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

[Seawytch]

They are demanding a special cake, created specifically for a particular event. An artistic creation. Have you ever planned a wedding?? I have. One of the things you do is meet with the baker to see if they can create what you want..and to see if they are willing to do it. I am so si k of lazy ass, stupid entitlement whores going to the mat to force people to serve them.

Sounds like we are in agreement here. They are purchasing a WEDDING CAKE - something that company is know to provide. They're asking for the same sort of service a heterosexual couple asks for. They're not asking for a wedding pie, or a crown roast.

You people are so inutterably lazy and stupid it makes me despair. You use the feds as your personal bank and your goon squad...apparently completely oblivious to the fact that when they have enough authority, they will come for you first. Once the feeder class has served its purpose, it is slaughtered. This has happened time and time again with fas ist regimes....and you're still too stupid to see it. If you spent even half the time you spend on this site actually researching history (and not history from ideologues), you would know this. If you spent any time researching our COUNTRY'S history, you would know this.

But you're so stupid, lazy, and brainwashed that you can't. Which pisses me off because it puts me in the uncomfortable position of wishing the feds would just go ahead and start culling. You're such a moron you will (and have) defend the rightness of such action.

sheep.

No, they want a special weddi g cake, made specifically for this event.

You're so stupid it gives me a headache.

They want a service routinely provided to weddings by that company. You're trying very hard to split hairs on this aren't you?

Which has nothing to do with public accomkodation laws.

I notice a few of the loons keep harping about Michigan having no PA laws....that's great so any state that doesn't have PA laws can tell the homos to pound sand and when they do we don't want to hear one fucking syllable of whines...oh wait Indiana doesn't have PA laws and they lost their minds over the pizza place refusing an accommodation. Perhaps they should just shut their pie holes and cease digging the hole they are

I've also noticed they haven't condemned the Muslims for refusing...this thread didn't bode well for the Islamapologists

What it means is that the individual can't sue if there are no laws. That doesn't mean we can't fight to get these laws and it doesn't mean that when states like Indiana, Georgia, North Carolina, Mississippi, etc. try to pass anti gay laws that we can't protest them.

Here you go: I Seawytch hereby condemn Muslims for killing gays and for not serving them in their establishments...of course the 1st part happens in other countries, not the US and the 2nd only happens in SassyGunSlingers mind. Oh well...

 

[bodecea]

And the courts and legislation concur.

you forgot t mention that the concurring was due the same type of people..... QWEERS!!!

Isn't it amazing that for 2 - 5% of the population how much control we have over the courts and legislatures?

 

[bodecea]

And we worked thru the legal system to have laws we considered unjust repealed or struck down in court. We worked long and hard for that victory. If gay people in America had just sat at our computers and whined about unfair laws instead of actually working to get the laws changed, gay sex would probably still be illegal and we'd probably still get fired for being gay everywhere. The power of Political Action!

You mean the power of perversion and bad conduct. Like I said there was no discrimination in the laws.

I get that you don't like to think that Gay Americans are equal citizens with you. Bummer for you.

BS, they've always been equal, equal wasn't good enough. I'm getting tired of nudist being discriminated against, after all, weren't we all born that way? So come on and try to lecture me on social norms, I dare ya.

Oh we were equal when we could be fired for being gay?
We were equal when we couldn't serve openly in the military?
We were equal when we couldn't marry the one we love?
We were equal when we could legally have our children taken from us or we could not adopt?

Conduct has consequences, if you keep your conduct private, guess what, no consequences. Gay or straight is conduct, a conscious choice, and we discriminate against undesirable conduct all the time. BTW why did you not address my concern, are you afraid any thing you say will undermine your own positions?

I agree that conduct has consequences.....Sweet Cakes Bakery broke the law with their conduct and are paying the consequences.

 

[bodecea]

I get that you don't like to think that Gay Americans are equal citizens with you. Bummer for you.

