What is the scope of your religious freedom as a business?

[BULLDOG]

Has our country reached a point where business can now serve moral judgement on its customers?

From your perspective as a totalitarian thug, dedicated to eradicating all individual rights and freedom, let me ask you;

Say there is a very talented cake decorator who is unemployed and looking for a job. A gay baker hears of this person, and orders him to come work at his bakery. The decorator refuses, stating that he won't work for a queer.

Should the law force the decorator to work for the baker? Should the baker be able to sue the decorator for refusing to work for him?

Back when

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction

was the law of the land, this was simple - now that you have repealed that law, it is murky.You democrats have always promoted slavery. You have shown that involuntary servitude is now a part of our nation, that homosexuals are a superior segment that own all others who must serve them without question. So given that the baker is gay, then should he be required to pay his slave?

How many different threads are you going to post this same ignorant crap on? Your slavery reference is still stupid.

 

[Asclepias]

Its a viable option. You just dont happen to like it. Tough.

It shouldn't be an "option" at all. The government should just leave them the hell alone.

Horse fucker.

Well it is an option. Not interested in your interpretation of the facts.

Kind of like death by firing squad or injection is an "option" in Utah?

Horse fucker.

Almost like that but no death involved.

Its the same concept. When your only two options are bad, its not really an option, its mandatory.

Its not the same concept no matter how hard you try to make it so. If you are that into your religion open your business in church.

 

[martybegan]

It shouldn't be an "option" at all. The government should just leave them the hell alone.

Horse fucker.

Well it is an option. Not interested in your interpretation of the facts.

Kind of like death by firing squad or injection is an "option" in Utah?

Horse fucker.

Almost like that but no death involved.

Its the same concept. When your only two options are bad, its not really an option, its mandatory.

Its not the same concept no matter how hard you try to make it so. If you are that into your religion open your business in church.

I'm not, what I am into is protecting the rights of people that are.

 

[Asclepias]

Well it is an option. Not interested in your interpretation of the facts.

Kind of like death by firing squad or injection is an "option" in Utah?

Horse fucker.

Almost like that but no death involved.

Its the same concept. When your only two options are bad, its not really an option, its mandatory.

Its not the same concept no matter how hard you try to make it so. If you are that into your religion open your business in church.

I'm not, what I am into is protecting the rights of people that are.

You arent doing anything but running your mouth. In the meantime bigots will be penalized.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Obviously the doctor was wrong and can be sued for discrimination. What is there to debate?

How can the doctor be discriminating when these are hard held religious beliefs?

What religion tells you can't treat a gay patient? Answer: no religion

Slippery slope fallacy

What religion tells you that you can't bake a cake for a gay wedding?

False equivalence

The baker is being asked to contribute to an unholy ceremony that is in conflict with his/her religion. The doctor treating a gay person isn't comparable.

In each case, someone is being required to compromise religious values, There are many more religious sanctions against atheists and adulterers. Yet the bakery doesn't seem to have a policy against making cakes for them

how would the bakery know...?

 

[martybegan]

Kind of like death by firing squad or injection is an "option" in Utah?

Horse fucker.

Almost like that but no death involved.

Its the same concept. When your only two options are bad, its not really an option, its mandatory.

Its not the same concept no matter how hard you try to make it so. If you are that into your religion open your business in church.

I'm not, what I am into is protecting the rights of people that are.

You arent doing anything but running your mouth. In the meantime bigots will be penalized.

Then you should be penalized for your obvious anti-religious bias.

Would you support the right of a gay baker to refuse to bake a cake for a christian wedding?

 

[Asclepias]

Almost like that but no death involved.

Its the same concept. When your only two options are bad, its not really an option, its mandatory.

Its not the same concept no matter how hard you try to make it so. If you are that into your religion open your business in church.

I'm not, what I am into is protecting the rights of people that are.

You arent doing anything but running your mouth. In the meantime bigots will be penalized.

Then you should be penalized for your obvious anti-religious bias.

Would you support the right of a gay baker to refuse to bake a cake for a christian wedding?

Go ahead and penalize me. I dont really care.

If the gay baker has a business no I wouldnt support him not baking a cake for a christian wedding stupid.

