequal if he decided not to make a cake for their gathering? How about a Jewish baker if he didn't bake a cake for a skinhead gathering?

It's not about equal or unequal. If you find somebody's motives to be offensive either religiously or personally, you should not be forced to subscribe to their events or actions. It's not a sin to recognize a sinner.

 

[Circe]

I think this San Mateo guy is within his right to operate his business the way he sees fit, and I think repubs shouldn't be fighting this.

This is exactly what repubs were talking about during the bakery incident and I think fighting this one is missing an opportunity. Let the dems set the precedent on this by allowing this guy to refuse business to maga hat wearers, that way, down the line, they have no argument when it happens again.

This is getting to the heart of the equal service to all protections that came in with Martin Luther King, Jr. Forget restaurants and cakes: the real issue is renting and selling houses or apartments to blacks in white areas. That has always been the central issue, though segregation of restaurants and hotels and theaters and zoos (yes) was directly related.

In the old days, within our memory in the case of many of us, people could serve or not serve as they chose. If they didn't want Irish in their bars, they could post a sign, and that was that.

I'd like to get back to that: it IS pure Libertarianism. And not as restrictive as it sounds: people lose money if they don't serve X or Y, and also customers have to be better behaved. There is a reason some people were not served---think of the crowds rioting on Black Fridays outside a Wards. Now we have to serve everyone, no matter how violent, and so there's lots of crime and disorder.

People are correctly noting that the basic (Left) instinct is to go right back to Libertarianism and throw the bums out. As long as everyone gets to do that, including the Right, I'm all for it.

 

[DandyDonovan]

I think this San Mateo guy is within his right to operate his business the way he sees fit, and I think repubs shouldn't be fighting this.

This is exactly what repubs were talking about during the bakery incident and I think fighting this one is missing an opportunity. Let the dems set the precedent on this by allowing this guy to refuse business to maga hat wearers, that way, down the line, they have no argument when it happens again.

This is getting to the heart of the equal service to all protections that came in with Martin Luther King, Jr. Forget restaurants and cakes: the real issue is renting and selling houses or apartments to blacks in white areas. That has always been the central issue, though segregation of restaurants and hotels and theaters and zoos (yes) was directly related.

In the old days, within our memory in the case of many of us, people could serve or not serve as they chose. If they didn't want Irish in their bars, they could post a sign, and that was that.

I'd like to get back to that: it IS pure Libertarianism. And not as restrictive as it sounds: people lose money if they don't serve X or Y, and also customers have to be better behaved. There is a reason some people were not served---think of the crowds rioting on Black Fridays outside a Wards. Now we have to serve everyone, no matter how violent, and so there's lots of crime and disorder.

People are correctly noting that the basic (Left) instinct is to go right back to Libertarianism and throw the bums out. As long as everyone gets to do that, including the Right, I'm all for it.

I was with you right up until you hilariously claimed that the left's instinct is to go back to libertarinism. LOL No one is more authoritarian than a leftist.

 

[Grace Is Stoked]

I would actually disagree that it is forbidden in all Christian denominations. Even though my husband and I consider ourselves non-denominational Christians now, I was raised in a Quaker household and he was raised Presbyterian. I was raised and taught in our meetings and in our home that we are all equal in the eyes of God. If a heterosexual couple like my husband and I are allowed to marry before God then so should a homosexual couple. I understand though that many denominations those beliefs are considered blasphemous. When it comes to choice regarding a baker and what he provides I would say that a baker should always have the right to decide what services he or she wants to offer and what they are comfortable doing for others. I'm also not sure that simply making a cake is truly participating in the wedding anymore or less than the store that provides the dresses or tuxedos is participating. But I understand that's debatable.

Your religion teaches that? How can a religion (Christian) teach that when God himself said that homosexual activity is an abomination to him? Do they also support murder and cheating on your spouse?

I never said anybody was unequal in God's eyes, especially those from a Christian prospective since it is taught that any and all can be forgiven PROVIDED they discontinue their transgressions and repent. I was raised Catholic and attended a Catholic school for my primary years of education. While I stopped following any specific religion once I became an adult, I kind of remember things I was taught; especially since we had a religion class every single school day.

