1) There are literally hundreds of other bakers they could have gotten their cake from.
2) There is no proof that homosexuality is a natural, genetic, inborn or otherwise natural basis for its existence to be protected, and I've cited the studies repeatedly. Until at least 1973, and in many parts of the world the 1980's and later, it has been diagnosed as an obsessive disorder, like pedophilia, sadomasochism, foot fetishism, gambling or substance addiction. And in many places, 10 to 20% of psych professionals in the U.S. who belong to NARTH, still is treated as a disorder.
3) Religious freedom. You don't force Muslims or Jews to eat pork. You don't force Hindus or vegetarians to eat meat. Again, if gays had just wanted a birthday cake or a cake for some other holiday or event, the Christian bakers would no doubt have gladly obliged them. They only exercised their freedom to not endorse this specific event.
4) The first Amendment:
Quote:
Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press,; or the thright of people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Read it. Learn it. LIVE it.
The problem with gay Nazis is they think that only they have rights to free speech, and that anyone who disagrees with them should be silenced. It doesn't work that way. Gays have a right to their beliefs and lifestyle, despite those who disagree with them. Christians have a right to their beliefs and lifestyle, despite those who disagree with them.
You really need to learn to respect the beliefs of those who tolerate yours.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Just a question to set things in perspective, if a straight couple ordered a cake for a gay wedding from the Baker, would he have done it? Or vice versa, if a gay couple (i don't know how he would know. Maybe they're blowing each other while coming through the door) orders a normal wedding cake, would he have done it?
also, disregard my question. I just wanted to post something about people blowing each other while entering an establishment. It seems like a cool thing to do.
I would prefer that homophobes self identify themselves. As I've said before I would just take my money elsewhere. Them making it easier is all good in my book.
Not surprised that you completely avoided the issue, but the subtext is clear: you do not acknowledge the unconstitutional nature of forcing a private entity to provide services for others against its/his/her will.
When you open the door to the public you shouldn't treat customers unequally based on sex, religion, race or sexual orientation. I think that's a good principle and the law respects that. If a private entity is so sensitive that seems unreasonable than that is and should be their problem.
also, disregard my question. I just wanted to post something about people blowing each other while entering an establishment. It seems like a cool thing to do.
that isn't even in the top five reasons you're not allowed back in my store, you sick bastard.
Just a question to set things in perspective, if a straight couple ordered a cake for a gay wedding from the Baker, would he have done it? Or vice versa, if a gay couple (i don't know how he would know. Maybe they're blowing each other while coming through the door) orders a normal wedding cake, would he have done it?
Originally Posted By: Son of Mxy
also, disregard my question. I just wanted to post something about people blowing each other while entering an establishment. It seems like a cool thing to do.
I meant to answer this before, but I've been rather busy. I think I covered it when I said above that if gays just came in to order lunch or a birthday cake, and were refused service solely on the basis of their being gay, that would be discrimination. It not because of being gay they refused service, but because of a specific cake they were asked to make for an activity that diametrically opposed the bakers' Christian beliefs. That is religious freedom. Regarding "how did they even know it was for gays?", the couple requested it for a lesbian service.
If Satanists came in and just ordered a "Happy Birthday" cake for a friend, I'm sure the Christian bakers (probably not even knowing) would comply with a conventional request. If they requested a "Hail Satan" cake, the Christian bakers would similarly refuse, based on the fact they strongly oppose that religious viewpoint.
That is not discrimination. It's religious freedom.
I have even more respect for Baronelle Stutzman after seeing her interviewed on Megyn Kelly:
She is exceptionally respectful and reasonable in her arguments, without the slightest trace of anti-gay zeal. She very respectfully refused very specific business, that she would otherwise take from gay customers for birthdays or other occasions.
And she even referred the customers she declined to several other bakers, who WOULD bake the cake for them.
The government clearly has no reasonable basis for levelling charges, beyond intimidating her into endorsing gay marriage, otherwise they would not be so eager to drop the charges in exchange for her endorsing gay marriage. She is very courageous, risking her business to take a principled stand.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
The Colorado Civil Rights Division has ruled that a baker who refused to make cakes with anti-gay messages did not discriminate.
Marjorie Silva, owner of Azucar Bakery in Denver, says she got the news on Friday but knows that Bill Jack, a Christian from Castle Rock, Colo., will likely appeal the decision.
