The gay couples' taxes help protect the bakery; Shouldnt the be allowed to shop in it

[PaintMyHouse]

Bake the cake. Fertilize the frosting.

And say goodbye to your business and any chance to work with food again,

Now pantyhose will want his cake DNA tested...lmao.

I wish. If I was gay I'd use my best lawyer who owes me the most and I'd own the damn town, one bakery at a time.

Did you know we already have gay married people, all over the country? The wives look like women but they're really men (XY), and the husbands look like men but they are really women. (XXY or XXXY)

Ever wonder why Bachmann's husband is such a total fruit and they never had biological children? That's because he's XXY or XXXY more than likely. Tall, heavy, breasts, high-pitched voice, sounds and acts like a big gay man. That's because he's mostly a woman.

Ann Coulter, never married and no kids, is probably XY as well.

 

[bripat9643]

And say goodbye to your business and any chance to work with food again,

Now pantyhose will want his cake DNA tested...lmao.

I wish. If I was gay I'd use my best lawyer who owes me the most and I'd own the damn town, one bakery at a time.

Did you know we already have gay married people, all over the country? The wives look like women but they're really men (XY), and the husbands look like men but they are really women. (XXY or XXXY)

Ever wonder why Bachmann's husband is such a total fruit and they never had biological children? That's because he's XXY or XXXY more than likely. Tall, heavy, breasts, high-pitched voice, sounds and acts like a big gay man. That's because he's mostly a woman.

Ann Coulter, never married and no kids, is probably XY as well.

He looks like a normal guy to me. How would you know if he has breasts? Have you got a picture of him without a shirt on?

You're obviously just making this shit up. You don't have a shred of evidence.

 

[The T]

The so-called bakery owned by the religious person who doesn't like gay people......is protected by local and state police and fire departments. Paid for by all the taxpayers.

So, that gay couple pays taxes, that in part go to the benefit of that bakery.

So, when that gay couple walks in and says "We'd like to buy a 3 layer chocolate cake please", and a straight couple walks in requesting the same type cake, and both couples are taxpayers, and the bakery benefits from police and fire protection funded in part by both couples' tax money............how can that baker refuse to service one couple with the SAME product as the other?

Business owners pay their share of taxes and in fact pay more than the average person so what's your point?

That's almost as stupid as the roads argument.

If a business is private property shouldn't the owners of that property have the right to deny access to anyone for any reason?

I don't have to let you into my house for dinner do I? So why should I have to let you in to my business?

Statists have no regard for personal property. It's that simple.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The so-called bakery owned by the religious person who doesn't like gay people......is protected by local and state police and fire departments. Paid for by all the taxpayers.

So, that gay couple pays taxes, that in part go to the benefit of that bakery.

So, when that gay couple walks in and says "We'd like to buy a 3 layer chocolate cake please", and a straight couple walks in requesting the same type cake, and both couples are taxpayers, and the bakery benefits from police and fire protection funded in part by both couples' tax money............how can that baker refuse to service one couple with the SAME product as the other?

Business owners pay their share of taxes and in fact pay more than the average person so what's your point?

That's almost as stupid as the roads argument.

If a business is private property shouldn't the owners of that property have the right to deny access to anyone for any reason?

I don't have to let you into my house for dinner do I? So why should I have to let you in to my business?

Statists have no regard for personal property. It's that simple.

I'll bet you wish that were true but it ignores reality however, suit yourself.

 

[Avatar4321]

Look, you can jump through whatever mental hoops you want to justify your vile behavior, but using violence to force people to do business with others or putting them out of business if they don't comply with you is just plain wrong. You can dress it up as pretty as you like, compelling people to labor for those they don't want to is wrong.

 

[The T]

Business owners pay their share of taxes and in fact pay more than the average person so what's your point?

That's almost as stupid as the roads argument.

If a business is private property shouldn't the owners of that property have the right to deny access to anyone for any reason?

I don't have to let you into my house for dinner do I? So why should I have to let you in to my business?

Statists have no regard for personal property. It's that simple.

I'll bet you wish that were true but it ignores reality however, suit yourself.

I will and do...Tyrant.

 

[Spiderman]

Look, you can jump through whatever mental hoops you want to justify your vile behavior, but using violence to force people to do business with others or putting them out of business if they don't comply with you is just plain wrong. You can dress it up as pretty as you like, compelling people to labor for those they don't want to is wrong.

Exactly.

Now on a pragmatic note I don't see why a business would ever refuse a paying well behaved customer.

That's stupid in my opinion.

I think the religious reason is one of the lamest of all to deny service to someone.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Statists have no regard for personal property. It's that simple.

I'll bet you wish that were true but it ignores reality however, suit yourself.

I will and do...Tyrant.

I know I'm a terrible person, wanting everyone to be equal before the law and in the marketplace.

 

[bripat9643]

I'll bet you wish that were true but it ignores reality however, suit yourself.

I will and do...Tyrant.

I know I'm a terrible person, wanting everyone to be equal before the law and in the marketplace.

Everyone in prison is equal. That's the kind of equality you endorse.

 

[dblack]

I'll bet you wish that were true but it ignores reality however, suit yourself.

I will and do...Tyrant.

I know I'm a terrible person, wanting everyone to be equal before the law and in the marketplace.

