Muslim Bakeries Refuse To Make Gay Wedding Cake...& No Rabid Protests From Liberals?

[bripat9643]

Hmmm . . the law says it's illegal for Muslims to discriminate against queers. So your distinction is irrelevant.

What specific law?

The law that says Christian bakers have to bake a wedding cake for queers, obviously. If it wasn't for that law, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

WHAT specific law - you are being awfully vague.

You aren't as ignorant as you're pretending to be.

What law are you referring to?

Here are what I find in terms of cases involving lawsuits related to same sex marriage accommodations:
Court Rules Bakery Illegally Discriminated Against Gay Couple - ACLU - Colorado
Sweet Cakes by Melissa Didn’t Just Deny a Lesbian Couple Service, They Also Doxxed Them and Their Kids

These seem to be state law specific.

Yes, they are state laws. So?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

It's been reported homos deliberately sought out Christians. The fact remains the Muslims refused, you cannot condemn the Christians and not condemn the Muslims.

That is what I said - it's wrong to deliberately seek out someone in order to have them refuse you. IT DOESN"T MATTER WHAT RELIGION THEY ARE.

So condemn the Muslims.....waiting

I thought I did. I'll dumb it down.

If a same sex couple seeks out a wedding cake from a Muslim baker, and is refused - I condemn that Muslim baker.
If a same sex couple seeks out a wedding cake from a Christian baker, and is refused - I condemn that Christian baker.

If a person claiming to be a participant in a same sex wedding seeks out a Muslim baker, and in order to be refused and is refused - I condemn that person, not the baker.
If a person claiming to be a participant in a same sex wedding seeks out a Christian baker, and in order to be refused and is refused - I condemn that person, not the baker.

Does that clarify my stance on this sufficiently?

You couldn't just say the Muslim was wrong? Personally I support the Muslim in this case. That may very well be the first and only time I do

You'll only support a Muslim's right to be a bigot.

That is priceless.

I support religious freedom, of course you being a low info dumbass can't grasp it. Stop bothering me with your infantile nonsense

 

[Coyote]

Kind of looks like a "set up" situation doesn't it?

Someone deliberately looking for a baker of a specific religion in order to be refused?

Muslim bakers are most likely a tiny minority in this country, the vast majority are Christian. That's likely why less fuss is heard. The Muslim community is also much more conservative - I doubt a gay couple would look to a Muslim baker for their cake. Did this person SUE them? Has anyone sued a Muslim baker?

A baker that serves the public, should serve the public - regardless of who the wedding participants are as long as they can pay for the service and the requested item is within their ability to make. I don't think they should be forced to make anything lewd or pornographic.

Aside from that - there has also been a rash of cases of couples supposedly getting married and deliberately seeking out vendors they KNOW will be hostile to same-sex arrangements. I think that is wrong - maybe not legally wrong, but ethically wrong. In the original case, the couple sought out a baker they had used many times before and had good arrangements with, so they had the expectation their service would similarly be welcomed not rebuffed. Some of these other cases smack of set ups.

Conservative 'Comedian' Pretends to Be Gay, Asks Muslim Bakeries for Gay Wedding Cakes

Unfortunately for his thesis, several bakeries agreed to make the cake. At least according to his blog. But showcased are three bakeries that did not.​

That is the purpose and technique of a sting type operation.

The purpose of a sting operation is done by law enforcement to catch someone breaking the law.
Was that the purpose here?

There is what is legally right, and there is what is ethically right - they don't always mesh.

If you do not like the word "sting" you can substitute whatever term suits you the result is the same. It is either wrong for everyone to refuse to make gay cakes or it is o for everyone to refuse to make gay cakes, not just some.

Agree, in terms of the law.

But is it right to seek out and entrap someone for that purpose (regardless of their religion)?

There are real live homosexuals in Dearborn, MI and they could go to a Muslim bakery and file a federal discrimination lawsuit when and if they were refused. The intent to entrap would have to be proven, and that would be extremely difficult..

From what I understand in reading about these cases - the laws in question are not federal, but state laws. From what Bodecea said - Michigan does not have that law.

