Denver baker sued for refusing to write anti-gay slogans on cake

[Politico]

No something that won't make it on CNN just isn't worth the the time.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So, let's start from this end:

Does a customer have the right to have 'Death to President Obama' put on his cake?

Okay, so we'll take the lack of responses from the stunned silence crowd to mean, NO, the customer does not have that right.

Therefore, now that we've then established that the baker does in fact have the right to refuse certain custom wording on his cakes, even though he sells that service on a limited basis,

the only question left is whether that right is unlimited, or if it is limited, where is the line drawn?

 

[Silhouette]

So, let's start from this end:

Does a customer have the right to have 'Death to President Obama' put on his cake?

Okay, so we'll take the lack of responses from the stunned silence crowd to mean, NO, the customer does not have that right.

Therefore, now that we've then established that the baker does in fact have the right to refuse certain custom wording on his cakes, even though he sells that service on a limited basis,

the only question left is whether that right is unlimited, or if it is limited, where is the line drawn?

Well, yes a person does have a right to have that iced on a cake. And a Christian has a right to refuse to promote something his faith absolutely prohibits: gay marriage or any promotion of the cult of LGBT's value system to supersede his own. That right to refuse service would be extended to "Death to President Obama", because that would violate a Christian's mandates as well.

If a person wanted an exceptionally repugnant message designed on their cake, they should seek and find a baker who has no qualms about that. The Free Market will fill in the vacuum when "we reserve the right to refuse service" is opted for.

People are mistaking ONCE AGAIN that gays are not a race of people. They are a CULT. A cult does not get the same Constitutional protections as a race of people. So public accomodation laws do not cover LGBTs. A Christian, for example, couldn't go into a Muslim's bakery and insist that Muslim depict the Prophet Muhammed on his cake. The Muslim would have every right to refuse that.

 

[Synthaholic]

People are mistaking ONCE AGAIN that gays are not a race of people. They are a CULT.

No, religions are by definition much more like a cult than homosexuality.

 

[Silhouette]

People are mistaking ONCE AGAIN that gays are not a race of people. They are a CULT.

No, religions are by definition much more like a cult than homosexuality.

We'll let the Supreme Court sort that out...

 

[Derideo_Te]

Anyone else notice how Sil is always posting pictures of scantily glad gay men?

 

[NYcarbineer]

So, let's start from this end:

Does a customer have the right to have 'Death to President Obama' put on his cake?

Okay, so we'll take the lack of responses from the stunned silence crowd to mean, NO, the customer does not have that right.

Therefore, now that we've then established that the baker does in fact have the right to refuse certain custom wording on his cakes, even though he sells that service on a limited basis,

the only question left is whether that right is unlimited, or if it is limited, where is the line drawn?

Well, yes a person does have a right to have that iced on a cake. And a Christian has a right to refuse to promote something his faith absolutely prohibits: gay marriage or any promotion of the cult of LGBT's value system to supersede his own. That right to refuse service would be extended to "Death to President Obama", because that would violate a Christian's mandates as well.

If a person wanted an exceptionally repugnant message designed on their cake, they should seek and find a baker who has no qualms about that. The Free Market will fill in the vacuum when "we reserve the right to refuse service" is opted for.

People are mistaking ONCE AGAIN that gays are not a race of people. They are a CULT. A cult does not get the same Constitutional protections as a race of people. So public accomodation laws do not cover LGBTs. A Christian, for example, couldn't go into a Muslim's bakery and insist that Muslim depict the Prophet Muhammed on his cake. The Muslim would have every right to refuse that.

You're serious?

A baker who offers personalized cakes is legally required to write a threat to the President's life on a cake if a customer requests it?

Does ANYONE else here believe that?

Goddam you people get in deeper every day.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Anyone else notice how Sil is always posting pictures of scantily glad gay men?

"...a boy's got to have a hobby..."

 

[NYcarbineer]

[

I'm more interested in changing hearts & minds than in intimidating & punishing.

.

Which is nothing more than an admission that you're willing to tolerate discrimination.

 

[Mac1958]

I'm more interested in changing hearts & minds than in intimidating & punishing..

Which is nothing more than an admission that you're willing to tolerate discrimination.

That might be the perception of a shallow, closed-minded, hardcore left wing partisan ideologue, yes.

.

 

[Skylar]

So, let's start from this end:

Does a customer have the right to have 'Death to President Obama' put on his cake?

Okay, so we'll take the lack of responses from the stunned silence crowd to mean, NO, the customer does not have that right.

Therefore, now that we've then established that the baker does in fact have the right to refuse certain custom wording on his cakes, even though he sells that service on a limited basis,

the only question left is whether that right is unlimited, or if it is limited, where is the line drawn?

Well, yes a person does have a right to have that iced on a cake. And a Christian has a right to refuse to promote something his faith absolutely prohibits: gay marriage or any promotion of the cult of LGBT's value system to supersede his own. That right to refuse service would be extended to "Death to President Obama", because that would violate a Christian's mandates as well.

