For all the Bigoted Bakers, Fanatical Florists and Pharisee Photographers

[ChrisL]

^^^

I wonder how many of them are obese themselves? Dude's wife looks a bit on the "chunky" side. Oops!

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

No, it isn't. It is exactly the same thing. If you sell a product or a service then you cannot refuse to sell that product or service to someone when it falls within a protected class. What that product or service might be is irrelevant.

I can certainly say as a printer that I do not offer porn as a product. That is not discrimination based on race, gender, religion or sexual preference. It's my company policy. You cannot demand that I sell a product I don't offer. A bakery that sells wedding cakes, sells wedding cakes. They have every right to tell me that they won't make a penis shaped cake if they don't offer that. They cannot however refuse to sell me cake #23 from their catalog on the grounds that it's for a gay wedding. That is discrimination. It is in no way the same.

I don't believe pornography is a protected class, so that is a non-issue. Let us not move away from what the actual scenario is. A customer wants you to put up a billboard, which is the service you provide, stating that homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God. That is an expression of religious belief and religion is a protected class. The Oregon law prohibits your refusing taking on that job because you don't like the message.

I don't know if you are dumb, willfully ignorant or just dishonest. The law this couple broke has nothing to do with the product they provide. They are entitled to control their product. What they CANNOT do is refuse to sell to a segment of the community. This couple violated antidiscrimination laws by stating that they will NOT sell their product to gay people because it goes against their religious beliefs. The state does not recognize their religious beliefs as a valid argument to discriminate against a certain segment of the population. Do you get it yet?

Your understanding of the law is non-existent.

Obviously that would be yourself. You are completely misrepresenting the law. It has no bearing on your product. The fact is that this couple violated anti-discrimination laws in their community. As business owners, they should have been aware that you cannot do what they did. It is their own fault they are stupid business people. Their religious freedoms end when they violate another groups civil rights. These laws have been in effect for SOME time now. Ignorance is no excuse.

That law is invalid, because it violates the GOD-GIVEN RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL.

That the municipality is enforcing such, merely denotes the invalid nature of that government.

Your defense of that invalid law and the government which wields it, denotes the invalid nature of your reasoning.

Invalid reasoning is disqualified from consideration by reasonable people, because the construct of the reasoning identifies it as fatally flawed reasoning.

Despite knowing that it cannot, due to the fatally flawed nature of your reasoning, I remain hopeful that that will help, even if only in some small way.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

A cake is a freakin' cake. A printer prints many things of varying subjects.

CREAK go the goalposts....

Really? Printing can be anything from a book of baby ducks to hardcore porn.
A cake is a cake. Apples and oranges my friend.

No, it isn't. It is exactly the same thing. If you sell a product or a service then you cannot refuse to sell that product or service to someone when it falls within a protected class. What that product or service might be is irrelevant.

I can certainly say as a printer that I do not offer porn as a product. That is not discrimination based on race, gender, religion or sexual preference. It's my company policy. You cannot demand that I sell a product I don't offer. A bakery that sells wedding cakes, sells wedding cakes. They have every right to tell me that they won't make a penis shaped cake if they don't offer that. They cannot however refuse to sell me cake #23 from their catalog on the grounds that it's for a gay wedding. That is discrimination. It is in no way the same.

So you couldn't refuse, as a gay printer, printing a billboard that quotes a bible passage condemning homosexuality, as long as you already print billboards with other messages?

It depends on whether or not they offer their signs for that purpose.
I think they have a much better argument in court than the baker does.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I would think you could reasonably deny that request. I could make it my policy not to portray hateful, sexual, or violent messages on my billboards. That is not discriminating against the individual but their message.

BTW the gay people were the victims not the baker. The gays didn't discriminate by asking for a cake.

Not under the Oregon law you couldn't. That is a religious expression and religion is a protected class.

I'm on the fence. I could see an argument where a gay owner could argue that is hateful to them personally. I can also see the other side. The owner could say maybe they don't post religious or political messages at all to avoid such conflicts. Their product would then be solely product or business advertisement and not religious or political messages. I don't really know. It would be a good case.

The baker says it is hateful to them, but that didn't matter. The law in Oregon really doesn't leave any leeway. If it is a protected class (and religion is) then you cannot discriminate in any way. If you make billboards, you can't not make that billboard because you don't like what it says.