BS, they've always been equal, equal wasn't good enough. I'm getting tired of nudist being discriminated against, after all, weren't we all born that way? So come on and try to lecture me on social norms, I dare ya.

Oh we were equal when we could be fired for being gay?
We were equal when we couldn't serve openly in the military?
We were equal when we couldn't marry the one we love?
We were equal when we could legally have our children taken from us or we could not adopt?

Your perception of "equal" is seriously flawed. Maybe you need to go back to junior high.

Nope...I'm spot on. And the courts and legislation concur.

Feel free to intentionally misinterpret the law in order to further a disingenuous agenda.

I don't misinterpret any law here. I'm not the one (as some here) who are confused over states (Oregon/Michigan) and what their PA laws state.

 

[bodecea]

When a state law is enacted, the state is responsible for enforcing it.

Then why can NC enforce theirs? When any law is passed, whether it be one you like or don't, the state is obligated to enforce it, correct?

I believe NC will be enforcing theirs. I look forward to someone like this....

walking into the womens' room in NC because he was born female and has that on his birth certificate.

Let them enforce.....until action is taken to get the law repealed........WHICH IS...what I've been telling posters all along is what they should do with PA laws they don't like.

That is exactly what we're trying to do.

Well, good then. If you are actively working to repeal laws thru petitions, protests, letters to your Congressman, $ to the appropriate lobby groups, then you are doing it the right way. I wish you luck.

Who put you in charge of what the "right way" is, and why should I give a flying fuck?

I'm not in charge of "the right way".....the way legal change is affected in this country was established by our Forefathers.

 

[bodecea]

Why would there be protests? You know that it's not against the law there....Right?

Which is why the left should be on the march. NC recently said people had religious freedom and the left is having a shit fit. All because they say men go to men's restrooms and women use the women's restroom. Many places have had restrooms that allow family members to use when they need to help members of the opposite sex.

The transgenders need to give up the bathroom fight. When choosing between men's and women's restroom, choose by how you look. I don't want to share a restroom or locker room with some burly guy and I damn sure don't want my daughter having to deal with that.

I'm sure there are groups working to add sexual orientation to Michigan (and other states) PA laws. I don't hear about it because I'm not a citizen of Michigan....and as for NC....I would say that there's a pretty healthy attempt to get that law struck down as we speak.....don't you think?

 

[bodecea]

You can assume nothing. I'm asking you, and you keep ignoring the question, what YOU are personally doing to get rid of PA laws beyond bitching about state and local laws on a message board. You oppose PA laws, but have you called your Senator and Congresscritter and demanded they repeal Title II of the CRA? That's the law that requires that I, a gay person, serve a Christian in all 50 states.

I will continue to ignore any questions about my personal life. What I do is none of your business. So stop asking me or I'll report you to the mods, asshole.

So if you don't want me assuming, I'll ask you. Do you support laws that punish a person for choosing not to engage in trade with someone?

But how do you know if you're doing the right things in life if you don't tell Seawytch so she can determine that and inform you if what you are doing is adequate or not? I mean she is the standard, she says so

Well, you're obviously doing it wrong. Gays are getting married just like straight folks (despite your "educating them) and in some places you have to serve them, just like you have to serve black folks. (Oh and a majority of Americans support adding gay folks to PA laws, not getting rid of all of them) oopsie!

You really suck at this educating thing I reckon.

Swish, complete evasion. You asked me why I haven't personally changed the PA law. I asked you for an example of how you met your standard. What laws have you personally changed, the standard you hold me to.

Man up, Charlie. Your standard, you demonstrate how you've done it

I don't expect you do it all by yourself Kazzie, but I would think you'd do something beyond whining on an internet message board, but that's all you've got.

I mean, sure, you could call your congressman, but you know you'd get laughed at for suggesting a repeal of Title II of the CRA. We already know what happened to Rand when he suggested in on Rachel Maddow...he now pretends he never suggested it.