As for the baker, he has served the homosexual couple on several occasions. He even said he would bake a cake for them, just not customize it to their wedding. They would be welcome to do anything they wanted with that cake afterwards, but he didn't want to do it.

Customizing a cake is sort of an art, just like painting, writing music, or even being a tattoo artist. The baker didn't want to use his creativity to help celebrate an event the was against his religious beliefs. It would be similar to asking a black baker to make a cake for a KKIK meeting in his town. There are just some things people find offensive. In this case, I also believe it was a violation of the bakers constitutional rights.

My religion doesn't have a creed or static dogma like Catholicism and other faiths have so it's going to be tough for you to relate to me and I to you. For me it's not about taking a sentence of the Bible and being inflexible in its meaning. Inequality is more than just what a nation's law says in equal. Using prortions of the Bible that can lead to discrimination and inequality is not what I, or we, believe to be what Jesus taught and what God intended. In my opinion God wouldn't give us a book that teaches us to treat others in an unequal or discriminatory way and so therefor I don't think that we should use it to do something like that.

I understand what you are saying about how the baker feels that it violates his religious beliefs and his constitutional rights. I was just letting you know that there are religions that view the homosexuals wanting a cake for their wedding to be equal to the heterosexual couple and shouldn't be discriminated against. I personally think that a business owner should be able to decide how they serve the public, but I personally also wish they would be more open minded and open hearted in their beliefs towards other people.

How does one be "open minded" and adhering to their religion at the same time if their religion believes what they are doing is sinful? If a Christian baker does bake a cake for (what he considers) an event that is considered an abomination of God, is that being open minded or hypocritical?

It could be argued that the real sin is being committed by the baker in that he or she is sinning against another by discriminating against them based on a judgment of the homosexuals perceived or assumed sin. The baker in essence is saying that they are unequal to him in Gods eyes which is not his place to say that. I hope that makes sense. Quaker and Catholic are pretty different in a lot of ways so i'm trying to understand

No, not at all. Nobody said anything about being unequal. Going back to my earlier scenario, do you think a black baker would consider the KKK unequal if he decided not to make a cake for their gathering? How about a Jewish baker if he didn't bake a cake for a skinhead gathering?

It's not about equal or unequal. If you find somebody's motives to be offensive either religiously or personally, you should not be forced to subscribe to their events or actions. It's not a sin to recognize a sinner.

I agree legally and constitutionally they should be able to determine who they serve their product to and why, we agree on that. In my personal opinion though the baker should serve them regardless just as the black person should serve the KKK member and the Jew should serve the skinhead if they entered their business. To me everybody has the Inward Light and so its better to open your heart and serve than to cast someone aside based on their sin. It's hard to not let your emotions and judgements get in the way, I fail often too, but if you want to recognize the sinner you may, however, we should still open our hearts and our doors to the sinner.

 

[DandyDonovan]

Your religion teaches that? How can a religion (Christian) teach that when God himself said that homosexual activity is an abomination to him? Do they also support murder and cheating on your spouse?

I never said anybody was unequal in God's eyes, especially those from a Christian prospective since it is taught that any and all can be forgiven PROVIDED they discontinue their transgressions and repent. I was raised Catholic and attended a Catholic school for my primary years of education. While I stopped following any specific religion once I became an adult, I kind of remember things I was taught; especially since we had a religion class every single school day.

As for the baker, he has served the homosexual couple on several occasions. He even said he would bake a cake for them, just not customize it to their wedding. They would be welcome to do anything they wanted with that cake afterwards, but he didn't want to do it.

Customizing a cake is sort of an art, just like painting, writing music, or even being a tattoo artist. The baker didn't want to use his creativity to help celebrate an event the was against his religious beliefs. It would be similar to asking a black baker to make a cake for a KKIK meeting in his town. There are just some things people find offensive. In this case, I also believe it was a violation of the bakers constitutional rights.