“I’m happy that we were not just morally right but legally right,” she said in an interview with Yahoo News. “Hopefully this will lead to a better world where we are friendly to each other.”
In March 2014, Jack asked Silva to make him a Bible-shaped cake with anti-gay messages, such as “Homosexuality is a detestable sin. Leviticus 18:2.” He also wanted the cake to include two men holding hands with a large X over them.
She agreed to make the dessert in the shape of a book but declined to include the hateful content.
That actually adds to baker Marjorie Silva's even-handedness. Even as a Christian who isn't a fan of gay marriage, Silva declined to bake this cake:
Quote:
In March 2014, Jack asked Silva to make him a Bible-shaped cake with anti-gay messages, such as “Homosexuality is a detestable sin. Leviticus 18:2.” He also wanted the cake to include two men holding hands with a large X over them.
I think that's inappropriate and just plain mean to put on a cake. And so did Silva.
False equivalence. If somebody came into my theoretical bake shop and wanted a cake with "fat greedy republicans have no souls" on it, I would have the right not to do it.
Just to be clear, I'm totally fine if you rut in your ignorance. It simply doesn't matter because the law does make a distinction no matter how much you deny it. I'm also fine if the republican party continues to support discrimination as it fools less and less as time goes by. Reap what you sow time I think.
If the Christian baker isn't allowed to refrain from printing a message on the cake because the state considers it discrimination, then the vice versa scenario is also true for the same-sex marriage detractor's message being rejected by another baker.
Just because the law makers haven't caught up with the logic of the law doesn't mean that you're in the right by virtue of a judge siding with you on it.
Patrick Stewart defends Christian bakers in 'gay cake' controversy
Actor and activist Sir Patrick Stewart has revealed that he supports the right of Christian bakers to refuse to make cakes they find offensive.
Last month, the owners of Ashers Baker in Northern Ireland were found guilty of discrimination after they refused bake a cake that a carried the slogan "Support Gay Marriage", alongside an image of Sesame Street puppets Bert and Ernie.
"It was not because it was a gay couple that they objected, it was not because they were celebrating some sort of marriage or an agreement between them," he said. "It was the actual words on the cake they objected to. Because they found the words offensive
• The 'gay cake' ruling against a Christian bakery could lead to even more discrimination
"I would support their rights to say no, this is personally offensive to my beliefs, I will not do it."
The McArthur family were fined £500, though they have said they will appeal the decision.
"My friends have always been the best of me." -Doctor Who
"Well,whenever I'm confused,I just check my underwear. It holds most answers to life's questions." Abe Simpson
I can tell by the position of the sun in the sky, that is time for us to go. Until next time, I am Lothar of the Hill People!
Sweet Cakes by Melissa breaks record on crowdfunding site
PORTLAND, Ore. - The Gresham bakery that refused to make a wedding cake for a lesbian couple is breaking records with its crowdfunding campaign.
Sweet Cakes by Melissa was kicked off GoFundMe earlier this year, but has since raised more than $350,000 on the crowdfunding site Continue to Give. The growing total, which far exceeds the couple's $150,000 goal, is the largest individual campaign in the history of the three-year-old site, the Washington Times reported. The couple previously netted more than $60,000 from Go Fund Me before that campaign was taken down.
The founder of Continue to Give, Jesse Wellhoefer, said he refused to remove the Sweet Cakes campaign despite "lots and lots" of complaints, according to the Washington Times.
The bakery owners, Aaron and Melissa Klein, were ordered to pay the couple $135,000 in damages, the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries ruled July 2.
Aaron Klein said he has no plans to stop the Continue to Give campaign and there is no end date set.
"The future is unknown," said Klein, who hasn't been working at his job as a garbage collector since he injured his arm. "I don't know what taxes are owed on this."
Melissa Klein is also out of work, except for baking for family and friends.
Klein said he plans to appeal BOLI's decision and if there is extra money when the legal battle is over, he might donate it to charity.
"My friends have always been the best of me." -Doctor Who
"Well,whenever I'm confused,I just check my underwear. It holds most answers to life's questions." Abe Simpson
I can tell by the position of the sun in the sky, that is time for us to go. Until next time, I am Lothar of the Hill People!
Sweet Cakes by Melissa breaks record on crowdfunding site
PORTLAND, Ore. - The Gresham bakery that refused to make a wedding cake for a lesbian couple is breaking records with its crowdfunding campaign.