I think entrapment is very dicey.

 

[bripat9643]

It's been reported homos deliberately sought out Christians. The fact remains the Muslims refused, you cannot condemn the Christians and not condemn the Muslims.

That is what I said - it's wrong to deliberately seek out someone in order to have them refuse you. IT DOESN"T MATTER WHAT RELIGION THEY ARE.

So condemn the Muslims.....waiting

I thought I did. I'll dumb it down.

If a same sex couple seeks out a wedding cake from a Muslim baker, and is refused - I condemn that Muslim baker.
If a same sex couple seeks out a wedding cake from a Christian baker, and is refused - I condemn that Christian baker.

If a person claiming to be a participant in a same sex wedding seeks out a Muslim baker, and in order to be refused and is refused - I condemn that person, not the baker.
If a person claiming to be a participant in a same sex wedding seeks out a Christian baker, and in order to be refused and is refused - I condemn that person, not the baker.

Does that clarify my stance on this sufficiently?

You couldn't just say the Muslim was wrong? Personally I support the Muslim in this case. That may very well be the first and only time I do

You'll only support a Muslim's right to be a bigot.

That is priceless.

No, you and your ilk are the ones who support the Muslim's right to be a bigot.

 

[Coyote]

What specific law?

The law that says Christian bakers have to bake a wedding cake for queers, obviously. If it wasn't for that law, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

WHAT specific law - you are being awfully vague.

You aren't as ignorant as you're pretending to be.

What law are you referring to?

Here are what I find in terms of cases involving lawsuits related to same sex marriage accommodations:
Court Rules Bakery Illegally Discriminated Against Gay Couple - ACLU - Colorado
Sweet Cakes by Melissa Didn’t Just Deny a Lesbian Couple Service, They Also Doxxed Them and Their Kids

These seem to be state law specific.

Yes, they are state laws. So?

What's Michigan's law?

 

[bripat9643]

That is the purpose and technique of a sting type operation.

The purpose of a sting operation is done by law enforcement to catch someone breaking the law.
Was that the purpose here?

There is what is legally right, and there is what is ethically right - they don't always mesh.

If you do not like the word "sting" you can substitute whatever term suits you the result is the same. It is either wrong for everyone to refuse to make gay cakes or it is o for everyone to refuse to make gay cakes, not just some.

Agree, in terms of the law.

But is it right to seek out and entrap someone for that purpose (regardless of their religion)?

There are real live homosexuals in Dearborn, MI and they could go to a Muslim bakery and file a federal discrimination lawsuit when and if they were refused. The intent to entrap would have to be proven, and that would be extremely difficult..

From what I understand in reading about these cases - the laws in question are not federal, but state laws. From what Bodecea said - Michigan does not have that law.

I think entrapment is very dicey.

Do you support or oppose such laws?

 

[NYcarbineer]

That is what I said - it's wrong to deliberately seek out someone in order to have them refuse you. IT DOESN"T MATTER WHAT RELIGION THEY ARE.

So condemn the Muslims.....waiting

I thought I did. I'll dumb it down.

If a same sex couple seeks out a wedding cake from a Muslim baker, and is refused - I condemn that Muslim baker.
If a same sex couple seeks out a wedding cake from a Christian baker, and is refused - I condemn that Christian baker.

If a person claiming to be a participant in a same sex wedding seeks out a Muslim baker, and in order to be refused and is refused - I condemn that person, not the baker.
If a person claiming to be a participant in a same sex wedding seeks out a Christian baker, and in order to be refused and is refused - I condemn that person, not the baker.

Does that clarify my stance on this sufficiently?

You couldn't just say the Muslim was wrong? Personally I support the Muslim in this case. That may very well be the first and only time I do

You'll only support a Muslim's right to be a bigot.

That is priceless.

No, you and your ilk are the ones who support the Muslim's right to be a bigot.

Prove it.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

The law that says Christian bakers have to bake a wedding cake for queers, obviously. If it wasn't for that law, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

WHAT specific law - you are being awfully vague.

You aren't as ignorant as you're pretending to be.

What law are you referring to?

