LGBT -- seeking respct and acceptance form the mainstream...?

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

I cannot speak for individual members of the group, but it does seem to me that the LGBT community seeks acceptance and respect from the mainstream population -- 'we're just like you except for the gender of who we love, please treat us the same way you treat each other' or something similar.

Right? Seems reasonable to me.

Do members of the LGBT community who seek goods and services from this who, with every right to do so, oppose certain aspects of their lifestyle and then use the state to hammer those who oppose them into submission serve to further of hinder the acceptance of LGBT in mainstream society?

The compulsive obsessive lying ignorant deceitful low life discriminating scum which make up the LGBT don't deserve respect from even the festering goo in a dumpster.


Former Olympian Turned Low Life Scum Bag Poster Boy

Bruce Jenner, the new poster boy for homosexuals to think it is ok to pretend to be the opposite sex and rob heterosexuals of the right to be heterosexual yet they expect this trash to be respected. Respected for what, encouraging homosexuals to rob heterosexuals of the right to be heterosexual with these filthy low life scum bag homosexual deceptions!

As for me, 15 years of doing activism and no more Mr. Nice guy, I'll be happy to continue to tell it like it is to wake all of you out of your slumber on the foundation of this issue and many more with demonstrations of fact which reveal these homosexuals and homosexual activists for the liars and deceivers that they prove to be on the foundation of their every issue to do with their filthy little bias agenda! How disgusting homosexuals and homosexual activists are, the mockery they have made of society and heterosexuality is unforgivable!

The low life scum bags doing this story are calling a man with a surgically mutilated penis a woman thus they too are encouraging homosexuals to rob heterosexuals of the right to be heterosexual with these filthy low life scum bag homosexual deceptions! According to all of these involved with the media etc., you have no right to be heterosexual because some homosexual refuses to accept them self for what they are and seek to rob you of the right to be heterosexual for it!

These (trans gender, transsexual, tranny) types of homosexuals are not only bettering their chances of robbing heterosexuals of the right to be heterosexuals with these sick disgusting filthy low life scum bag homosexual deceptions, they are now labelling innocent little children trans gender and trying to use them to gain sympathy from the public. (Heterosexuals don't have the right to be heterosexual because some homosexual refuses to accept them self for what they are?!!! As if, this is going to change!!!) How much lower can homosexual activists get than this you wonder? They will come up with any lie and deception to continue to make fools out of everyone else and they blame you / everyone else because they are quite obviously the ones that do not accept themselves for what they are in the first place. To them this means if you are a homophobe, a hater, a bigot and whatever other lie and deception that they can possibly fathom just so they can better their chances at deceiving heterosexuals with their filthy disgusting low life scum bag deceptions! This has been going on since before the 60's it's called the tranny, but not only do they now get away with discriminating heterosexuals from having the right to be heterosexual with these sick filthy disgusting homosexual deceptions, they are making heterosexuals as haters, discriminators and bigots for being robbed by some sick filthy disgusting low life scum bag homosexual deception!!! Also why are other boys being discriminated from using the girls wash room just because they did' not get their genitals surgically mutilated or pretend to be something they never will be, the opposite sex?! (which is what leads to more heterosexuals of the right to be heterosexual) because they were born with a penis which is exactly what makes a male a male and is exactly why homosexuals get the surgical genital mutilation to mimic the male because they know that is their best chance at deception so they claim it is how you feel or how you perceive it yet they get the surgical genital mutilation which proves that they are lying because if it were how you feel or how you perceive that determines ones sex there would obviously be no fabricated need for the surgical genital mutilation in the first place. Homosexuals and homosexuals activists are among the most selfish greedy low life compulsive lying and deceiving discriminators that ever existed on the planet and they sure have made complete idiots out of general public / the lot of you!!!

Here is more homosexual activist advertising disgustingly and inexcusably forced on the public to try and gain the public's sympathy for homosexuals so that these homosexuals can continue to legally degrade, humiliate, traumatize heterosexuals while robbing heterosexuals of the right to be heterosexual while dictating to society that being heterosexual includes having sex with homosexuals with surgically mutilated genitals (those born with the same sex genital that the heterosexual them self is born with) otherwise the heterosexual is a homophobe. Now that's offensive, outrageous, disgusting, filthy and way beyond unacceptable as well a mockery made out of society by a bunch of liars and deceivers and this activity needs to be criminalized globally for the well being and sanity of current and future generations!

