Christian Bake Shop Must Serve Gakes

[koshergrl]

Please, bode, the last time you had anything intelligent to add to any convo, you were still in little boy pants.

 

[koshergrl]

Gakes, gay cakes.

Judge orders bakeshop to serve same-sex customers after owner REFUSED to make rainbow wedding cake for gay couple | Mail Online

The cake shop cannot discriminate. That's just life. It's like owning a restaurant and not allowing gays to dine in your restaurant. That is discriminatory.

Since when are bakeries forced to produce pastries for anyone who demands them?

 

[Nosmo King]

Gakes, gay cakes.

Judge orders bakeshop to serve same-sex customers after owner REFUSED to make rainbow wedding cake for gay couple | Mail Online

The cake shop cannot discriminate. That's just life. It's like owning a restaurant and not allowing gays to dine in your restaurant. That is discriminatory.

Since when are bakeries forced to produce pastries for anyone who demands them?

Well, first, since there have been bakeries operating under a Capitalist system.

Odd you should use words like 'forced'. Aren't bakeries in the business of baking? Did anyone threaten personal harm or property damage at the bakery if a cake is not baked? Hyperbole is the safe harbor for weak arguments. Yours is lashed to the pier with steel cables.

 

[BDBoop]

I'm tolerant of homosexuals..I'm not tolerant of in-your-face sexual activism, or the concept that people should *identify* themselves via the sex acts they most enjoy. I'm not tolerant of people who I find morally bankrupt telling my children that they are not expected or capable of controlling their sexual urges. I'm not tolerant of people who change the language to suit their own reality, and then force ME to accept that new *reality*. I'm not tolerant of oppression by a small minority of assholes who think they have the right to say whatever they like to and about me, but who want to throw me in jail for daring to voice opinions that are not in agreement with THEM. I'm not tolerant of a small minority who have tried and continue to try to normalize abnormal behavior, depraved behavior, and who want to de-criminalize criminal behavior, based on the false concept that people cannot control their sexual behavior..while at the same time attempt to CRIMINALIZE moral behavior, and attempt to criminalize any religious objection to, or sermonizing about, what constitutes moral behavior.

So no, I'm not tolerant of that shit. And typically, that's what the homo block is all about. It isn't about getting equal rights. It's about eliminating the rights of people who refuse to endorse the depraved and public sexual posturings of a tiny minority.

Bullshit.

Seconded. Motion carried.

 

[emilynghiem]

Gakes, gay cakes.

Judge orders bakeshop to serve same-sex customers after owner REFUSED to make rainbow wedding cake for gay couple | Mail Online

I am amazed to live in a country where a judge can order a business to make a cake for a gay couple, which is optional, but cannot order government to follow the Constitution which is a contractual agreement.

With cases like this, or the AZ immigration bill, it seems people have "no problem" enforcing Constitutional principles for one party's sake at the expense of the equal rights of the other.

But when it comes to the other way, then all this justification comes up as to why the group is 'wrong' that is seeking equal Constitutional protections.

Just insanity. Don't know whether to laugh at how utterly ridiculous this is getting, or go cry with Victoria Jackson and others who weep for America.

I'm glad I have a sense of humor, but this really is horrible; and I am starting to feel bad for laughing at how truly sad the shape of our country is in.

I feel bad for both sides of these conflicts, and don't feel this is helping solve the issues by adding more injuries. People really deserve support to resolve differences directly, and keep all this nonsense we don't agree on OUT of government. The reason we can't resolve them is that they involve religious beliefs, so those will not change. Technically govt is not supposed to impose or establish one view over another, so this is not govt jurisdiction but belongs to the people to settle among ourselves and quit backlogging govt with the mess!

So sad. I have strong sympathies for all people who are NOT helped by these dilemma, where govt should NOT be abused to force one way or another, but to protect interests equally.
If anything, judges should order the people to resolve their conflicts and keep them OUT of courts and avoid public expense for their personal or religious conflicts that don't belong there.