Kind of like how gays felt when they called their congresscritters demanding that DOMA or DADT be repealed back in the day... but we didn't give up and just whine about it on a message board. We went out and fought for it. We raised money, we made phone calls, we even went door to door.

But how are those opposed to PA laws fighting them? Are they going after the granddaddy of all PA laws? No, they bitch and moan about "Christian persecution" because 50 year old laws also include "the gheys" in some places.

Whine away Kaz old boy, it's as effective as...

^ This

 

[bodecea]

When choosing between men's and women's restroom, choose by how you look.

Choose by how you look? So "manly looking" women have to use the men's room?

North Carolina took away the ability to "choose by how you look" and now require (by law) that this guy use the women's restroom because 1) He has a vagina and 2) It says "girl" on his birth certificate.

Apparently, this is what NC wants.....in fact, if any Trans person is in NC, this law now FORCES them to go into the public bathroom that will cause quite a stir.

 

[bodecea]

Sounds like we are in agreement here. They are purchasing a WEDDING CAKE - something that company is know to provide. They're asking for the same sort of service a heterosexual couple asks for. They're not asking for a wedding pie, or a crown roast.

No, they want a special weddi g cake, made specifically for this event.

You're so stupid it gives me a headache.

They want a service routinely provided to weddings by that company. You're trying very hard to split hairs on this aren't you?

Which has nothing to do with public accomkodation laws.

I notice a few of the loons keep harping about Michigan having no PA laws....that's great so any state that doesn't have PA laws can tell the homos to pound sand and when they do we don't want to hear one fucking syllable of whines...oh wait Indiana doesn't have PA laws and they lost their minds over the pizza place refusing an accommodation. Perhaps they should just shut their pie holes and cease digging the hole they are

I've also noticed they haven't condemned the Muslims for refusing...this thread didn't bode well for the Islamapologists

What it means is that the individual can't sue if there are no laws. That doesn't mean we can't fight to get these laws and it doesn't mean that when states like Indiana, Georgia, North Carolina, Mississippi, etc. try to pass anti gay laws that we can't protest them.

Here you go: I Seawytch hereby condemn Muslims for killing gays and for not serving them in their establishments...of course the 1st part happens in other countries, not the US and the 2nd only happens in SassyGunSlingers mind. Oh well...

I also stated earlier in this thread (apparently Bi-Catfish didn't bother to look) that a muslim baker refusing to serve is wrong and I'm sure that there are those trying to change the PA laws in Michigan (and in Indiana) to include sexual orientation.....we just don't hear about it because we don't live in those states.

 

[my2¢]

If I were a baker I'd bake the cake. But that's me, I think God would want me to and it's for Him to decide somewhat like when Christ saved the life of a prostitute from being stoned by asking that the initial one be tossed by somebody without sin.

Still I enjoyed the video and agree with the presenter's attitude and respect the rights of the shop owners. The best point on the subject that I've heard was on a religious radio station when a preacher related the refusal of service with a tattoo artist having the right to not draw white supremacy and Nazi symbols because of personal beliefs.

In regards to the lack of protests though I'll defend liberals somewhat because there really isn't any victim in the video, the situation was staged for media.

 

[NoNukes]

How come none of you are defending the Muslim bakers the way you would defend a Christian baker?

 

[bodecea]

How come none of you are defending the Muslim bakers the way you would defend a Christian baker?

Excellent question....you'd think they would ESPECIALLY since the muslim bakers aren't breaking any laws while the christer bakers are.

 

[kaz]

Yes. I can't hit you with sticks and stones, but I can call you names...

Can you threaten me with burning crosses on my lawn, graffitti on my house, and death threats?

What about if you go to Starbucks in Florida and we scream at you, does that work?

You have this thing about Starbucks.....and Florida....and screaming.




Odd.

You post constantly on a political message board and you don't know anything about what's going on in politics. I'd say "odd" but it's not, you're just stupid and uninformed

I don't live in Florida and I rarely go to Starbucks and I don't scream. So...tell me why there is a requirement for me to know what you are talking about?