Being a heterosexual male does not include sticking your penis inside a surgically mutilated penis! Being a heterosexual female does not include inserting a surgically mutilated vagina into your vagina! That homosexual activists, as well City TV is propagating that homosexuals deserve any sort of sympathy to continue to degrade, humiliate, traumatize heterosexuals while robbing heterosexuals of the right to be heterosexual is well beyond offensive, disgusting and filthy! They are doing exactly that by promoting as legal and in any way shape or form acceptable, the tranny, transsexual, trans gender which are people who refuse to accept themselves for what they are and expect that heterosexuals should be the ones to have to suffer the consequences for it!

Do we hand the mentally defective a drill and a free pass to go around drilling peoples brains to make them mentally defective? Because we do not allow this, the person who is mentally defective is being discriminated against according to the homosexual activist warped pathetic insane mentality. (I'll get to that in just a sec)

Do we hand the physically handicapped an axe and a free pass to go around hacking off other peoples limbs so that they too then are physically defective? Because we do not allow this, the person who is physically defective is being discriminated against according to the homosexual activist warped pathetic insane mentality. (I'll get to that in just a sec)

So here we have the sexually defective aka homosexuals (if it were up to homosexuals to sustain the human race, we would have died off thousands of years ago for weakly being a race of sexually defective) and homosexual activists deceiving society with false claims of discrimination as well every twisted lie and deception that they can possibly fathom the issue which shamefully enough has lead for now to giving homosexuals the tools (wrongfully allowing homosexuals to pretend to be the opposite sex which leads to heterosexuals becoming victims) to degrade, traumatize, humiliate heterosexuals by robbing us of our heterosexuality with these sick filthy disgusting low life scum bag homosexual deceptions. They are quite clearly claiming that not allowing homosexuals to make guinea pigs out of heterosexuals with these sick filthy disguising homosexual deceptions thus degrade, humiliate, traumatize heterosexuals to the level of the sexually defective is discriminating homosexuals right to equality. That is the insane mentality of the homosexual activist, use every lie and deceptions to treat the public like a bunch into stupid idiots into supporting their lies and deceptions! They not only use every lie and deception on the foundation of this issue to do with their bias agenda, but they have used lies and deceptions as the foundation of their every issue to do with their bias agenda. Go ahead and look me up to find these activists are already exposed and have been hiding the information from the public for years with discrimination so they could continue to make a bunch of idiots out of the general public!.

While they have been doing this they have dictated that being heterosexual includes having sex with homosexuals (those born with the same sex genital that the heterosexual is born with) all the while put commercials on television to try and get you to have sympathy for these sick filthy disgusting homosexuals by attempting to promote the lie that tranny, transsexual and trans gender is promoting equality. Robbing heterosexuals of the right to be heterosexual these low life scum bag homosexual activists call equality and much of the public is brainwashed by such filthy disgusting lies! This really makes my blood boil!

And stop letting them fool you into thinking that everything that they stand for is about homosexual johnny just wants to be with homosexual Jimmy and just wants to be left alone because homosexual Timmy is going around deceiving thus discriminating heterosexuals of the right to be heterosexual!

What needs to be done to free our innocent little children as well as society as a while from this homosexual insanity is simply undo everything homosexual activists have done (legislation corrupted etc.) over the past few decades and start from scratch only this time make it so all procedures, surgeries and altercations must be made illegal for being used to make a person appear the opposite sex that they are born, as well discrimination against heterosexuality needs to be criminalized for the well being and sanity of current and future generations. Which quite obviously means that tranny, trans gender and transsexual needs to be criminalized. Homosexuals wanting to have sex with other homosexuals or even bi sexuals are one thing, but homosexuals that discriminate heterosexuals with homosexual deceptions is unacceptable for it is quite obviously robbing heterosexuals of the right to be heterosexuals. Anyone pretending to be the opposite sex encourages homosexuals to think that it is ok to do it as well which again leads to more heterosexual victims which is why pretending to be the opposite sex needs to be criminalized for everyone. This type of homosexual behaviour being forced upon innocent little children in the school system or upon citizens through government is unacceptable!

