Rules For Traditionals: How People In Wedding Trades Can Defend Themselves

[bripat9643]

I'm opposed to bigotry being passed off as religious freedom. First you don't serve gays because they're sinners. Then blacks because they have the mark of Cain, then Jews because they killed Jesus.

You can use religion to discriminate against anyone you don't like. It's false and it's vile. And it's against the law.

You simply accuse anyone acting from religious convictions of acting from bigotry. It's just a sleazy propaganda tactic.

People shouldn't be forced to serve anyone, no matter what their motivation. You have no right to be served by anyone except the government.

 

[Dragonlady]

You made a lot of dumb posts on this subject but that one makes no sense at all. No one is asking that someone do anything other than what they advertise to the public and to do it without discrimination.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Just because you "feel" that Gays are somehow unworthy of your best effort simply because they are Gay, that "feeling" could be extended to every other group of American citizens.

When are you going to get it through your head that you can't force someone's "best effort" out of them. It's impossible. If you don't like the service and/or quality of products you're getting, take your business somewhere else. You liberals are absolutely fucking ridiculous with your entitlement bullshit.

And conservatives are absolutely ridiculous with regard to their lies and willful ignorance.

Public accommodations laws don't 'force' anyone to do anything, they have nothing to do with 'entitlements,' and they have nothing to do with 'liberals.'

Public accommodations laws are necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory measures as authorized by the Commerce Clause, regulatory policy whose sole intent is to safeguard the integrity of the local market and all other interrelated markets. It is perfectly appropriate for states and local jurisdictions to require business open to the general public to accommodate all members of the community, thus facilitating commerce beneficial to the community as a whole.

 

[bripat9643]

You made a lot of dumb posts on this subject but that one makes no sense at all. No one is asking that someone do anything other than what they advertise to the public and to do it without discrimination.

Wrong. When did they advertise they bake cakes for gay weddings? You and your ilk have decided what their business is, not them.

 

[HappyJoy]

First they came for the cake makers...then....

Watch out...it's totally going to happen. Don't poke your eye out in bed.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No. I am a straight man. My personal belief about marriage equality has nothing to do with "feelings" but everything to do with freedom.

This isn't marriage equality you moron! Which only underscores the fact that you are operating on personal emotions and nothing more. I fully support gay marriage rights. But I oppose any effort that would attempt to force people to bake cakes, or whatever, that they don't want to make. Freedom doesn't stop at gay marriage, you know.

Again, public accommodations laws don't 'force' anyone to do anything.

Businesses open to the general public are subject to all manner of necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory measures – such as paying a minimum wage, ensuring safe working conditions for employees, and ensuring that good and services offered to consumers are safe – public accommodations laws are no different.

Because public accommodations laws are Constitutional, no one is being denied his freedom nor are any civil rights being violated.

 

[bripat9643]

Just because you "feel" that Gays are somehow unworthy of your best effort simply because they are Gay, that "feeling" could be extended to every other group of American citizens.

When are you going to get it through your head that you can't force someone's "best effort" out of them. It's impossible. If you don't like the service and/or quality of products you're getting, take your business somewhere else. You liberals are absolutely fucking ridiculous with your entitlement bullshit.

And conservatives are absolutely ridiculous with regard to their lies and willful ignorance.

Public accommodations laws don't 'force' anyone to do anything, they have nothing to do with 'entitlements,' and they have nothing to do with 'liberals.'

Of course they do, you fucking moron. What do you call a $135,000 fine, if it's not force? The problem with arguing with liberal morons is they simply ignore the accepted definition of words.

Public accommodations laws are necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory measures as authorized by the Commerce Clause, regulatory policy whose sole intent is to safeguard the integrity of the local market and all other interrelated markets. It is perfectly appropriate for states and local jurisdictions to require business open to the general public to accommodate all members of the community, thus facilitating commerce beneficial to the community as a whole.

They are neither necessary nor proper nor authorized by the commerce clause. The "integrity of the local" market is just a meaningless bullshit abradacabra liberal justification for violating the rights of property owners. Business owners should be free to associate with whomever the wish to associate with, which means the should be free to decline any customers they don't want to serve. Infringing on property rights is beneficial to no one other than the thugs who run this fascist police state we all suffer under.

 

[JoeB131]

No one's pointing any guns at the gays. However, Christians who decline to do business with them have guns pointed at them to strip them of their businesses and their life savings, so your claim that Christians are not being oppressed is obvious horseshit. Declining to bake you a cake is not oppression.

I'm sorry, when has anyone "pointed a gun" at anyone here?

yes, businesses who don't follow the law WILL be penalized. Just like businesses that don't provide safe workplaces, sell unsanitary food, or discriminate on other factors like race or religion. Businesses aren't people. Businesses don't have religions.

You don't want to do business with gays, don't open businesses gays might patronize. It's kind of that simple.

 

[JoeB131]

Of course they do, you fucking moron. What do you call a $135,000 fine, if it's not force? The problem with arguing with liberal morons is they simply ignore the accepted definition of words.