Here are what I find in terms of cases involving lawsuits related to same sex marriage accommodations:
Court Rules Bakery Illegally Discriminated Against Gay Couple - ACLU - Colorado
Sweet Cakes by Melissa Didn’t Just Deny a Lesbian Couple Service, They Also Doxxed Them and Their Kids

These seem to be state law specific.

Yes, they are state laws. So?

What's Michigan's law?

Indiana has no PA laws....that didn't stop the left from going after the pizza joint did it?

 

[Coyote]

In a legal sense - no. But in an ethical sense - is it right to deliberately seek out someone to refuse you? Christian or Muslim?

It's been reported homos deliberately sought out Christians. The fact remains the Muslims refused, you cannot condemn the Christians and not condemn the Muslims.

That is what I said - it's wrong to deliberately seek out someone in order to have them refuse you. IT DOESN"T MATTER WHAT RELIGION THEY ARE.

So condemn the Muslims.....waiting

I thought I did. I'll dumb it down.

If a same sex couple seeks out a wedding cake from a Muslim baker, and is refused - I condemn that Muslim baker.
If a same sex couple seeks out a wedding cake from a Christian baker, and is refused - I condemn that Christian baker.

If a person claiming to be a participant in a same sex wedding seeks out a Muslim baker, and in order to be refused and is refused - I condemn that person, not the baker.
If a person claiming to be a participant in a same sex wedding seeks out a Christian baker, and in order to be refused and is refused - I condemn that person, not the baker.

Does that clarify my stance on this sufficiently?

You couldn't just say the Muslim was wrong? Personally I support the Muslim in this case. That may very well be the first and only time I do

No. Because it is NOT black and white to me. I don't support unlimited religious freedom - no right is unlimited. While I realize that this would have no application, in law - from an ethical standpoint, I think entrapping people just to publically villify their religious beliefs is wrong.

 

[bripat9643]

So condemn the Muslims.....waiting

I thought I did. I'll dumb it down.

If a same sex couple seeks out a wedding cake from a Muslim baker, and is refused - I condemn that Muslim baker.
If a same sex couple seeks out a wedding cake from a Christian baker, and is refused - I condemn that Christian baker.

If a person claiming to be a participant in a same sex wedding seeks out a Muslim baker, and in order to be refused and is refused - I condemn that person, not the baker.
If a person claiming to be a participant in a same sex wedding seeks out a Christian baker, and in order to be refused and is refused - I condemn that person, not the baker.

Does that clarify my stance on this sufficiently?

You couldn't just say the Muslim was wrong? Personally I support the Muslim in this case. That may very well be the first and only time I do

You'll only support a Muslim's right to be a bigot.

That is priceless.

No, you and your ilk are the ones who support the Muslim's right to be a bigot.

Prove it.

Just read posts by Coyote.

 

[Alex.]

That is the purpose and technique of a sting type operation.

The purpose of a sting operation is done by law enforcement to catch someone breaking the law.
Was that the purpose here?

There is what is legally right, and there is what is ethically right - they don't always mesh.

If you do not like the word "sting" you can substitute whatever term suits you the result is the same. It is either wrong for everyone to refuse to make gay cakes or it is o for everyone to refuse to make gay cakes, not just some.

Agree, in terms of the law.

But is it right to seek out and entrap someone for that purpose (regardless of their religion)?

Entrapment Defined

Full Definition of entrapment

1. 1 a : the action or process of entrapping b : the condition of being entrapped
   
   
2. 2 : the action of luring an individual into committing a crime in order to prosecute the person for it

Yes it is in this situation, equal application of a standard must be accomplished no matter the means.

But did that happen in this situation?

I think that is ethically wrong - unless there is reason to believe that person had already committed crimes.

It may be but do you believe this practice should be wiped out?

 

[bripat9643]

It's been reported homos deliberately sought out Christians. The fact remains the Muslims refused, you cannot condemn the Christians and not condemn the Muslims.

That is what I said - it's wrong to deliberately seek out someone in order to have them refuse you. IT DOESN"T MATTER WHAT RELIGION THEY ARE.