The days of this low life scum bag homosexual activist insanity plaguing the globe with it's insanity draws near to an end!

love

Primary Factual Fundamentalist World Class Activist
David Jeffrey Spetch
Ps. be good, be strong!
Hamilton Ontario Canada


The Homosexual "What They Don't Know Won't Hurt Them" Mentality

A homosexual with a surgically mutilated genital is not a sex change, but giving homosexuals every advantage to rob heterosexuals of the right to be heterosexual because some homosexuals refuse to accept themselves for what they are. I accept myself as a heterosexual and fight for the preservation of heterosexuality because no heterosexual deserves to be degraded, humiliated, traumatized by some homosexual and their lies and deceptions. I think that it is time homosexuals start respecting heterosexuals for what we are as well start accepting themselves for what they themselves are. It saddens me that they have managed to brain wash so many with their lies and deceptions along with false claims of discrimination and calling anyone that exposes them as a liars a hater a deceiver a bigot a homophobe while they stooped to make this look acceptable in any way shape or form.

Then they have the nerve to ask "What do you care" or "if you don't know what does it matter?" which is not only exemplifying absolutely no respect for heterosexuality, but trying to tell you that what you don't know won''t hurt you and yet is it acceptable to date rape people? I mean they don't know so why should they care by the homosexual activist logic? Or how about someone spitting in your food at a restaurant, it's acceptable to homosexual activists because of the you don't know so why should you care mentality. Why not just have someone urinate in your corn flakes every day because according to homosexual activists mentality, why should you care because you don't know. Infuriating!

love

Primary Factual Fundamentalist World Class Activist
David Jeffrey Spetch
Ps. be good, be strong!
Hamilton Ontario Canada

 

[PratchettFan]

It derives from the state law which, as you have pointed out, has the right to create such laws.

Having the right to do something and it being right to do it are two different things.

Yes. The first is a matter of law and the second a matter of opinion.

My opinion on the matter is we are creating to many laws.

A law should be something 99.99% of the people agree to, like murder and rape being bad, not something to force people to kowtow to your moral structure.

You are entitled to your opinion. Other people are entitled to theirs.

The problem is people are turning opinion into punitive laws. At that point it turns from opinion to tyranny.

Most laws are punitive. That is the nature of laws. A valid argument can be made that these laws prevent tyranny. Tyranny is often just a matter of which side of the stick you are standing. If a state decides it wants these laws and those laws are not deemed unconstitutional or fall under federal jurisdiction, then it is up to the state.

 

[PratchettFan]

You'll have to excuse me if I don't share this grim prediction of what you believe the future holds.

We have people being castigated for not calling a pre-op trans-sexual "she" instead of "he". I'm sorry, but we are going the way of the Romans here.

People were castigated for being homosexuals. People are always being castigated for something. It comes with living in a free society.

The difference is progressives run to government to get them to do the dirty work.

So the pro-life people never try to limit abortion using the government? Please.

The difference is they realize they need overwhelming public opinions to get their laws passed. PA laws have mutated over time bureaucratically and judicially from their original intent.

When you try to get abortion restrictions passed, everyone knows the deal, its right there in the open. When PA laws get amended, its cloaked in terms like "fairness" and "equality" where all it really results in one form of butt hurt being made more equal than other form of butt hurt.

No. It is not the difference. It is exactly the same thing. No difference at all. If there is any difference it is a matter of degree. The "progressives" expect someone to sell a cake against their will, the pro-lifers expect someone to carry another human being in their body against their will. That difference in degree is significant. So please don't try to argue it is only one side that is doing this, because that is pure bull dung.

 

[martybegan]

You sure about that?
Every state that allows gay marriage allows it because the state legislature passed a law to that effect?
Every application of anti-discrimination laws to LGBT came from specific inclusion by the legislation and not the application of existing laws by a court?

Gay marriage is a separate issue. We are talking about anti-discrimination laws and yes, they are all from legislation. That's how you get laws.

You;re sure?