I call it, "proper use of governmental authority". This business could have settled this for a lot less simply by apologizing for the behavior and promising not to do it again. Of course, they were already run out of business because the COMMUNITY was so outraged by their actions that no one patronized them anymore.

They are neither necessary nor proper nor authorized by the commerce clause. The "integrity of the local" market is just a meaningless bullshit abradacabra liberal justification for violating the rights of property owners. Business owners should be free to associate with whomever the wish to associate with, which means the should be free to decline any customers they don't want to serve. Infringing on property rights is beneficial to no one other than the thugs who run this fascist police state we all suffer under.

Quite the contrary. We as the public are ALREADY subsidizing businesses. We pay the taxes that pay for police, fire, roads, infrastructure, regulation to make sure that products they buy are safe, courts to make sure their vendors don't cheat them, education so their employees can read simple instructions, and so on. Businesses cannot exist without support from the Public, something you "Libertarians" don't seem to understand.

So when the Public comes in and says, "Hey, we'd like to get one of those wedding cakes you advertised as making, and we're queer as a three dollar bill!" they'd better damned well make that cake.

 

[JoeB131]

When are you going to get it through your head that you can't force someone's "best effort" out of them. It's impossible. If you don't like the service and/or quality of products you're getting, take your business somewhere else. You liberals are absolutely fucking ridiculous with your entitlement bullshit.

Actually, there's a whole line of law that allows you to sue and get damages if you don't get someone's best efforts. It's called "Commerce Law".

 

[Seawytch]

So when the Public comes in and says, "Hey, we'd like to get one of those wedding cakes you advertised as making, and we're queer as a three dollar bill!" they'd better damned well make that cake.

You did forget the qualifier, Joe..."If they live in a location with PA laws that ALSO protect gays".

 

[dblack]

No. I am a straight man. My personal belief about marriage equality has nothing to do with "feelings" but everything to do with freedom.

This isn't marriage equality you moron! Which only underscores the fact that you are operating on personal emotions and nothing more. I fully support gay marriage rights. But I oppose any effort that would attempt to force people to bake cakes, or whatever, that they don't want to make. Freedom doesn't stop at gay marriage, you know.

Again, public accommodations laws don't 'force' anyone to do anything.

Again. This simply isn't true.

 

[JoeB131]

So when the Public comes in and says, "Hey, we'd like to get one of those wedding cakes you advertised as making, and we're queer as a three dollar bill!" they'd better damned well make that cake.

You did forget the qualifier, Joe..."If they live in a location with PA laws that ALSO protect gays".

which is a good point. They set up shop in PORTLAND, Oregon. One of the most liberal cities in the country.

 

[Seawytch]

No. I am a straight man. My personal belief about marriage equality has nothing to do with "feelings" but everything to do with freedom.

This isn't marriage equality you moron! Which only underscores the fact that you are operating on personal emotions and nothing more. I fully support gay marriage rights. But I oppose any effort that would attempt to force people to bake cakes, or whatever, that they don't want to make. Freedom doesn't stop at gay marriage, you know.

Again, public accommodations laws don't 'force' anyone to do anything.

Again. This simply isn't true.

It's only "true" in the silliest sense. Sure, we're all "forced" to follow the laws whether we like them or not. That certainly doesn't make it "tyranny" or any of the other ridiculousness the anti gay bigots try to throw out. It's not "tyranny" to make me wear a seatbelt or drive on the right side of the road.

 

[dblack]

No. I am a straight man. My personal belief about marriage equality has nothing to do with "feelings" but everything to do with freedom.

This isn't marriage equality you moron! Which only underscores the fact that you are operating on personal emotions and nothing more. I fully support gay marriage rights. But I oppose any effort that would attempt to force people to bake cakes, or whatever, that they don't want to make. Freedom doesn't stop at gay marriage, you know.

Again, public accommodations laws don't 'force' anyone to do anything.

Again. This simply isn't true.

It's only "true" in the silliest sense. Sure, we're all "forced" to follow the laws whether we like them or not. That certainly doesn't make it "tyranny" or any of the other ridiculousness the anti gay bigots try to throw out. It's not "tyranny" to make me wear a seatbelt or drive on the right side of the road.

I'm not so much interested in the gay issue, but PA laws do compel behavior. That's the point of the laws in the first place. There's a distinct difference between laws that prohibit actions that harm others, and those that dictate behavior. Do you really not see the difference? Or why the latter is a far greater loss of liberty?

 

[JoeB131]

I'm not so much interested in the gay issue, but PA laws do compel behavior. That's the point of the laws in the first place. There's a distinct difference between laws that prohibit actions that harm others, and those that dictate behavior. Do you really not see the difference? Or why the latter is a far greater loss of liberty?

No, guy, I don't. Frankly, i just don't see how it's an imposition to make your business do what it promises to do.

You advertised "Wedding Cakes for Sale", you should do wedding cakes. You made a representation that is what your company does.