A customer asking for a wedding cake from a wedding cake store is in no way hateful. I think that's a stretch. Asking a gay person to post a billboard against gay people is personal. I would liken it more to the KKK asking a black guy to do it. I think the billboard people can choose what messages go on their billboards if they don't offer political, religious , hate, sex or nudity. I think they can choose which product to offer. The cake is the product for the baker.

So exceptions for me, but not for thee. Figures.

Yeah that's it.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

In fact, I can open up a business that specializes in making signs for churches. That is not discriminatory either. That just happens to be the products I offer at my business.

OK, I'll ask again:

If you are gay and you print billboards for a living, and a Christian customer walked in and asked for you to print them a billboard that says: "Homosexuality is a sin unto God" for a busy highway, would you or would you not be able to deny serving that PARTICULAR request for a billboard based on your principles as a homosexual? Yes or no?

I would think you could reasonably deny that request. I could make it my policy not to portray hateful, sexual, or violent messages on my billboards. That is not discriminating against the individual but their message.

BTW the gay people were the victims not the baker. The gays didn't discriminate by asking for a cake.

Not under the Oregon law you couldn't. That is a religious expression and religion is a protected class.

I'm on the fence. I could see an argument where a gay owner could argue that is hateful to them personally. I can also see the other side. The owner could say maybe they don't post religious or political messages at all to avoid such conflicts. Their product would then be solely product or business advertisement and not religious or political messages. I don't really know. It would be a good case.

My brother owns and operates a printing shop that has been in my family for four generations. My brother is a strong advocate for gun control.

Every so often, a sportsmen's club will order raffle tickets and the prizes are guns. He ALWAYS prints them up for the customers. It's not his place to approve or disapprove of his client's activities. He preforms a service that's legal, public and honest.

There is no place for a mercantile seal of approval of their customers. Imposing one is simple discrimination.

In fact, I can open up a business that specializes in making signs for churches. That is not discriminatory either. That just happens to be the products I offer at my business.

OK, I'll ask again:

If you are gay and you print billboards for a living, and a Christian customer walked in and asked for you to print them a billboard that says: "Homosexuality is a sin unto God" for a busy highway, would you or would you not be able to deny serving that PARTICULAR request for a billboard based on your principles as a homosexual? Yes or no?

I would think you could reasonably deny that request. I could make it my policy not to portray hateful, sexual, or violent messages on my billboards. That is not discriminating against the individual but their message.

BTW the gay people were the victims not the baker. The gays didn't discriminate by asking for a cake.

Not under the Oregon law you couldn't. That is a religious expression and religion is a protected class.

I'm on the fence. I could see an argument where a gay owner could argue that is hateful to them personally. I can also see the other side. The owner could say maybe they don't post religious or political messages at all to avoid such conflicts. Their product would then be solely product or business advertisement and not religious or political messages. I don't really know. It would be a good case.

My brother owns and operates a printing shop that has been in my family for four generations. My brother is a strong advocate for gun control.

Every so often, a sportsmen's club will order raffle tickets and the prizes are guns. He ALWAYS prints them up for the customers. It's not his place to approve or disapprove of his client's activities. He preforms a service that's legal, public and honest.

There is no place for a mercantile seal of approval of their customers. Imposing one is simple discrimination.

It sounds reasonable. I bet though he wouldn't print porn or a white supremacist newsletter. There are reasonable limits. He doesn't have to offer those print services. Right?

 

[Nosmo King]

OK, I'll ask again:

If you are gay and you print billboards for a living, and a Christian customer walked in and asked for you to print them a billboard that says: "Homosexuality is a sin unto God" for a busy highway, would you or would you not be able to deny serving that PARTICULAR request for a billboard based on your principles as a homosexual? Yes or no?

I would think you could reasonably deny that request. I could make it my policy not to portray hateful, sexual, or violent messages on my billboards. That is not discriminating against the individual but their message.

BTW the gay people were the victims not the baker. The gays didn't discriminate by asking for a cake.

Not under the Oregon law you couldn't. That is a religious expression and religion is a protected class.

I'm on the fence. I could see an argument where a gay owner could argue that is hateful to them personally. I can also see the other side. The owner could say maybe they don't post religious or political messages at all to avoid such conflicts. Their product would then be solely product or business advertisement and not religious or political messages. I don't really know. It would be a good case.