Quick search...

Ohio Ant- discrimination legislation makes it illegal for an employer to discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap, age or ancestry.
No mention of sexual orientation.

Michigan Anti-discrimination legislation prohibits discrimination in employment, education, housing, public accommodations, and public service. The Michigan Department of Civil Rights has authority to accept complaints based on unlawful consideration of religion, race, color, national origin, arrest record, genetic information, sex, age, height, weight, marital status and disability.
No mention of sexual orientation.

I'm sure there are other examples.

THe cases in question aren't from Ohio or Michigan. The PA laws are state laws.

So basically using the government force over something this stupid is A-OK as long as the people getting the shaft disagree with you.

Got it.

Its perfectly legitimate for a state minimum codes of conduct for commerce in their state. Among them that they treat their customers fairly and equally.

If you can't do this, then find another job. Or another state.

Or the people can go to another baker. Again, you place the harsher impact on the people you don't like. Basically you are being a bully.

 

[martybegan]

Why does commerce trump free exercise?

Because business isn't an inherent act of faith. And these are generally applicable laws that don't target religion.

It the responsibility of the religious to find a profession that is compatible with their faith. A Buddhist doesn't get hired at a slaughterhouse only to demand they stop killing animals because it violates his religion. Steve Young didn't demand the Superbowl be played on a Saturday because working on a Sunday violated his religion.

Its the responsibility of each religious individual to find a profession that is compatible with their faith. Not society's responsibility to bend itself around whatever religious belief they happen to have.

A Buddhist doesn't WANT to work at a Slaughterhouse or start one. These bakers want to bake cakes, with one exception that does no real harm. I'm sorry, going to another baker isn't harm.

They are subject to the same laws as anyone else. This is the part I don't understand: why Christians believe that they are somehow special and above the law. THat the law that everyone else has to follow doesn't apply to them.

Gays and lesbians are seeking nothing more than to be treated like everyone else. They aren't asking the bakers to do anything but their jobs. And still, you blame the victims of intolerance, you blame those denied goods and services because of someone *else's* intolerance.

That's ridiculous.

For decades having to bake a cake for a gay wedding never came up. YOU are asking people to change, not the other way around. It would be like changing a flower shop to a butcher and THEN asking the Buddhist to keep working there.

The gays aren't the cause of the conflict. Ordering a cake from a cake maker is a completely reasonable act. The religiously intolerant baker is the source of the conflict. As denying someone a cake because of their sexual orientation is completely unreasonable. And in many states, against the law.

The ones suing over this and their supporters are asking people to go against their moral code or face government sanction.

They are asking for nothing more or less than that the law be followed. A law that requires that they be treated fairly and equally. Both of which are completely reasonable.

The litigants are the aggressors in this situation, and are the cause. By simply realizing some people will just not approve of their lifestyle and moving on they can eliminate the conflict.

The litigants are seeking redress for the harm caused them by the violations of the law. Its the violations of the law that instigate the situation. If the bakers had not violated the law, there would be no redress to seek.

It begins with the religious intolerance. As you can tell by all the folks who sell cakes to gays for their weddings NOT being sued and NOT having judgments against them.

You are once again blaming the victims. Your argument should come with its own case of Pabst Blue Ribbon and a wife beater T-shirt.

But that requires them to be the "bigger men" and for progressives that seems to be impossible.

It requires nothing more or less than they follow the law. Christians aren't better than the law. They aren't special. They aren't exempt. There isn't a special set of more lenient rules for Christians....and harsher set for everyone else.

Its the same rules for everyone. Which is reasonable.

THE LAW IS FUCKING RETARDED!!!!

end of story.

 

[martybegan]

Having the right to do something and it being right to do it are two different things.

Yes. The first is a matter of law and the second a matter of opinion.

My opinion on the matter is we are creating to many laws.

A law should be something 99.99% of the people agree to, like murder and rape being bad, not something to force people to kowtow to your moral structure.

You are entitled to your opinion. Other people are entitled to theirs.

The problem is people are turning opinion into punitive laws. At that point it turns from opinion to tyranny.