 

[dblack]

I'm not so much interested in the gay issue, but PA laws do compel behavior. That's the point of the laws in the first place. There's a distinct difference between laws that prohibit actions that harm others, and those that dictate behavior. Do you really not see the difference? Or why the latter is a far greater loss of liberty?

No, guy, I don't. Frankly, i just don't see how it's an imposition to make your business do what it promises to do.

This is clearly a conceit. By that reasoning, all a business needs to do is put up sign saying "We don't server xxx" and they're covered, right? If not, then this is NOT simply a matter of making a business do what it promises.

 

[Seawytch]

I'm not so much interested in the gay issue, but PA laws do compel behavior. That's the point of the laws in the first place. There's a distinct difference between laws that prohibit actions that harm others, and those that dictate behavior. Do you really not see the difference? Or why the latter is a far greater loss of liberty?

No, guy, I don't. Frankly, i just don't see how it's an imposition to make your business do what it promises to do.

This is clearly a conceit. By that reasoning, all a business needs to do is put up sign saying "We don't server xxx" and they're covered, right? If not, then this is NOT simply a matter of making a business do what it promises.

Yeah, a business should have to do that if you get rid of PA laws (remember, you gotta start with the Federal Civil Rights Act). Nobody is going to know I'm gay when I walk into a business and if they don't want me there, I sure as hell don't want to spend my money on them.

 

[dblack]

Yeah, a business should have to do that if you get rid of PA laws....

I'm not sure what you're saying here.

 

[Seawytch]

No. I am a straight man. My personal belief about marriage equality has nothing to do with "feelings" but everything to do with freedom.

This isn't marriage equality you moron! Which only underscores the fact that you are operating on personal emotions and nothing more. I fully support gay marriage rights. But I oppose any effort that would attempt to force people to bake cakes, or whatever, that they don't want to make. Freedom doesn't stop at gay marriage, you know.

Again, public accommodations laws don't 'force' anyone to do anything.

Again. This simply isn't true.

It's only "true" in the silliest sense. Sure, we're all "forced" to follow the laws whether we like them or not. That certainly doesn't make it "tyranny" or any of the other ridiculousness the anti gay bigots try to throw out. It's not "tyranny" to make me wear a seatbelt or drive on the right side of the road.

I'm not so much interested in the gay issue, but PA laws do compel behavior. That's the point of the laws in the first place. There's a distinct difference between laws that prohibit actions that harm others, and those that dictate behavior. Do you really not see the difference? Or why the latter is a far greater loss of liberty?

And you don't think the humiliation of having someone say "We don't serve you queers here" counts as a form of harm?

Let’s start by considering some fictional, but realistic scenarios that are actually a better showcase of why these kinds of protections are relevant:

—Suppose you are traveling in a remote region such as the Arizona/Utah border. Suppose that your car breaks down during a winter drive. Suppose there is one motel there, and to avoid sleeping in your car in the cold, you ask for a room at the motel. Suppose the motel owners are FLDS and they refuse to allow you there because you are in a mixed race marriage and they feel that entering a mixed race marriage is sinful (as is the case in the FLDS religion). You are thus stuck sleeping in your car in the cold.

—Consider the same scenario in the bible belt where Mormonism is considered a cult. Suppose that they motel refuses you respite when they realize that you are a Mormon.

—Suppose the next day you are trying to get your car fixed so you can continue your journey. There is a car repair in town, but once again, they refuse you service because of discrimination. Your only solution is to pay for an expensive tow truck to come and bring your car to the next city where you can get your car repaired without discrimination.

—Suppose you live in a beautiful small town. That town has one grocery store. Suppose that this grocery store refuses to give you service because of discrimination. You are compelled to drive 45 minutes to the next town to shop for groceries. Suppose that this same small town only has one plumber, and your pipes break. The plumber refuses service, so you have to pay a plumber to travel all the way from another town to give you a more expensive service, and you have to wait until he/she is available to travel.

—Suppose there is an ice cream store in your neighborhood. You have an 8-year old child and all of his/her friends talk about how much they love that ice cream. Suppose you take your child to get an ice cream there, but you are refused service because of your race, gender, religion, gender identity or sexual orientation. Your child is also not allowed to attend the camp that all of his/her friends are attending, nor take the dance classes or art classes that his/her friends are taking. Even your pediatrician refuses to treat your child (as recently happened in Michigan to a same-sex couple and their child).

—Suppose there is an excellent health club that you want to join and it is the only one in your town that offers yoga classes, and yoga has been the only effective way for you to control your back pain.They refuse to let you join because of discrimination. The only other health club in town is of very low quality, and has no yoga classes.

—Suppose you go out to a nice dinner with a loved one. You are seated, and your order is taken, but then they decide they don’t want to serve you because of discrimination. A nice dinner with a loved one becomes a bitter and sad moment. Now suppose this happens on a regular basis, week after week, year after year.
​

It's Not About the Cake

You really want to claim there's no potential for harm?