My brother owns and operates a printing shop that has been in my family for four generations. My brother is a strong advocate for gun control.

Every so often, a sportsmen's club will order raffle tickets and the prizes are guns. He ALWAYS prints them up for the customers. It's not his place to approve or disapprove of his client's activities. He preforms a service that's legal, public and honest.

There is no place for a mercantile seal of approval of their customers. Imposing one is simple discrimination.

OK, I'll ask again:

If you are gay and you print billboards for a living, and a Christian customer walked in and asked for you to print them a billboard that says: "Homosexuality is a sin unto God" for a busy highway, would you or would you not be able to deny serving that PARTICULAR request for a billboard based on your principles as a homosexual? Yes or no?

I would think you could reasonably deny that request. I could make it my policy not to portray hateful, sexual, or violent messages on my billboards. That is not discriminating against the individual but their message.

BTW the gay people were the victims not the baker. The gays didn't discriminate by asking for a cake.

Not under the Oregon law you couldn't. That is a religious expression and religion is a protected class.

I'm on the fence. I could see an argument where a gay owner could argue that is hateful to them personally. I can also see the other side. The owner could say maybe they don't post religious or political messages at all to avoid such conflicts. Their product would then be solely product or business advertisement and not religious or political messages. I don't really know. It would be a good case.

My brother owns and operates a printing shop that has been in my family for four generations. My brother is a strong advocate for gun control.

Every so often, a sportsmen's club will order raffle tickets and the prizes are guns. He ALWAYS prints them up for the customers. It's not his place to approve or disapprove of his client's activities. He preforms a service that's legal, public and honest.

There is no place for a mercantile seal of approval of their customers. Imposing one is simple discrimination.

It sounds reasonable. I bet though he wouldn't print porn or a white supremacist newsletter. There are reasonable limits. He doesn't have to offer those print services. Right?

As far as I know, no one has ever made such a request. White Supremacists don't seem to be too active here, thank God. And porn is something printed by much bigger facilities with four color presses, or produced for the internet.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The flaw in that line of thinking is that private businesses provide anything.

They engage in trade they are not public accomodations

If you have a storefront on main street, you are open to the public. The whole public.

Then stores that run "by appointment only" have to let people in no matter what?

You could do that maybe. Get all of your appointments on referral. If you advertise though you can't then deny people appointments.

What if you advertise you only work Opposite Sex weddings? or only Muslim Weddings?

I'm pretty sure you could advertise that you bake for traditional Christian weddings and you won't have a problem as long as you do only bake for traditional Christian weddings.

Or name your business The Glory Of God Baking Company. Your name implies your support for traditional marriage.

 

[PratchettFan]

The flaw in that line of thinking is that private businesses provide anything.

They engage in trade they are not public accomodations

If you have a storefront on main street, you are open to the public. The whole public.

Then stores that run "by appointment only" have to let people in no matter what?

You could do that maybe. Get all of your appointments on referral. If you advertise though you can't then deny people appointments.

What if you advertise you only work Opposite Sex weddings? or only Muslim Weddings?

I'm pretty sure you could advertise that you bake for traditional Christian weddings and you won't have a problem as long as you do only bake for traditional Christian weddings.

Not under the Oregon law.

 

[PratchettFan]

I can certainly say as a printer that I do not offer porn as a product. That is not discrimination based on race, gender, religion or sexual preference. It's my company policy. You cannot demand that I sell a product I don't offer. A bakery that sells wedding cakes, sells wedding cakes. They have every right to tell me that they won't make a penis shaped cake if they don't offer that. They cannot however refuse to sell me cake #23 from their catalog on the grounds that it's for a gay wedding. That is discrimination. It is in no way the same.

I don't believe pornography is a protected class, so that is a non-issue. Let us not move away from what the actual scenario is. A customer wants you to put up a billboard, which is the service you provide, stating that homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God. That is an expression of religious belief and religion is a protected class. The Oregon law prohibits your refusing taking on that job because you don't like the message.

I don't know if you are dumb, willfully ignorant or just dishonest. The law this couple broke has nothing to do with the product they provide. They are entitled to control their product. What they CANNOT do is refuse to sell to a segment of the community. This couple violated antidiscrimination laws by stating that they will NOT sell their product to gay people because it goes against their religious beliefs. The state does not recognize their religious beliefs as a valid argument to discriminate against a certain segment of the population. Do you get it yet?