Most laws are punitive. That is the nature of laws. A valid argument can be made that these laws prevent tyranny. Tyranny is often just a matter of which side of the stick you are standing. If a state decides it wants these laws and those laws are not deemed unconstitutional or fall under federal jurisdiction, then it is up to the state.

in this case the government is going after the baker, thus that is where the tyranny is considering there is no real impact on the people trying to get the cake beyond hurt feeeewwwwiiinnngs.

 

[martybegan]

We have people being castigated for not calling a pre-op trans-sexual "she" instead of "he". I'm sorry, but we are going the way of the Romans here.

People were castigated for being homosexuals. People are always being castigated for something. It comes with living in a free society.

The difference is progressives run to government to get them to do the dirty work.

So the pro-life people never try to limit abortion using the government? Please.

The difference is they realize they need overwhelming public opinions to get their laws passed. PA laws have mutated over time bureaucratically and judicially from their original intent.

When you try to get abortion restrictions passed, everyone knows the deal, its right there in the open. When PA laws get amended, its cloaked in terms like "fairness" and "equality" where all it really results in one form of butt hurt being made more equal than other form of butt hurt.

No. It is not the difference. It is exactly the same thing. No difference at all. If there is any difference it is a matter of degree. The "progressives" expect someone to sell a cake against their will, the pro-lifers expect someone to carry another human being in their body against their will. That difference in degree is significant. So please don't try to argue it is only one side that is doing this, because that is pure bull dung.

Well considering both sides mostly want women to be "forced" to carry a child past viability that is a matter of degree as well, plus to abortion opponents abortion is a matter of life and death, Not a 1-2 hour increase in needing to find another freaking cake.

 

[Katzndogz]

Respect and acceptance cannot be legislated.

 

[martybegan]

Respect and acceptance cannot be legislated.

Well they sure as hell are trying.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I cannot speak for individual members of the group, but it does seem to me that the LGBT community seeks acceptance and respect from the mainstream population -- 'we're just like you except for the gender of who we love, please treat us the same way you treat each other' or something similar.

Right? Seems reasonable to me.

Do members of the LGBT community who seek goods and services from this who, with every right to do so, oppose certain aspects of their lifestyle and then use the state to hammer those who oppose them into submission serve to further of hinder the acceptance of LGBT in mainstream society?

Have the right to object to whomever you like. But when you have a business you're bound to the same laws governing the execution of business practices of everyone else. This includes forgoing the right to refuse service for certain groups and persons just cuz'. Can't refuse service to gays any more than you could blacks. Can not like gays, actively oppose their rights all you want, but when you're at work you have to serve them just like everybody else. If you're gonna have problems with that, don't start a business.

 

[PratchettFan]

Yes. The first is a matter of law and the second a matter of opinion.

My opinion on the matter is we are creating to many laws.

A law should be something 99.99% of the people agree to, like murder and rape being bad, not something to force people to kowtow to your moral structure.

You are entitled to your opinion. Other people are entitled to theirs.

The problem is people are turning opinion into punitive laws. At that point it turns from opinion to tyranny.

Most laws are punitive. That is the nature of laws. A valid argument can be made that these laws prevent tyranny. Tyranny is often just a matter of which side of the stick you are standing. If a state decides it wants these laws and those laws are not deemed unconstitutional or fall under federal jurisdiction, then it is up to the state.

in this case the government is going after the baker, thus that is where the tyranny is considering there is no real impact on the people trying to get the cake beyond hurt feeeewwwwiiinnngs.

Nonetheless, its up to the state.

 

[PratchettFan]

People were castigated for being homosexuals. People are always being castigated for something. It comes with living in a free society.

The difference is progressives run to government to get them to do the dirty work.

So the pro-life people never try to limit abortion using the government? Please.

The difference is they realize they need overwhelming public opinions to get their laws passed. PA laws have mutated over time bureaucratically and judicially from their original intent.

When you try to get abortion restrictions passed, everyone knows the deal, its right there in the open. When PA laws get amended, its cloaked in terms like "fairness" and "equality" where all it really results in one form of butt hurt being made more equal than other form of butt hurt.