So condemn the Muslims.....waiting

I thought I did. I'll dumb it down.

If a same sex couple seeks out a wedding cake from a Muslim baker, and is refused - I condemn that Muslim baker.
If a same sex couple seeks out a wedding cake from a Christian baker, and is refused - I condemn that Christian baker.

If a person claiming to be a participant in a same sex wedding seeks out a Muslim baker, and in order to be refused and is refused - I condemn that person, not the baker.
If a person claiming to be a participant in a same sex wedding seeks out a Christian baker, and in order to be refused and is refused - I condemn that person, not the baker.

Does that clarify my stance on this sufficiently?

You couldn't just say the Muslim was wrong? Personally I support the Muslim in this case. That may very well be the first and only time I do

No. Because it is NOT black and white to me. I don't support unlimited religious freedom - no right is unlimited. While I realize that this would have no application, in law - from an ethical standpoint, I think entrapping people just to publically villify their religious beliefs is wrong.

That's a weasel.

 

[Coyote]

The purpose of a sting operation is done by law enforcement to catch someone breaking the law.
Was that the purpose here?

There is what is legally right, and there is what is ethically right - they don't always mesh.

If you do not like the word "sting" you can substitute whatever term suits you the result is the same. It is either wrong for everyone to refuse to make gay cakes or it is o for everyone to refuse to make gay cakes, not just some.

Agree, in terms of the law.

But is it right to seek out and entrap someone for that purpose (regardless of their religion)?

There are real live homosexuals in Dearborn, MI and they could go to a Muslim bakery and file a federal discrimination lawsuit when and if they were refused. The intent to entrap would have to be proven, and that would be extremely difficult..

From what I understand in reading about these cases - the laws in question are not federal, but state laws. From what Bodecea said - Michigan does not have that law.

I think entrapment is very dicey.

Do you support or oppose such laws?

I support them.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

It's been reported homos deliberately sought out Christians. The fact remains the Muslims refused, you cannot condemn the Christians and not condemn the Muslims.

That is what I said - it's wrong to deliberately seek out someone in order to have them refuse you. IT DOESN"T MATTER WHAT RELIGION THEY ARE.

So condemn the Muslims.....waiting

I thought I did. I'll dumb it down.

If a same sex couple seeks out a wedding cake from a Muslim baker, and is refused - I condemn that Muslim baker.
If a same sex couple seeks out a wedding cake from a Christian baker, and is refused - I condemn that Christian baker.

If a person claiming to be a participant in a same sex wedding seeks out a Muslim baker, and in order to be refused and is refused - I condemn that person, not the baker.
If a person claiming to be a participant in a same sex wedding seeks out a Christian baker, and in order to be refused and is refused - I condemn that person, not the baker.

Does that clarify my stance on this sufficiently?

You couldn't just say the Muslim was wrong? Personally I support the Muslim in this case. That may very well be the first and only time I do

No. Because it is NOT black and white to me. I don't support unlimited religious freedom - no right is unlimited. While I realize that this would have no application, in law - from an ethical standpoint, I think entrapping people just to publically villify their religious beliefs is wrong.

You're focusing on entrapment to avoid condemnation. Sort of. The fact is nobody can wail about one group refusing and remaining silent when another refuses. Forget law...that's just common sense

 

[bripat9643]

If you do not like the word "sting" you can substitute whatever term suits you the result is the same. It is either wrong for everyone to refuse to make gay cakes or it is o for everyone to refuse to make gay cakes, not just some.

Agree, in terms of the law.

But is it right to seek out and entrap someone for that purpose (regardless of their religion)?

There are real live homosexuals in Dearborn, MI and they could go to a Muslim bakery and file a federal discrimination lawsuit when and if they were refused. The intent to entrap would have to be proven, and that would be extremely difficult..

From what I understand in reading about these cases - the laws in question are not federal, but state laws. From what Bodecea said - Michigan does not have that law.

I think entrapment is very dicey.

Do you support or oppose such laws?

I support them.

Then you should be condemning these Muslim bakers rather than making excuses for their bigotry.

 

[Zander]

I think all bakers (and all businesses) should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

Here's your cake!