Your understanding of the law is non-existent.

Obviously that would be yourself. You are completely misrepresenting the law. It has no bearing on your product. The fact is that this couple violated anti-discrimination laws in their community. As business owners, they should have been aware that you cannot do what they did. It is their own fault they are stupid business people. Their religious freedoms end when they violate another groups civil rights. These laws have been in effect for SOME time now. Ignorance is no excuse.

That law is invalid, because it violates the GOD-GIVEN RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL.

That the municipality is enforcing such, merely denotes the invalid nature of that government.

Your defense of that invalid law and the government which wields it, denotes the invalid nature of your reasoning.

Invalid reasoning is disqualified from consideration by reasonable people, because the construct of the reasoning identifies it as fatally flawed reasoning.

Despite knowing that it cannot, due to the fatally flawed nature of your reasoning, I remain hopeful that that will help, even if only in some small way.

No, it isn't. Aside from the fact there is no such thing as a GOD-GIVEN RIGHT OF THE INDIVIDUAL to violate, the state does have the right to establish their own standards when it comes to PA laws. It falls under the 10th amendment.

 

[PratchettFan]

If you have a storefront on main street, you are open to the public. The whole public.

Then stores that run "by appointment only" have to let people in no matter what?

You could do that maybe. Get all of your appointments on referral. If you advertise though you can't then deny people appointments.

What if you advertise you only work Opposite Sex weddings? or only Muslim Weddings?

I'm pretty sure you could advertise that you bake for traditional Christian weddings and you won't have a problem as long as you do only bake for traditional Christian weddings.

Or name your business The Glory Of God Baking Company. Your name implies your support for traditional marriage.

Doesn't matter. That does not circumvent the Oregon law.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

For those of you who have wondered "Why can't Anti-Americans be hidden?"

The below contributor decided to offer you a solid example of why that is:

No, it isn't. Aside from the fact there is no such thing as a GOD-GIVEN RIGHT OF THE INDIVIDUAL to violate, the state does have the right to establish their own standards when it comes to PA laws. It falls under the 10th amendment.

States do not have 'rights'... States have power. And there is NO POTENTIAL FOR A VALID USE OF STATE POWER WHICH USURPS THE MEANS OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO FREELY PRACTICE THEIR RELIGION.

PERIOD!

The last state that felt that they HAD SUCH A RIGHT... was kicked the fuck out of the United States.

And you should know that, given that you're a British Subject and it was YOUR KING who the American founders de-nutted and sent packin'.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Then stores that run "by appointment only" have to let people in no matter what?

You could do that maybe. Get all of your appointments on referral. If you advertise though you can't then deny people appointments.

What if you advertise you only work Opposite Sex weddings? or only Muslim Weddings?

I'm pretty sure you could advertise that you bake for traditional Christian weddings and you won't have a problem as long as you do only bake for traditional Christian weddings.

Or name your business The Glory Of God Baking Company. Your name implies your support for traditional marriage.

Doesn't matter. That does not circumvent the Oregon law.

Fuck Oregon and it's would-be LAW. Just as "Fuck Britain and the rules of their little cult".

 

[PratchettFan]

For those of you who have wondered "Why can't Anti-Americans be hidden?"

The below contributor decided to offer you a solid example of why that is:

No, it isn't. Aside from the fact there is no such thing as a GOD-GIVEN RIGHT OF THE INDIVIDUAL to violate, the state does have the right to establish their own standards when it comes to PA laws. It falls under the 10th amendment.

States do not have 'rights'... States have power. And there is NO POTENTIAL FOR A VALID USE OF STATE POWER WHICH USURPS THE MEANS OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO FREELY PRACTICE THEIR RELIGION.

PERIOD!

The last state that felt that they HAD SUCH A RIGHT... was kicked the fuck out of the United States.

And you should know that, given that you're a British Subject and it was YOUR KING who the American founders de-nutted and sent packin'.

Uh huh. This is a free country. You can live in fantasy land if that pleases you.

 

[PratchettFan]

You could do that maybe. Get all of your appointments on referral. If you advertise though you can't then deny people appointments.