My religion doesn't have a creed or static dogma like Catholicism and other faiths have so it's going to be tough for you to relate to me and I to you. For me it's not about taking a sentence of the Bible and being inflexible in its meaning. Inequality is more than just what a nation's law says in equal. Using prortions of the Bible that can lead to discrimination and inequality is not what I, or we, believe to be what Jesus taught and what God intended. In my opinion God wouldn't give us a book that teaches us to treat others in an unequal or discriminatory way and so therefor I don't think that we should use it to do something like that.

I understand what you are saying about how the baker feels that it violates his religious beliefs and his constitutional rights. I was just letting you know that there are religions that view the homosexuals wanting a cake for their wedding to be equal to the heterosexual couple and shouldn't be discriminated against. I personally think that a business owner should be able to decide how they serve the public, but I personally also wish they would be more open minded and open hearted in their beliefs towards other people.

How does one be "open minded" and adhering to their religion at the same time if their religion believes what they are doing is sinful? If a Christian baker does bake a cake for (what he considers) an event that is considered an abomination of God, is that being open minded or hypocritical?

It could be argued that the real sin is being committed by the baker in that he or she is sinning against another by discriminating against them based on a judgment of the homosexuals perceived or assumed sin. The baker in essence is saying that they are unequal to him in Gods eyes which is not his place to say that. I hope that makes sense. Quaker and Catholic are pretty different in a lot of ways so i'm trying to understand

No, not at all. Nobody said anything about being unequal. Going back to my earlier scenario, do you think a black baker would consider the KKK unequal if he decided not to make a cake for their gathering? How about a Jewish baker if he didn't bake a cake for a skinhead gathering?

It's not about equal or unequal. If you find somebody's motives to be offensive either religiously or personally, you should not be forced to subscribe to their events or actions. It's not a sin to recognize a sinner.

I agree legally and constitutionally they should be able to determine who they serve their product to and why, we agree on that. In my personal opinion though the baker should serve them regardless just as the black person should serve the KKK member and the Jew should serve the skinhead if they entered their business. To me everybody has the Inward Light and so its better to open your heart and serve than to cast someone aside based on their sin. It's hard to not let your emotions and judgements get in the way, I fail often too, but if you want to recognize the sinner you may, however, we should still open our hearts and our doors to the sinner.

I'd serve everyone as well. Most people would, but not by force of big government.

 

[Circe]

I was with you right up until you hilariously claimed that the left's instinct is to go back to libertarinism. LOL No one is more authoritarian than a leftist.

I know they are authoritarian---but look at it! Their first reaction is that it's a "free country," which we know it no longer is, and they say that if they don't want to let someone, anyone, in their restaurant or tea shop or whatever, they don't have to! That is exactly what segregation was and they want it back. Only against white Republicans.

 

[Muhammed]

It isnt the same thing really. There are connotations around maga that would make a reasonable business owner concerned.

What sort of connotations?

 

[Dana7360]

A quick glance through the thread yields no Regressives screaming about public accommodations laws. How weird! I wonder why!

Do any states or localities include political affiliation under public accommodation laws?

Not that I know of!

But I do wonder why some who screamed about them before are now ignoring them now!

Weird, huh!
.

It’s not at all weird. If political affiliation were covered, I’d be arguing for the MAGA dumbasses. It’s not. The screaming MAGA dorks are the hypocrites, not those that support PA laws. Republicans in the city where this restaurant is located can try to get political affiliation added. I wish them luck.

I also wish luck to those that want to repeal all PA laws.

Political affiliation need play no official role in this. Those who defend PA laws should be consistent.

They are not, and the reason is blatantly obvious.
.

Actually you're not correct.

I support PA laws.

As I posted earlier, I would serve the person. It has nothing to do with PA laws though. As I posted, I'm not a racist. I won't be what I don't like.

Besides, their money spends the same as everyone else's.

It's not nice to generalize.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Your religion teaches that? How can a religion (Christian) teach that when God himself said that homosexual activity is an abomination to him? Do they also support murder and cheating on your spouse?