Sweet Cakes by Melissa was kicked off GoFundMe earlier this year, but has since raised more than $350,000 on the crowdfunding site Continue to Give. The growing total, which far exceeds the couple's $150,000 goal, is the largest individual campaign in the history of the three-year-old site, the Washington Times reported. The couple previously netted more than $60,000 from Go Fund Me before that campaign was taken down.
The founder of Continue to Give, Jesse Wellhoefer, said he refused to remove the Sweet Cakes campaign despite "lots and lots" of complaints, according to the Washington Times.
The bakery owners, Aaron and Melissa Klein, were ordered to pay the couple $135,000 in damages, the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries ruled July 2.
Aaron Klein said he has no plans to stop the Continue to Give campaign and there is no end date set.
"The future is unknown," said Klein, who hasn't been working at his job as a garbage collector since he injured his arm. "I don't know what taxes are owed on this."
Melissa Klein is also out of work, except for baking for family and friends.
Klein said he plans to appeal BOLI's decision and if there is extra money when the legal battle is over, he might donate it to charity.
Saying he might donate this to charity sounds awfully like Zzap! saying he might make time for his kids this weekend or Snarf might have a date with a hot lady. Two things we all know are not going to happen.
A Louisiana teenager says she was refused a Donald Trump cake for her 18th birthday party by Albertsons bakery after she requested a design featuring an American flag that read “Trump 2016”.
McKenzie Gill, a 17 year-old Trump supporter from Bossier City took to her Facebook page to explain what had originally occurred when she asked for a Trump-themed cake at her local Albertsons grocery store.
Gill says she just wanted a cake for her birthday that reflected her excitement on voting for the first time and, more specifically, voting for Trump.
“Trump is just someone I really look up to,” Gill told KSLA.
Gill said that when she and her mother went to the local grocery story bakery to request the Trump-themed cake, they were expecting the standard scenario of ordering a cake.
Instead, she left empty-handed and puzzled.
“We just need an American flag cake with Trump 2016 on it, and right when I said Trump the lady just (makes face) kinda Trump? And she was like I can make you a flag cake but I’m not going to write Trump on it,” Gill told KSLA.
Afterwards, Gill and her mother said they simply went to another bakery to make the cake for them.
“It’s your job,” Gill said. “We’re not really going for your opinion on what you think of the candidates we were just wanting Trump 2016 on the cake.”
Since the enthusiastic young Trump supporter’s story immediately grabbed headlines, Albertsons released a statement, saying “We apologize to our customer in Bossier City for the situation regarding the cake that was requested.”
“Our Bakery staff member misunderstood the training provided regarding copyrighted phrases, and incorrectly informed the customer we could not fulfill her request,” the Albertsons statement continued. “We would be happy to provide the cake as the customer requested.”
Gill said she never thought her story would see national attention, saying “I was just venting on Facebook when I made the status that I made, I didn’t think I was going to get as much attention as it did.”
“We just need an American flag cake with Trump 2016 on it, and right when I said Trump the lady just (makes face) kinda Trump? And she was like I can make you a flag cake but I’m not going to write Trump on it,”
That should have been a "let me speak to the manager right now" moment.
Quote:
Afterwards, Gill and her mother said they simply went to another bakery to make the cake for them.
See, that's the difference between a Republican and a Democrat. Although he could have made trouble, he just moved on to another baker to have it done the way he wanted.
Quote:
“It’s your job,” Gill said. “We’re not really going for your opinion on what you think of the candidates we were just wanting Trump 2016 on the cake.”
Since the enthusiastic young Trump supporter’s story immediately grabbed headlines, Albertsons released a statement, saying “We apologize to our customer in Bossier City for the situation regarding the cake that was requested.”
“Our Bakery staff member misunderstood the training provided regarding copyrighted phrases, and incorrectly informed the customer we could not fulfill her request,” the Albertsons statement continued. “We would be happy to provide the cake as the customer requested.”
A bullshit response from Albertson's. An honest and appropriate response would have been to apologize, be honest about the employee's discriminatory behavior, and announce that the employee had been suspended or fired, and any employee who behaved the same way would similarly be fired.
The B.S. response, with no penalty for the employee, is essentially an endorsement of the employee's discriminatory behavior.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