The difference is, they were willing to sell the cake and provide the customer with all the supplies necessary to put any messge they wanted on it.

Your anti-gay baker refused to do business with gays at all. ANd that's where they violated the law.

If a person wanted an exceptionally repugnant message designed on their cake, they should seek and find a baker who has no qualms about that. The Free Market will fill in the vacuum when "we reserve the right to refuse service" is opted for.

That logic didn't work during the era of the 'Whites Only' lunch counters. And it doesn't work now. But its good to see on what side of history your rhetoric comes down on.

People are mistaking ONCE AGAIN that gays are not a race of people. They are a CULT. A cult does not get the same Constitutional protections as a race of people. So public accomodation laws do not cover LGBTs. A Christian, for example, couldn't go into a Muslim's bakery and insist that Muslim depict the Prophet Muhammed on his cake. The Muslim would have every right to refuse that.

Wow. You're just opening a window for us into your mind now Silo. With the thin veneer of pseudo-legal gibberish slowly being chipped away as the courts do exactly opposite of what you claimed they should. And the thick, viscous gooey center of irrationality and blind hatred is seeping through the cracks.

I can only imagine what hapless vitriol you'll spew when and if the USSC affirms gay marriage. Though it will undoubtedly be dramatic.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Mac, you made post 289, how does it feel to post on a perfect square?

 

[Synthaholic]

People are mistaking ONCE AGAIN that gays are not a race of people. They are a CULT.

No, religions are by definition much more like a cult than homosexuality.

We'll let the Supreme Court sort that out...

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'm more interested in changing hearts & minds than in intimidating & punishing..

Which is nothing more than an admission that you're willing to tolerate discrimination.

That might be the perception of a shallow, closed-minded, hardcore left wing partisan ideologue, yes.

.

Sorry but when you reject force in making people stop discriminating you are passively endorsing discrimination.

It's like making stop signs suggestions, other than the law.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I don't think this is discrimination against the customer, I think it's more of a First Amendment kind of deal, because the customer was trying to get the store owner to say things they don't believe in.

And..........the FACT that the shop owner offered to make the cake like the person wanted, and was willing to provide a pastry bag and frosting so that the person could put the words on the cake themselves made the bakery owner more than accommodating towards the idiot customer.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm more interested in changing hearts & minds than in intimidating & punishing..

Which is nothing more than an admission that you're willing to tolerate discrimination.

That might be the perception of a shallow, closed-minded, hardcore left wing partisan ideologue, yes.

.

Sorry but when you reject force in making people stop discriminating you are passively endorsing discrimination.

It's like making stop signs suggestions, other than the law.

No you aren't, asshole. You're rejecting the use of force in human relations. However, since when did liberals ever object to the use of force? They are positively eager to use force against their fellow humans, especially those they don't agree with. That's what they call "tolerance."

The question is you have to answer is why you think anyone is entitled to stop another from discriminating? "Making choices" is just another way of saying "discriminating." Why should I care if you don't like the choices I make?

 

[Synthaholic]

It's like making stop signs suggestions, other than the law.

Wait a minute....they're not?

 

[Silhouette]

I don't think this is discrimination against the customer, I think it's more of a First Amendment kind of deal, because the customer was trying to get the store owner to say things they don't believe in.

And..........the FACT that the shop owner offered to make the cake like the person wanted, and was willing to provide a pastry bag and frosting so that the person could put the words on the cake themselves made the bakery owner more than accommodating towards the idiot customer.

Marriage is the hub of any culture. Christians are forbidden under threat of eternal damnation if they promote a homosexual culture, or fail to stop it in its tracks, proactively, not passively praying. Jude 1 of the New Testament is very specific about this difference.

THEREFORE, a Christian baker doesn't merely "not want to make a gay wedding cake". A Christian baker CANNOT make a gay wedding cake and remain a Christian.

 

[Skylar]

I don't think this is discrimination against the customer, I think it's more of a First Amendment kind of deal, because the customer was trying to get the store owner to say things they don't believe in.

And..........the FACT that the shop owner offered to make the cake like the person wanted, and was willing to provide a pastry bag and frosting so that the person could put the words on the cake themselves made the bakery owner more than accommodating towards the idiot customer.

Marriage is the hub of any culture. Christians are forbidden under threat of eternal damnation if they promote a homosexual culture, or fail to stop it in its tracks, proactively, not passively praying. Jude 1 of the New Testament is very specific about this difference.

Selling a product isn't promoting the customer. Its promoting the product. Obliterating your logic.

THEREFORE, a Christian baker doesn't merely "not want to make a gay wedding cake". A Christian baker CANNOT make a gay wedding cake and remain a Christian.

There's no biblical prohibition of selling cake.

To anyone. So even your theological rants are meaningless.

 

[Skylar]

It's like making stop signs suggestions, other than the law.

Wait a minute....they're not?

Shrugs....that's how we treat them in California.