 

[pwjohn]

Ok, everyone knows the story of the Christian-owned bakery whose owners refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding. They argued businesses should / do have the right to refuse to support certain events when those events are against their religious or moral beliefs.

Liberals saw things differently, people lost their minds, Christians were demonized, the govt got involved, and they wanted to force the owners to make the cake or be punished.

So, did / are they getting fair and equal treatment?

Didja hear about the Muslim bakarieS (yes, plural) that refuse to make same-Sex wedding cakes? Of course you didn't! My phone won't allow me to post the specific link, but - if you aren't lazy - go to LouderwithCrowder.com and watch the video of this guy going into numerous Muslim bakeries and getting rejected everytime he asked them to make a same-sex wedding cake.

Funny, you would think this would be all over the news and that Obama & his DOJ would be all over this, right?

The libs & govt aren't all over this because they believe in appeasing Muslims while targeting Christians unfairly. Why? Maybe 1 reason is they know, unlike with Christians, Muslims (Islamic Extremists) will cut your head off or blow your ass up if you mess with them

This isn't a major problem anyway because hardly any homosexuals go into Muslim bakeries. Why? Because they know these same people burn, behead, and hang gays in their country where they came from. So if they don't want to serve gays, no problem - just stay the hell away from them, leave them alone, and 'pick' on the Christians. They are easier targets...

Why exactly won't your phone post the link? Why not use your computer instead to post the link?

 

[Coyote]

The purpose of a sting operation is done by law enforcement to catch someone breaking the law.
Was that the purpose here?

There is what is legally right, and there is what is ethically right - they don't always mesh.

If you do not like the word "sting" you can substitute whatever term suits you the result is the same. It is either wrong for everyone to refuse to make gay cakes or it is o for everyone to refuse to make gay cakes, not just some.

Agree, in terms of the law.

But is it right to seek out and entrap someone for that purpose (regardless of their religion)?

Entrapment Defined

Full Definition of entrapment

1. 1 a : the action or process of entrapping b : the condition of being entrapped
   
   
2. 2 : the action of luring an individual into committing a crime in order to prosecute the person for it

Yes it is in this situation, equal application of a standard must be accomplished no matter the means.

But did that happen in this situation?

I think that is ethically wrong - unless there is reason to believe that person had already committed crimes.

It may be but do you believe this practice should be wiped out?

Yes, but I'm on the fence a bit. I prefer it to be wiped out through cultural change and education. At some point - laws have to be introduced: legalizing gay marriage, prohibiting discrimmination in housing, jobs, etc based on gender, race, religion, ethnicity, etc. to start the process. It's what had to happen with segregation, etc.

But these are small communities, small time family run operations - is it right to entrap them in this manner?

 

[Coyote]

That is what I said - it's wrong to deliberately seek out someone in order to have them refuse you. IT DOESN"T MATTER WHAT RELIGION THEY ARE.

So condemn the Muslims.....waiting

I thought I did. I'll dumb it down.

If a same sex couple seeks out a wedding cake from a Muslim baker, and is refused - I condemn that Muslim baker.
If a same sex couple seeks out a wedding cake from a Christian baker, and is refused - I condemn that Christian baker.

If a person claiming to be a participant in a same sex wedding seeks out a Muslim baker, and in order to be refused and is refused - I condemn that person, not the baker.
If a person claiming to be a participant in a same sex wedding seeks out a Christian baker, and in order to be refused and is refused - I condemn that person, not the baker.

Does that clarify my stance on this sufficiently?

You couldn't just say the Muslim was wrong? Personally I support the Muslim in this case. That may very well be the first and only time I do

No. Because it is NOT black and white to me. I don't support unlimited religious freedom - no right is unlimited. While I realize that this would have no application, in law - from an ethical standpoint, I think entrapping people just to publically villify their religious beliefs is wrong.

That's a weasel.

Do you think entrapment is ok?

 

[Skylar]

HIDDEN CAM: #GayWeddingCakes at Muslim Bakeries?

There are at least half a dozen threads on this topic already. All citing the same video.