No. It is not the difference. It is exactly the same thing. No difference at all. If there is any difference it is a matter of degree. The "progressives" expect someone to sell a cake against their will, the pro-lifers expect someone to carry another human being in their body against their will. That difference in degree is significant. So please don't try to argue it is only one side that is doing this, because that is pure bull dung.

Well considering both sides mostly want women to be "forced" to carry a child past viability that is a matter of degree as well, plus to abortion opponents abortion is a matter of life and death, Not a 1-2 hour increase in needing to find another freaking cake.

All you are doing is justifying doing what you don't like other people doing. There is no difference. Every issue, whether right or left, has got people trying to use the government to impose their position on everyone else. It's called a republic.

 

[Skylar]

Because business isn't an inherent act of faith. And these are generally applicable laws that don't target religion.

It the responsibility of the religious to find a profession that is compatible with their faith. A Buddhist doesn't get hired at a slaughterhouse only to demand they stop killing animals because it violates his religion. Steve Young didn't demand the Superbowl be played on a Saturday because working on a Sunday violated his religion.

Its the responsibility of each religious individual to find a profession that is compatible with their faith. Not society's responsibility to bend itself around whatever religious belief they happen to have.

A Buddhist doesn't WANT to work at a Slaughterhouse or start one. These bakers want to bake cakes, with one exception that does no real harm. I'm sorry, going to another baker isn't harm.

They are subject to the same laws as anyone else. This is the part I don't understand: why Christians believe that they are somehow special and above the law. THat the law that everyone else has to follow doesn't apply to them.

Gays and lesbians are seeking nothing more than to be treated like everyone else. They aren't asking the bakers to do anything but their jobs. And still, you blame the victims of intolerance, you blame those denied goods and services because of someone *else's* intolerance.

That's ridiculous.

For decades having to bake a cake for a gay wedding never came up. YOU are asking people to change, not the other way around. It would be like changing a flower shop to a butcher and THEN asking the Buddhist to keep working there.

The gays aren't the cause of the conflict. Ordering a cake from a cake maker is a completely reasonable act. The religiously intolerant baker is the source of the conflict. As denying someone a cake because of their sexual orientation is completely unreasonable. And in many states, against the law.

The ones suing over this and their supporters are asking people to go against their moral code or face government sanction.

They are asking for nothing more or less than that the law be followed. A law that requires that they be treated fairly and equally. Both of which are completely reasonable.

The litigants are the aggressors in this situation, and are the cause. By simply realizing some people will just not approve of their lifestyle and moving on they can eliminate the conflict.

The litigants are seeking redress for the harm caused them by the violations of the law. Its the violations of the law that instigate the situation. If the bakers had not violated the law, there would be no redress to seek.

It begins with the religious intolerance. As you can tell by all the folks who sell cakes to gays for their weddings NOT being sued and NOT having judgments against them.

You are once again blaming the victims. Your argument should come with its own case of Pabst Blue Ribbon and a wife beater T-shirt.

But that requires them to be the "bigger men" and for progressives that seems to be impossible.

It requires nothing more or less than they follow the law. Christians aren't better than the law. They aren't special. They aren't exempt. There isn't a special set of more lenient rules for Christians....and harsher set for everyone else.

Its the same rules for everyone. Which is reasonable.

THE LAW IS FUCKING RETARDED!!!!

end of story.

Treating your customers fairly and equally isn't 'retarded'. Its perfectly reasonable.

 

[PratchettFan]

Respect and acceptance cannot be legislated.

No. But once attained it can be used to cause legislation.

 

[Skylar]

Respect and acceptance cannot be legislated.

No. But once attained it can be used to cause legislation.

Geneally speaking familiarity breeds acceptance. Look at interracial marriage. When the courts overturned the bans, the bans enjoyed 80+ point approval ratings. Yet by the mid 90s, a majority approved. With approval in the mid 70s today.

There are many perspectives that have a literal shelf life. And are culled from our society by the sheer attrition of time.

 

[martybegan]

My opinion on the matter is we are creating to many laws.

A law should be something 99.99% of the people agree to, like murder and rape being bad, not something to force people to kowtow to your moral structure.

You are entitled to your opinion. Other people are entitled to theirs.

The problem is people are turning opinion into punitive laws. At that point it turns from opinion to tyranny.