 

[rightwinger]

How can the doctor be discriminating when these are hard held religious beliefs?

What religion tells you can't treat a gay patient? Answer: no religion

Slippery slope fallacy

What religion tells you that you can't bake a cake for a gay wedding?

False equivalence

The baker is being asked to contribute to an unholy ceremony that is in conflict with his/her religion. The doctor treating a gay person isn't comparable.

In each case, someone is being required to compromise religious values, There are many more religious sanctions against atheists and adulterers. Yet the bakery doesn't seem to have a policy against making cakes for them

how would the bakery know...?

Maybe when the bride is seven months pregnant

 

[Ravi]

The dictionary is your friend. Its an option. You may not like it but that has nothing to do with the meaning.

It is not a viable option, you horse-fucker.

Its a viable option. You just dont happen to like it. Tough.

It shouldn't be an "option" at all. The government should just leave them the hell alone.

Horse fucker.

Well it is an option. Not interested in your interpretation of the facts.

Kind of like death by firing squad or injection is an "option" in Utah?

Horse fucker.

Why are you signing your posts? I always think that is a weird behavior.

 

[martybegan]

Its the same concept. When your only two options are bad, its not really an option, its mandatory.

Its not the same concept no matter how hard you try to make it so. If you are that into your religion open your business in church.

I'm not, what I am into is protecting the rights of people that are.

You arent doing anything but running your mouth. In the meantime bigots will be penalized.

Then you should be penalized for your obvious anti-religious bias.

Would you support the right of a gay baker to refuse to bake a cake for a christian wedding?

Go ahead and penalize me. I dont really care.

If the gay baker has a business no I wouldnt support him not baking a cake for a christian wedding stupid.

Bullshit.

 

[The Rabbi]

Exactly, Marty. And that's what my moved thread on the donkey was intended to get at. Jesus, Rosa Parks and Mandela all stood up nonviolently and without the power of the state to show the INJUSTICE of the state's actions should offend us all.

Yet, the response by Indiana and Arkansas was to legally justify the right to discriminate against gays. Hardly what Christ was about.

how are they doing that...? the law says nothing about gays...

the law is simply to provide a way to court for people who do not want to be forced against their religious beliefs...

Forced to do what?

How does baking a cake violate the tenets of any religion?

And will these oh so holy people apply this refusal to all people who sin or just some people who sin?

IDGAF if people refuse to serve someone I just want them to be honest and consistent.

The problem contained in your question is that religions aren't 'official' or based on specific identiable sets of beliefs.

Your religion, essentially, is whatever you want to call your religion.

Not entirely. Usually there has to be some consistent tenets etc.

and the oh so holy people can't pick and choose the tenets they follow right?

Surely if baking a cake for a gay person is a sin then baking one for an adulterer is a sin, a thief? a murderer?

Seems to me with all the sinners that baker sells to his soul is already damned to hell so why not make a little money on a gay wedding cake

You ar not empowered to tell people what they can and cannot believe.

 

[Ravi]

Its a viable option. You just dont happen to like it. Tough.

It shouldn't be an "option" at all. The government should just leave them the hell alone.

Horse fucker.

Well it is an option. Not interested in your interpretation of the facts.

Kind of like death by firing squad or injection is an "option" in Utah?

Horse fucker.

Why are you signing your posts? I always think that is a weird behavior.

Fuck off douchebag.

LOL! You sure anger easily. You might want to have that looked at.

 

[martybegan]

how are they doing that...? the law says nothing about gays...

the law is simply to provide a way to court for people who do not want to be forced against their religious beliefs...

Forced to do what?

How does baking a cake violate the tenets of any religion?

And will these oh so holy people apply this refusal to all people who sin or just some people who sin?

IDGAF if people refuse to serve someone I just want them to be honest and consistent.

The problem contained in your question is that religions aren't 'official' or based on specific identiable sets of beliefs.

Your religion, essentially, is whatever you want to call your religion.

Not entirely. Usually there has to be some consistent tenets etc.

and the oh so holy people can't pick and choose the tenets they follow right?

Surely if baking a cake for a gay person is a sin then baking one for an adulterer is a sin, a thief? a murderer?