 

[BullKurtz]

I'm tolerant of homosexuals..I'm not tolerant of in-your-face sexual activism, or the concept that people should *identify* themselves via the sex acts they most enjoy. I'm not tolerant of people who I find morally bankrupt telling my children that they are not expected or capable of controlling their sexual urges. I'm not tolerant of people who change the language to suit their own reality, and then force ME to accept that new *reality*. I'm not tolerant of oppression by a small minority of assholes who think they have the right to say whatever they like to and about me, but who want to throw me in jail for daring to voice opinions that are not in agreement with THEM. I'm not tolerant of a small minority who have tried and continue to try to normalize abnormal behavior, depraved behavior, and who want to de-criminalize criminal behavior, based on the false concept that people cannot control their sexual behavior..while at the same time attempt to CRIMINALIZE moral behavior, and attempt to criminalize any religious objection to, or sermonizing about, what constitutes moral behavior.

So no, I'm not tolerant of that shit. And typically, that's what the homo block is all about. It isn't about getting equal rights. It's about eliminating the rights of people who refuse to endorse the depraved and public sexual posturings of a tiny minority.

 

[BullKurtz]

Seconded. Motion carried.

 

[koshergrl]

The cake shop cannot discriminate. That's just life. It's like owning a restaurant and not allowing gays to dine in your restaurant. That is discriminatory.

Since when are bakeries forced to produce pastries for anyone who demands them?

Well, first, since there have been bakeries operating under a Capitalist system.

Odd you should use words like 'forced'. Aren't bakeries in the business of baking? Did anyone threaten personal harm or property damage at the bakery if a cake is not baked? Hyperbole is the safe harbor for weak arguments. Yours is lashed to the pier with steel cables.

Forced is the correct word. They were forced to provide a service and a product to someone they did not wish to serve or produce for.

A capitalist system does not work under the premise that people are forced to work for people they don't want to work for. Quite the opposite.

A bakery/catering business is essentially a matter of contracts...the baker contracts with the buyers. They tell him what they want, he tells them if he'll make it, and if he makes it, for how much.

It isn't a matter of someone marching up and telling the baker "You'll make this for me."

 

[Camp]

Since when are bakeries forced to produce pastries for anyone who demands them?

Well, first, since there have been bakeries operating under a Capitalist system.

Odd you should use words like 'forced'. Aren't bakeries in the business of baking? Did anyone threaten personal harm or property damage at the bakery if a cake is not baked? Hyperbole is the safe harbor for weak arguments. Yours is lashed to the pier with steel cables.

Forced is the correct word. They were forced to provide a service and a product to someone they did not wish to serve or produce for.

A capitalist system does not work under the premise that people are forced to work for people they don't want to work for. Quite the opposite.

A bakery/catering business is essentially a matter of contracts...the baker contracts with the buyers. They tell him what they want, he tells them if he'll make it, and if he makes it, for how much.

It isn't a matter of someone marching up and telling the baker "You'll make this for me."

They were not forced to be in the cake making business. It is the business owners job and duty to know the regulations and laws that govern what their business is obligated to follow. When they obtain a business license they have access to all those rules and laws. They make an agreement with the state, sometimes the county and sometimes the town to follow those regulations and laws. The key point is that by obtaining the license they agree to follow the laws. They do not have the right to arbitrarily alter the agreement they made with the licensing authority(s). If they don't like the rules and laws they have three choices, follow them even though they don't like them, ignore the rules and laws they don't like and suffer the consequences if and when caught, or, don't enter into the business to start with.

 

[BullKurtz]

Well, first, since there have been bakeries operating under a Capitalist system.

Odd you should use words like 'forced'. Aren't bakeries in the business of baking? Did anyone threaten personal harm or property damage at the bakery if a cake is not baked? Hyperbole is the safe harbor for weak arguments. Yours is lashed to the pier with steel cables.

Forced is the correct word. They were forced to provide a service and a product to someone they did not wish to serve or produce for.

A capitalist system does not work under the premise that people are forced to work for people they don't want to work for. Quite the opposite.

A bakery/catering business is essentially a matter of contracts...the baker contracts with the buyers. They tell him what they want, he tells them if he'll make it, and if he makes it, for how much.

It isn't a matter of someone marching up and telling the baker "You'll make this for me."

They were not forced to be in the cake making business. It is the business owners job and duty to know the regulations and laws that govern what their business is obligated to follow. When they obtain a business license they have access to all those rules and laws. They make an agreement with the state, sometimes the county and sometimes the town to follow those regulations and laws. The key point is that by obtaining the license they agree to follow the laws. They do not have the right to arbitrarily alter the agreement they made with the licensing authority(s). If they don't like the rules and laws they have three choices, follow them even though they don't like them, ignore the rules and laws they don't like and suffer the consequences if and when caught, or, don't enter into the business to start with.