Most laws are punitive. That is the nature of laws. A valid argument can be made that these laws prevent tyranny. Tyranny is often just a matter of which side of the stick you are standing. If a state decides it wants these laws and those laws are not deemed unconstitutional or fall under federal jurisdiction, then it is up to the state.

in this case the government is going after the baker, thus that is where the tyranny is considering there is no real impact on the people trying to get the cake beyond hurt feeeewwwwiiinnngs.

Nonetheless, its up to the state.

Constitutionally yes, but not if you see Free exercise of religion trumping the ability of a State to regulate commerce within its borders (or the feds regulating it between States)

 

[martybegan]

A Buddhist doesn't WANT to work at a Slaughterhouse or start one. These bakers want to bake cakes, with one exception that does no real harm. I'm sorry, going to another baker isn't harm.

They are subject to the same laws as anyone else. This is the part I don't understand: why Christians believe that they are somehow special and above the law. THat the law that everyone else has to follow doesn't apply to them.

Gays and lesbians are seeking nothing more than to be treated like everyone else. They aren't asking the bakers to do anything but their jobs. And still, you blame the victims of intolerance, you blame those denied goods and services because of someone *else's* intolerance.

That's ridiculous.

For decades having to bake a cake for a gay wedding never came up. YOU are asking people to change, not the other way around. It would be like changing a flower shop to a butcher and THEN asking the Buddhist to keep working there.

The gays aren't the cause of the conflict. Ordering a cake from a cake maker is a completely reasonable act. The religiously intolerant baker is the source of the conflict. As denying someone a cake because of their sexual orientation is completely unreasonable. And in many states, against the law.

The ones suing over this and their supporters are asking people to go against their moral code or face government sanction.

They are asking for nothing more or less than that the law be followed. A law that requires that they be treated fairly and equally. Both of which are completely reasonable.

The litigants are the aggressors in this situation, and are the cause. By simply realizing some people will just not approve of their lifestyle and moving on they can eliminate the conflict.

The litigants are seeking redress for the harm caused them by the violations of the law. Its the violations of the law that instigate the situation. If the bakers had not violated the law, there would be no redress to seek.

It begins with the religious intolerance. As you can tell by all the folks who sell cakes to gays for their weddings NOT being sued and NOT having judgments against them.

You are once again blaming the victims. Your argument should come with its own case of Pabst Blue Ribbon and a wife beater T-shirt.

But that requires them to be the "bigger men" and for progressives that seems to be impossible.

It requires nothing more or less than they follow the law. Christians aren't better than the law. They aren't special. They aren't exempt. There isn't a special set of more lenient rules for Christians....and harsher set for everyone else.

Its the same rules for everyone. Which is reasonable.

THE LAW IS FUCKING RETARDED!!!!

end of story.

Treating your customers fairly and equally isn't 'retarded'. Its perfectly reasonable.

Then ask people to, don't force them over something this stupid.

 

[martybegan]

The difference is progressives run to government to get them to do the dirty work.

So the pro-life people never try to limit abortion using the government? Please.

The difference is they realize they need overwhelming public opinions to get their laws passed. PA laws have mutated over time bureaucratically and judicially from their original intent.

When you try to get abortion restrictions passed, everyone knows the deal, its right there in the open. When PA laws get amended, its cloaked in terms like "fairness" and "equality" where all it really results in one form of butt hurt being made more equal than other form of butt hurt.

No. It is not the difference. It is exactly the same thing. No difference at all. If there is any difference it is a matter of degree. The "progressives" expect someone to sell a cake against their will, the pro-lifers expect someone to carry another human being in their body against their will. That difference in degree is significant. So please don't try to argue it is only one side that is doing this, because that is pure bull dung.

Well considering both sides mostly want women to be "forced" to carry a child past viability that is a matter of degree as well, plus to abortion opponents abortion is a matter of life and death, Not a 1-2 hour increase in needing to find another freaking cake.

All you are doing is justifying doing what you don't like other people doing. There is no difference. Every issue, whether right or left, has got people trying to use the government to impose their position on everyone else. It's called a republic.