What if you advertise you only work Opposite Sex weddings? or only Muslim Weddings?

I'm pretty sure you could advertise that you bake for traditional Christian weddings and you won't have a problem as long as you do only bake for traditional Christian weddings.

Or name your business The Glory Of God Baking Company. Your name implies your support for traditional marriage.

Doesn't matter. That does not circumvent the Oregon law.

Fuck Oregon and it's would-be LAW. Just as "Fuck Britain and the rules of their little cult".

Ooohhhh... I'm sure Oregon is heart broken you feel that way.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

State and local public accommodations laws are necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory measures as authorized by the Commerce Clause. (Heart of Atlanta Motel v. US)

State and local public accommodations laws do not 'violate' religious liberty because their sole intent is indeed regulatory, in no way seeking to disadvantage religious expression, where such measures comply with Free Exercise Clause jurisprudence. (Employment Division v. Smith).

Consequently, the 'religious liberty' argument is nothing more than a facade behind which those hostile to gay Americans hide, as religious beliefs are not 'justification' to violate a just and Constitutional law.

 

[PratchettFan]

State and local public accommodations laws are necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory measures as authorized by the Commerce Clause. (Heart of Atlanta Motel v. US)

State and local public accommodations laws do not 'violate' religious liberty because their sole intent is indeed regulatory, in no way seeking to disadvantage religious expression, where such measures comply with Free Exercise Clause jurisprudence. (Employment Division v. Smith).

Consequently, the 'religious liberty' argument is nothing more than a facade behind which those hostile to gay Americans hide, as religious beliefs are not 'justification' to violate a just and Constitutional law.

Not a façade. It is so easy to just dismiss other people's positions with a label, but it isn't honest. People of integrity can have differing views. To just dismiss those views as unimportant because they do not support your position does nothing to advance us as a society - quite the opposite.

Good God, can't - just for a minute - everyone get their heads out of their backsides long enough to recognize that the people on the other side of the issue are just that - people. Real live human beings. Not some great nemesis to be crushed, but people deserving of just a bit of understanding and fucking respect.

 

[JoeB131]

Ruining the lives of a young, industrious, ambitious and decent couple only for their beliefs is wrong and if you have any decency, you know it.

You also know that if a a bake shop owned by homosexuals refused to bake a cake for regular wedding, you would cheer them as heroes. Along with your fellow phonies.

You also know that if the black owners of a bake shop refused to similarly accommodate a white couple, you and your fellow hypocrites would be overjoyed.

You probably would know (I give you credit fr SOME brains) that the above two hypothetical refusals of service have nothing to do with deeply held religious beliefs but undeniable inborn hatred.

That's frankly the most retarded thing you've said yet. There aren't any cases of gay or black bakers withholding services from nice straight white people. In fact, they are probably just happy for the business.

These people ruined their own lives when they got into bed with the Hate Group "Family Research Council" and advertised who these women were and where they lived. The damages were for the misery these people inflicted on the gay couple for standing up for their rights.

 

[JoeB131]

You totally miss the definition of liberty because you're moron

No, I just realize that the Wingnuts who want to restrict who people can marry and what ladies stick up their who-has really have no concept of liberty.

This is about protecting White, Christian Privilege. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[JoeB131]

It is not about religious technicalities it is about individual rights and freedoms. Chief among these is the individual right to discrimination.

Discrimination is a basic human right regardless of how one discriminates. It is nothing more than the free and peaceful association or disassociation with others based on preference. It harms no one and is no one else business least of all the governments

We aren't talking about an individual right to discrimination. We are talking about a business's right to discrimination. Businesses aren't people.

 

[JoeB131]

LOL..You're one of the most bigoted, miserable, haters on the board. You hate Jews ,Christians, "rich people" insurance companies, business owners, America, ect ..You're a joke

Well, let's see now.

No problem with Jews. Have no use for Zionists.

Have no problem with Christians. DO have a problem with "Christians" who want to inflict their superstitions on the rest of us while missing everything Jesus had to say.

Have no problem with Rich people who pay their fair share.

Insurance companies that take people's money and then cheat them. Yes. I have a problem with that. Why dont you?

Have no problem with business owners who play by the rules.

As for America. I served my country in the Armed forces, and I would NEVER put a foreign flag equal to America's... unlike you.