There's the letter of the law and then there's the spirit of the law. If you were anything but a statist dink, you'd know many laws are on the books just to be on the books....nobody takes them seriously and they aren't enforced.....until a cop gets a wild hair to hassle somebody. I've had several business licenses....they deal with collecting sales tax not the laws in a particular burg. How about you STFU now.

 

[Camp]

Forced is the correct word. They were forced to provide a service and a product to someone they did not wish to serve or produce for.

A capitalist system does not work under the premise that people are forced to work for people they don't want to work for. Quite the opposite.

A bakery/catering business is essentially a matter of contracts...the baker contracts with the buyers. They tell him what they want, he tells them if he'll make it, and if he makes it, for how much.

It isn't a matter of someone marching up and telling the baker "You'll make this for me."

They were not forced to be in the cake making business. It is the business owners job and duty to know the regulations and laws that govern what their business is obligated to follow. When they obtain a business license they have access to all those rules and laws. They make an agreement with the state, sometimes the county and sometimes the town to follow those regulations and laws. The key point is that by obtaining the license they agree to follow the laws. They do not have the right to arbitrarily alter the agreement they made with the licensing authority(s). If they don't like the rules and laws they have three choices, follow them even though they don't like them, ignore the rules and laws they don't like and suffer the consequences if and when caught, or, don't enter into the business to start with.

There's the letter of the law and then there's the spirit of the law. If you were anything but a statist dink, you'd know many laws are on the books just to be on the books....nobody takes them seriously and they aren't enforced.....until a cop gets a wild hair to hassle somebody. I've had several business licenses....they deal with collecting sales tax not the laws in a particular burg. How about you STFU now.

Obviously you have never been in the food business. Cops don't inforce those regulations, inspectors from the licensing authority do. Many towns require a town license in addition to a state license. In my town if a complaint is made an inspector will show up the next day if the complaint deals with a safety violation. In my town a hand washing sink outside of the employee restroom, as a stand alone hand washing sink is an enforced regulation in any business dealing with food products. If a business's hand washing sink is not working, guess what, the business gets closed until it is repaired and re-inspected.

 

[koshergrl]

Well, first, since there have been bakeries operating under a Capitalist system.

Odd you should use words like 'forced'. Aren't bakeries in the business of baking? Did anyone threaten personal harm or property damage at the bakery if a cake is not baked? Hyperbole is the safe harbor for weak arguments. Yours is lashed to the pier with steel cables.

Forced is the correct word. They were forced to provide a service and a product to someone they did not wish to serve or produce for.

A capitalist system does not work under the premise that people are forced to work for people they don't want to work for. Quite the opposite.

A bakery/catering business is essentially a matter of contracts...the baker contracts with the buyers. They tell him what they want, he tells them if he'll make it, and if he makes it, for how much.

It isn't a matter of someone marching up and telling the baker "You'll make this for me."

They were not forced to be in the cake making business. It is the business owners job and duty to know the regulations and laws that govern what their business is obligated to follow. When they obtain a business license they have access to all those rules and laws. They make an agreement with the state, sometimes the county and sometimes the town to follow those regulations and laws. The key point is that by obtaining the license they agree to follow the laws. They do not have the right to arbitrarily alter the agreement they made with the licensing authority(s). If they don't like the rules and laws they have three choices, follow them even though they don't like them, ignore the rules and laws they don't like and suffer the consequences if and when caught, or, don't enter into the business to start with.

Again, you have confused capitalism with communism.

See in a capitalist society, there is an agreement between two parties...one party agrees to create something or provide something, and the other party agrees to purchase it. If one party determines the price is not to their liking, or the product is not to their liking, then they have the option of NOT PURCHASING it. If the producer is not willing to produce/serve the customer, they have the option of not taking their money.

In this way, a diverse marketplace is created, where people can obtain speciality items or refuse to commerce with producers they aren't interested in or don't like.


In a communist society, the state forces people to produce whatever they tell them to, and to dispose of it as they are told to. Generally, this consists of creating food that is then taken from them, and then they starve...but communists like this system and so the world has learned to accept the fact that they will always be extremely short, rickety and underweight, with short life spans.