Follow the news and read this message board

 

[kaz]

Unconstitutional laws constitute lawlessness. Now you're just chasing your tail, peon.

This is as ignorant as it is wrong.

State public accommodations laws are in fact Constitutional:

‘As we have pointed out, 32 States now have [public accommodations laws] and no case has been cited to us where the attack on a state statute has been successful, either in federal or state courts. Indeed, in some cases, the Due Process and Equal Protection Clause objections have been specifically discarded in this Court. Bob-Lo Excursion Co. v. Michigan, 333 U.S. 28, 34 n. 12 (1948). As a result, the constitutionality of such state statutes stands unquestioned. "The authority of the Federal Government over interstate commerce does not differ," it was held in United States v. Rock Royal Co-op., Inc., 307 U.S. 533 (1939), "in extent or character from that retained by the states over intrastate commerce." At 569-570. See also Bowles v. Willingham, 321 U.S. 503 (1944).'

Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States

Public accommodations laws are necessary, proper, and Constitutional as authorized by the Commerce Clause.

And again, as you have demonstrated in post after post exhibiting your bigotry and hate toward gay Americans, such laws are very much necessary and proper.

What does going to the baker down the street have to do with interstate commerce?

It has to do with equal protection under the law. States can't have discriminatory laws that violate the Constitution.

You mean your version of the Constitution. Involuntary servitude violates the Constitution also.

So...your version of the Constitution doesn't have the 14th Amendment?

Once again a sad government school graduate. The 14th amendment is a LIMIT on government, not a power of government. Why don't you people want your kids to get a better education than you got? The Constitution limits government's actions against it's citizens, it isn't a power to compel it's citizens to do things like bake each other cakes

 

[kaz]

Can you threaten me with burning crosses on my lawn, graffitti on my house, and death threats?

What about if you go to Starbucks in Florida and we scream at you, does that work?

You have this thing about Starbucks.....and Florida....and screaming.




Odd.

You post constantly on a political message board and you don't know anything about what's going on in politics. I'd say "odd" but it's not, you're just stupid and uninformed

I don't live in Florida and I rarely go to Starbucks and I don't scream. So...tell me why there is a requirement for me to know what you are talking about?

Follow the news and read this message board

BTW, You could also google the words I gave you, "Florida Starbucks scream"

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is as ignorant as it is wrong.

State public accommodations laws are in fact Constitutional:

‘As we have pointed out, 32 States now have [public accommodations laws] and no case has been cited to us where the attack on a state statute has been successful, either in federal or state courts. Indeed, in some cases, the Due Process and Equal Protection Clause objections have been specifically discarded in this Court. Bob-Lo Excursion Co. v. Michigan, 333 U.S. 28, 34 n. 12 (1948). As a result, the constitutionality of such state statutes stands unquestioned. "The authority of the Federal Government over interstate commerce does not differ," it was held in United States v. Rock Royal Co-op., Inc., 307 U.S. 533 (1939), "in extent or character from that retained by the states over intrastate commerce." At 569-570. See also Bowles v. Willingham, 321 U.S. 503 (1944).'

Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States

Public accommodations laws are necessary, proper, and Constitutional as authorized by the Commerce Clause.

And again, as you have demonstrated in post after post exhibiting your bigotry and hate toward gay Americans, such laws are very much necessary and proper.

What does going to the baker down the street have to do with interstate commerce?

It has to do with equal protection under the law. States can't have discriminatory laws that violate the Constitution.

You mean your version of the Constitution. Involuntary servitude violates the Constitution also.

So...your version of the Constitution doesn't have the 14th Amendment?

Once again a sad government school graduate. The 14th amendment is a LIMIT on government, not a power of government. Why don't you people want your kids to get a better education than you got? The Constitution limits government's actions against it's citizens, it isn't a power to compel it's citizens to do things like bake each other cakes

Wrong again. The 14th gives the government the power to enforce equal protection under the law.