Seems to me with all the sinners that baker sells to his soul is already damned to hell so why not make a little money on a gay wedding cake

You ar not empowered to tell people what they can and cannot believe.

Actually they can, what they cannot do is use government to force a person to act regardless of their beliefs without an overriding compelling reason.

 

[Statistikhengst]

The bigots want to be able to serve cake to a straight who is getting married for the third time but not to a newlywed gay couple, because they think its gays who are ruining marriage.

It just doesn't get more hypocritical or stupid as that.

This isn't about religious freedom. Religion has nothing to do with it. This is about the freedom to be a hateful sanctimonious retard. Just like their KKK political ancestors.

Using God as a pretense for being a bigot is as evil as it gets.

Nobody will admit it, but this is all coming down to conservatives acknowledging that they have lost the battle against gay marriage

If they can't stop gays from marrying, they can still do their best to stop it from being a pleasant experience

 

[martybegan]

The bigots want to be able to serve cake to a straight who is getting married for the third time but not to a newlywed gay couple, because they think its gays who are ruining marriage.

It just doesn't get more hypocritical or stupid as that.

This isn't about religious freedom. Religion has nothing to do with it. This is about the freedom to be a hateful sanctimonious retard. Just like their KKK political ancestors.

Using God as a pretense for being a bigot is as evil as it gets.

Nobody will admit it, but this is all coming down to conservatives acknowledging that they have lost the battle against gay marriage

If they can't stop gays from marrying, they can still do their best to stop it from being a pleasant experience

Oh yes, the trials and tribulations of having to go visit another bake shop.....

clapping at the voice of fascism, figures.

 

[Ravi]

Why are you signing your posts? I always think that is a weird behavior.

Fuck off douchebag.

LOL! You sure anger easily. You might want to have that looked at.

Sorry, people with "teh stupids" irritate me.

Or in your case people with "the goat faced fucktards"

Signing repetitive posts horse fucker is so not stupid.

Nice attempt at white knighting, but fail as usual Ravi-douche.

Plus my sig is the same in every post, the one from C.S Lewis, so your "witty" comment fails on merit, and the fact you are a general worthless snot-goblin.

Tissue?

 

[martybegan]

Fuck off douchebag.

LOL! You sure anger easily. You might want to have that looked at.

Sorry, people with "teh stupids" irritate me.

Or in your case people with "the goat faced fucktards"

Signing repetitive posts horse fucker is so not stupid.

Nice attempt at white knighting, but fail as usual Ravi-douche.

Plus my sig is the same in every post, the one from C.S Lewis, so your "witty" comment fails on merit, and the fact you are a general worthless snot-goblin.

Tissue?

Not after you used it to jerk off with.

 

[Ravi]

The bigots want to be able to serve cake to a straight who is getting married for the third time but not to a newlywed gay couple, because they think its gays who are ruining marriage.

It just doesn't get more hypocritical or stupid as that.

This isn't about religious freedom. Religion has nothing to do with it. This is about the freedom to be a hateful sanctimonious retard. Just like their KKK political ancestors.

Using God as a pretense for being a bigot is as evil as it gets.

Nobody will admit it, but this is all coming down to conservatives acknowledging that they have lost the battle against gay marriage

If they can't stop gays from marrying, they can still do their best to stop it from being a pleasant experience

Notice how cons are selective in their outrage about PA laws. You never hear a peep about them until it involves gays, blacks, or muslims.

 

[Statistikhengst]

The very reason the anti-gay bigots don't have the political and economic power today is precisely because their racist ancestors caused those powers to be forcibly removed by the federal government.

That's why they whine about wanting that power back. So they can go back to the "good old days" they frequently harp about.

Absolutely spot-on. The best and most concise argument to-date.

 

[Ravi]

LOL! You sure anger easily. You might want to have that looked at.

Sorry, people with "teh stupids" irritate me.

Or in your case people with "the goat faced fucktards"

Signing repetitive posts horse fucker is so not stupid.

Nice attempt at white knighting, but fail as usual Ravi-douche.

Plus my sig is the same in every post, the one from C.S Lewis, so your "witty" comment fails on merit, and the fact you are a general worthless snot-goblin.

Tissue?

Not after you used it to jerk off with.

Now you're sputtering. All this anger isn't good for you.