In this case, the state is insisting that the producer create a product he doesn't want to create for a customer he has no interest in contracting with.

That's not capitalism. Sorry. If you like that ^ system, you should move to N.Korea. They're flourishing under it, there.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Are you saying you are a bigot? Are you saying we should have second class citizens because of sexual orientation?
That almost makes you as bad as being a racist.

Not being able to force someone into performing a service that they clearly do not want to perform does not make someone a second class citizen. When citizenship depends on getting a wedding cake at your command, from whomever you command it, we have more serious problems than second hand citizens. It's the baker who is really the second class citizen because it is the baker that has had his business decisions taken from him by law.

Same argument made by the people of Nashville when the SNCC students sat at the Woolworths lunch counter.

No, that's a lie!

 

[koshergrl]

Of course it's a lie. Bode doesn't even pretend to be truthful, or knowledgeable. She just yaps incessantly. Her irrelevance makes her easy to ignore though.

 

[Jarlaxle]

I asked for a link..figures youd pull this boring stunt.

Are they, or are they not, assholes who use the law to get what they want?

The asshole here is the baker who is trying to use religion to justify his prejudices. If he denied a wedding cake to a bi-racial couple because he didn't believe in mixed marriages, would you be OK with that? What about refusing a Jewish couple because Jews killed Jesus? Would that be OK?

If you are going to offer your services to the public, you have to serve the public, even people you don't like.

I would answer "yes" to all cases. He should be free to serve (or not serve) anyone he wants to for any reason he wants, period, end of discussion.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Artists? Wow really digging deep for this one huh. Reality is you have nothing.

yes.... wedding cakes are works of art. I CHOOSE who will get to have my work....


unless you get one at your local safeway..... as i would not consider a box cake with Crisco icing..... art.

I know..for some reason windbag needed to make up that all cakes are works of art because he needs to connect this to free speech or he has nothing.

Actually, the one making up facts here is you. I said that the baker could argue that the cakes the gay couple wanted to buy, which, coincidentally, happen to be wedding cakes, are works of art. Feel free to continue to lie to support your lack of a position though, we all know it is all you have.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Do whatever you need. This baker is not making art. Their is a difference between cake art and baking a cake. You once again do understand what you are talking about.

If it isn't artistic they can go to Safeway and pick up whatever they want.

Or maybe he makes good cakes and they want one.
You have nothing per usual..im moving on.

And he doesn't have to sell them a special order cake, they can pick one off the shelf. Even they admitted he gave them that option, which totally destroys your argument that he refused them service because they are gay.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The bakery is open to the public. So they must be open to the public! No matter who comes through the door, they are a customer. And customers is what business is all about. It's as if Woolworth released a press statement saying it is against the religious beliefs of the Board of Directors to serve Darkies at Woolworth lunch counters. Using hatred to turn away business and justifying that decision by perverting the teachings of Jesus Christ shows just what a shallow, warped mind is capable of.

Discrimination is always wrong. But hiding behind the skirts of Christianity to perpetuate fear, suspicion and hatred makes it despicable.

It is a bakery, not Burger King.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJXzkUH72cY]Vintage Burger King Commercial - Have it Your Way - 1974 - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Quantum Windbag]

yes.... wedding cakes are works of art. I CHOOSE who will get to have my work....


unless you get one at your local safeway..... as i would not consider a box cake with Crisco icing..... art.

I know..for some reason windbag needed to make up that all cakes are works of art because he needs to connect this to free speech or he has nothing.

That IS pretty funny.

I actually thought it was pathetic that Plasmaball was reduced to lying in an attempt to refute my point.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I asked for a link..figures youd pull this boring stunt.

Are they, or are they not, assholes who use the law to get what they want?

The asshole here is the baker who is trying to use religion to justify his prejudices. If he denied a wedding cake to a bi-racial couple because he didn't believe in mixed marriages, would you be OK with that? What about refusing a Jewish couple because Jews killed Jesus? Would that be OK?

If you are going to offer your services to the public, you have to serve the public, even people you don't like.

I would rather hang out with assholes than fascists.

That probably explains why I have been called an asshole numerous times on this board, and full expect to be called one again, but no one has ever made a good argument that anyone who hates government as much as I do is a fascist.