 

[Katzndogz]

How come none of you are defending the Muslim bakers the way you would defend a Christian baker?

Excellent question....you'd think they would ESPECIALLY since the muslim bakers aren't breaking any laws while the christer bakers are.

We are too busy laughing at liberal hypocrisy and duplicity.

Liberals would have no problem with the muzz throwing gays off buildings if the muzz killed Christians. Gays are the lib sacrifice.

 

[kaz]

I think government should not compel any citizen to do business with another citizen. Explain what's "exempt" about that standard.

Stop being an idiot

Then work to get rid of PA laws.

I am you stupid dyke, how many times do I need to explain that to you? Do you have a learning disability? Do you have a learning disability? Do you have a learning disability? Do you have a learning disability? Did I ask you that question before? No?

And why do you have to be rude? What is it exactly you are doing to get rid of PA laws in your state? Tell us.

Oh, and I do apologize if you have told us in the past....I've missed it....could you link or point out where you did so?

He's rude because you're a dingbat who refuses to give a straight answer to a straight question. Dodging, dancing and weaseling and running away are your stock in trade.

I see that you insult instead of debate civilly too. Speaking of dodging...notice how Kaz claims to have answered my question about what she is doing to get rid of PA laws in her state....and yet cannot show me where she made that answer. Perhaps you've seen it and can point it out to me? Be a pal and point it out.

Every time you ask me what protesting I'm doing, I tell you I think that people need to be persuaded, not have some dumb ass like you, Seahag and the Florida bitch scream in their face. I tell you that over and over and over and over and over, and you keep coming back with assigning me the task of grabbing a sign and acting like a jackass like you and your liberal brethren following Trump, Scott and other Republicans around. Then again our goal is different. I want to change minds. You want to intimidate your opposition into silence.

Then you say I haven't answered your question? You are one ... stupid ... dyke. When you process my answer and incorporate my answer into your rhetoric rather than ignoring it like a gnat, then you can whine if I'm rude. And unlike you, I have actually changed minds. A lot of people both on boards and in real life who never questioned things like income taxes and government marriage have told me they are at least open to that now. You've persuaded no one, just silenced them

 

[Papageorgio]

Because *you* seem to have this misguided idea that rights are unlimited

So, if I'm to extrapolate from your assertion...

That means you have the idea that rights should be regulated? Please by all means correct me if I'm wrong.

Regulated? If that is what you call placing limitations on rights, then yes.

I do not believe the right of free speech means you can slander, libel or create public panic.

I do not believe the right to freedom of religion should include forcing those religious values on anyone else.

I do not believe the right to assembly includes leading lynch mob.

All of our rights have limitations.

Do you think they should be unlimited?

Forcing beliefs on another. That is what many groups and even the government has been doing. Religion is nothing but a belief system, we all follow a religion of some sort.

Definition of religion
: the belief in a god or in a group of gods
: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods
: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group

So forcing beliefs on another is wrong and this is my issue with many of the government laws forcing people to accept others beliefs.

 

[kaz]

Its a cake people, there lots of bakeries. Find one that wants to make it, pay for it and eat it already.

I can sympathize with being rebuffed. A wedding is a huge deal and it's an emotional deal. It's an even huger deal when it's something that's been long denied to you. You should be able to have a reasonable expectation of being treated like any other customer looking for the same product. Now if the person went looking for a refusal, I'd have no sympathy but that isn't the case in the Oregon case.

Making a purchase in a retail store is different than having someone cater an event. It was the event the baker objected to.

No, it's not. Catering an event is like putting a roof on someone's house, or mowing their lawn.

You can't discriminate.

I have yet to go to a wedding where the cake baker was an integral part of the wedding ceremony....have you? Usually the cake gets delivered to the reception and that's that.

Irrelevant, but the biggest crime against your fellow citizens are the cases where photographers were forced to witness and photograph fag weddings and kisses, that is sick