I never said anybody was unequal in God's eyes, especially those from a Christian prospective since it is taught that any and all can be forgiven PROVIDED they discontinue their transgressions and repent. I was raised Catholic and attended a Catholic school for my primary years of education. While I stopped following any specific religion once I became an adult, I kind of remember things I was taught; especially since we had a religion class every single school day.

As for the baker, he has served the homosexual couple on several occasions. He even said he would bake a cake for them, just not customize it to their wedding. They would be welcome to do anything they wanted with that cake afterwards, but he didn't want to do it.

Customizing a cake is sort of an art, just like painting, writing music, or even being a tattoo artist. The baker didn't want to use his creativity to help celebrate an event the was against his religious beliefs. It would be similar to asking a black baker to make a cake for a KKIK meeting in his town. There are just some things people find offensive. In this case, I also believe it was a violation of the bakers constitutional rights.

My religion doesn't have a creed or static dogma like Catholicism and other faiths have so it's going to be tough for you to relate to me and I to you. For me it's not about taking a sentence of the Bible and being inflexible in its meaning. Inequality is more than just what a nation's law says in equal. Using prortions of the Bible that can lead to discrimination and inequality is not what I, or we, believe to be what Jesus taught and what God intended. In my opinion God wouldn't give us a book that teaches us to treat others in an unequal or discriminatory way and so therefor I don't think that we should use it to do something like that.

I understand what you are saying about how the baker feels that it violates his religious beliefs and his constitutional rights. I was just letting you know that there are religions that view the homosexuals wanting a cake for their wedding to be equal to the heterosexual couple and shouldn't be discriminated against. I personally think that a business owner should be able to decide how they serve the public, but I personally also wish they would be more open minded and open hearted in their beliefs towards other people.

How does one be "open minded" and adhering to their religion at the same time if their religion believes what they are doing is sinful? If a Christian baker does bake a cake for (what he considers) an event that is considered an abomination of God, is that being open minded or hypocritical?

It could be argued that the real sin is being committed by the baker in that he or she is sinning against another by discriminating against them based on a judgment of the homosexuals perceived or assumed sin. The baker in essence is saying that they are unequal to him in Gods eyes which is not his place to say that. I hope that makes sense. Quaker and Catholic are pretty different in a lot of ways so i'm trying to understand

No, not at all. Nobody said anything about being unequal. Going back to my earlier scenario, do you think a black baker would consider the KKK unequal if he decided not to make a cake for their gathering? How about a Jewish baker if he didn't bake a cake for a skinhead gathering?

It's not about equal or unequal. If you find somebody's motives to be offensive either religiously or personally, you should not be forced to subscribe to their events or actions. It's not a sin to recognize a sinner.

I agree legally and constitutionally they should be able to determine who they serve their product to and why, we agree on that. In my personal opinion though the baker should serve them regardless just as the black person should serve the KKK member and the Jew should serve the skinhead if they entered their business. To me everybody has the Inward Light and so its better to open your heart and serve than to cast someone aside based on their sin. It's hard to not let your emotions and judgements get in the way, I fail often too, but if you want to recognize the sinner you may, however, we should still open our hearts and our doors to the sinner.

I agree, if they quit sinning. However if you follow a religious creed, and the sinner never repents or changes his (or her) ways, how does one open their hearts to them and still follow their beliefs?

 

[TheDude]

San Mateo restaurant owner says customers will not be served if they are wearing a "Make America Great Again" hat.

Kenji Lopez-Alt of Wursthall Restaurant tweeted that it would be the "same as if you come in wearing a swastika, white hood, or any other symbol of intolerance and hate."

The tweet has gotten mixed reactions. Some people say refusing to get to know someone or serve someone based on what they're wearing is unfair. Other replies on Twitter support the chef and say they're now more likely to go to the restaurant.

Restaurant owner won't serve customers wearing MAGA hats

If bakeries can refuse to serve LGBTQ customers - why can't this restaurant refuse to serve racists? Sounds reasonable to me. What do you think?

Mods: I tried to do a search but couldn't find an existing thread. I apologize if I have duplicated.

You like that huh Lakhota? Would it be as fun if they refused dumb Indians or just Indians in general? Either way you'd be fucked.