Not terrible, necessarily. But deluded. You can't have both of those things. Equality in the marketplace, as we see in this instance and others, requires inequality before the law.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I will and do...Tyrant.

I know I'm a terrible person, wanting everyone to be equal before the law and in the marketplace.

Not terrible, necessarily. But deluded. You can't have both of those things. Equality in the marketplace, as we see in this instance and others, requires inequality before the law.

Really? If I tell everyone who bakes cakes for the public that they are then required to bake cakes for the public, how exactly is that unequal?

 

[dblack]

I know I'm a terrible person, wanting everyone to be equal before the law and in the marketplace.

Not terrible, necessarily. But deluded. You can't have both of those things. Equality in the marketplace, as we see in this instance and others, requires inequality before the law.

Really? If I tell everyone who bakes cakes for the public that they are then required to bake cakes for the public, how exactly is that unequal?

Well, you aren't telling anyone anything - unless your delusions include 'autocrat'. But government telling anyone they are required to serve anyone else, public or otherwise, is involuntary servitude - as has been observed.

In any case, requiring bakers to 'bake cakes for the public' isn't what's going on. What the public accommodations laws are telling them is what they can think - the reasons they can decide to serve others or not. That inherently discriminates against people with preferences regarding 'protected classes'. It's unequal protection of the law because it targets people with unpopular opinions for persecution, for special punishment not applied to others who might make exactly the same decisions for other reasons.

 

[Spoonman]

The so-called bakery owned by the religious person who doesn't like gay people......is protected by local and state police and fire departments. Paid for by all the taxpayers.

So, that gay couple pays taxes, that in part go to the benefit of that bakery.

So, when that gay couple walks in and says "We'd like to buy a 3 layer chocolate cake please", and a straight couple walks in requesting the same type cake, and both couples are taxpayers, and the bakery benefits from police and fire protection funded in part by both couples' tax money............how can that baker refuse to service one couple with the SAME product as the other?

gun ownership advocates taxes help support america. shouldn't they be allowed to excerise their constitutional right uninfringed as intended? Don't want ot own a gun, don't own one. But stop trying to deny others their rights.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I will and do...Tyrant.

I know I'm a terrible person, wanting everyone to be equal before the law and in the marketplace.

Everyone in prison is equal. That's the kind of equality you endorse.

Never been to prison I see? Good on you.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Not terrible, necessarily. But deluded. You can't have both of those things. Equality in the marketplace, as we see in this instance and others, requires inequality before the law.

Really? If I tell everyone who bakes cakes for the public that they are then required to bake cakes for the public, how exactly is that unequal?

Well, you aren't telling anyone anything - unless your delusions include 'autocrat'. But government telling anyone they are required to serve anyone else, public or otherwise, is involuntary servitude - as has been observed.

In any case, requiring bakers to 'bake cakes for the public' isn't what's going on. What the public accommodations laws are telling them is what they can think - the reasons they can decide to serve others or not. That inherently discriminates against people with preferences regarding 'protected classes'. It's unequal protection of the law because it targets people with unpopular opinions for persecution, for special punishment not applied to others who might make exactly the same decisions for other reasons.

It's telling them to make the damn cakes, all of them, and the Supreme court has already rejected your arguments, decades ago. Renting rooms to blacks, baking cakes for gays, not slavery, sorry.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The so-called bakery owned by the religious person who doesn't like gay people......is protected by local and state police and fire departments. Paid for by all the taxpayers.

So, that gay couple pays taxes, that in part go to the benefit of that bakery.

So, when that gay couple walks in and says "We'd like to buy a 3 layer chocolate cake please", and a straight couple walks in requesting the same type cake, and both couples are taxpayers, and the bakery benefits from police and fire protection funded in part by both couples' tax money............how can that baker refuse to service one couple with the SAME product as the other?

gun ownership advocates taxes help support america. shouldn't they be allowed to excerise their constitutional right uninfringed as intended? Don't want ot own a gun, don't own one. But stop trying to deny others their rights.

Can you name a Right without limitations? Just curious.

 

[dblack]

Really? If I tell everyone who bakes cakes for the public that they are then required to bake cakes for the public, how exactly is that unequal?

Well, you aren't telling anyone anything - unless your delusions include 'autocrat'. But government telling anyone they are required to serve anyone else, public or otherwise, is involuntary servitude - as has been observed.

In any case, requiring bakers to 'bake cakes for the public' isn't what's going on. What the public accommodations laws are telling them is what they can think - the reasons they can decide to serve others or not. That inherently discriminates against people with preferences regarding 'protected classes'. It's unequal protection of the law because it targets people with unpopular opinions for persecution, for special punishment not applied to others who might make exactly the same decisions for other reasons.

It's telling them to make the damn cakes, all of them, and the Supreme court has already rejected your arguments, decades ago. Renting rooms to blacks, baking cakes for gays, not slavery, sorry.

So, "I'll punt"?

The Supreme Court was wrong, that's sort of the point of the discussion. Try to keep up.

 

[Katzndogz]

Anyone who bakes cakes for the public, bakes cakes for the public. They are baked, frosted and put in the bakery case. Anyone who wants one can come in and buy one. When it crosses the line from buying something available to the public and wanting a personal service with a particular message, it moves from public accommodation to private declaration.