Actually I'm not. I would never deny services to a gay couple, I just don't think the government has the right to do it. I wouldn't vote for an abortion ban, but I don't see in the constitution where a State is prevented from doing it if they so choose so legislatively. I support gay marriage legislatively, just not via judicial fiat.

What I actually don't like is people using government to get their results at the expense of others over things not material to the overall well being of society, i.e. I can see forcing a hotel or a gas station to serve everyone who comes through the doors, but just can't see the benefit of forcing a baker to bake a cake.

 

[Skylar]

They are subject to the same laws as anyone else. This is the part I don't understand: why Christians believe that they are somehow special and above the law. THat the law that everyone else has to follow doesn't apply to them.

Gays and lesbians are seeking nothing more than to be treated like everyone else. They aren't asking the bakers to do anything but their jobs. And still, you blame the victims of intolerance, you blame those denied goods and services because of someone *else's* intolerance.

That's ridiculous.

The gays aren't the cause of the conflict. Ordering a cake from a cake maker is a completely reasonable act. The religiously intolerant baker is the source of the conflict. As denying someone a cake because of their sexual orientation is completely unreasonable. And in many states, against the law.

The ones suing over this and their supporters are asking people to go against their moral code or face government sanction.

They are asking for nothing more or less than that the law be followed. A law that requires that they be treated fairly and equally. Both of which are completely reasonable.

The litigants are the aggressors in this situation, and are the cause. By simply realizing some people will just not approve of their lifestyle and moving on they can eliminate the conflict.

The litigants are seeking redress for the harm caused them by the violations of the law. Its the violations of the law that instigate the situation. If the bakers had not violated the law, there would be no redress to seek.

It begins with the religious intolerance. As you can tell by all the folks who sell cakes to gays for their weddings NOT being sued and NOT having judgments against them.

You are once again blaming the victims. Your argument should come with its own case of Pabst Blue Ribbon and a wife beater T-shirt.

But that requires them to be the "bigger men" and for progressives that seems to be impossible.

It requires nothing more or less than they follow the law. Christians aren't better than the law. They aren't special. They aren't exempt. There isn't a special set of more lenient rules for Christians....and harsher set for everyone else.

Its the same rules for everyone. Which is reasonable.

THE LAW IS FUCKING RETARDED!!!!

end of story.

Treating your customers fairly and equally isn't 'retarded'. Its perfectly reasonable.

Then ask people to, don't force them over something this stupid.

Like any law, they aren't for the fair minded and law abiding. But for the handful of chuckle-heads that can meet minimum standards of reasonable behavior unless we require them to.

 

[martybegan]

The ones suing over this and their supporters are asking people to go against their moral code or face government sanction.

They are asking for nothing more or less than that the law be followed. A law that requires that they be treated fairly and equally. Both of which are completely reasonable.

The litigants are the aggressors in this situation, and are the cause. By simply realizing some people will just not approve of their lifestyle and moving on they can eliminate the conflict.

The litigants are seeking redress for the harm caused them by the violations of the law. Its the violations of the law that instigate the situation. If the bakers had not violated the law, there would be no redress to seek.

It begins with the religious intolerance. As you can tell by all the folks who sell cakes to gays for their weddings NOT being sued and NOT having judgments against them.

You are once again blaming the victims. Your argument should come with its own case of Pabst Blue Ribbon and a wife beater T-shirt.

But that requires them to be the "bigger men" and for progressives that seems to be impossible.

It requires nothing more or less than they follow the law. Christians aren't better than the law. They aren't special. They aren't exempt. There isn't a special set of more lenient rules for Christians....and harsher set for everyone else.

Its the same rules for everyone. Which is reasonable.

THE LAW IS FUCKING RETARDED!!!!

end of story.

Treating your customers fairly and equally isn't 'retarded'. Its perfectly reasonable.

Then ask people to, don't force them over something this stupid.

Like any law, they aren't for the fair minded and law abiding. But for the handful of chuckle-heads that can meet minimum standards of reasonable behavior unless we require them to.

Again, when it comes to something this trivial, who the hell are you to decide your morals outweigh theirs? Why does this require infringing on their religious rights, besides, of course, the obvious pleasure you get from crapping on people you don't agree with.