Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The law has decided that there is great harm in tax paying ctizens of this country being denied accommodation by businesses who use the roads, finance and court systems of this country to operate their business.
In fact, that harm is deemed greater than any PERSONAL DISTASTE occasioned by a business owner who has to *** gasp *** serve a black person, or a gay person, in their business.
By not being allowed to discriminate against black people, or Jewish people, or Muslims.... you STILL get to keep all the same feelings you have against those people. You just can't deny service.
Again, been this way for the majority of the lives of anyone in business today.
I repeat: Don't like it, you are free to start a private restaurant club where everyone has to be a member and your patrons have to fit whatever perfect mold you want them to look like and nobody will bother you. No Jews, no problem!
Any law that forces religious people including Jews to help a same gender "wedding" is anti-Semitic.
There is no difference in Antisemitism between this Oregon Law and Laws that Nazis made regarding Jewish stores in the 30's.
The poster said that homosexuals can not reproduce, he said nothing about homosexual couples.
I am a homosexual, I can and have reproduced.
if gays can repraduce they could also get married to a member of the oposite sex. In short there is no discrimination in forbidding 2 members of the same sex from "marrying" each other.
who ever says gays can't get "married" in a state like Mississippi is either failed kindergarten or is a liar.
You are aware religious freedom is not absolute right?
For liberals
The only absolute rights are those that are "implied" by the constitution, abortion, homosexual perversion etc.
All the ones it says clearly in black and white are to be limited if ever applied.
Note that the bakery owner is not being charged with refusing to serve gay people, but is accused of refusing to take a contract for a wedding cake - a wedding that they see as illegitimate regardless of what the law says.
If a gay couple came into the store and wanted to buy some donuts or bread, and were refused service, that is what the law was supposed to prevent. But that's not the case here and this unilateral expansion of the definition of the law infringes on the religious freedom of the owner.
On Aug. 14, Oregon's state Bureau of Labor and Industries reported its investigation to determine if Sweet Cakes' actions violated the Oregon Equality Act of 2007, which states that people cannot be denied service based on sexual orientation. The law provides an exemption for schools and religious groups, but not for private businesses, according to a BOLI news release.
Since 2007, Oregonians have filed 11 complaints of unlawful discrimination in public places under the 2007 equality law. BOLI found no substantial evidence in five of those complaints but parties negotiated settlements in three other cases, including one this past week where a bar was fined $400K for keeping transgenders away. The Sweet Cakes case is still being reviewed by BOLI investigators as of Aug. 30.
there is no free market when unconstitutional laws force a person to sell something they don't want to.
That is called slavery.
Furthermore the analogy is severely flawed.
I'm not refusing the perverts because their perverts I'm refusing them because its for a service I don't provide. It's only discrimination if I refuse to sell a lesbian a cake for a real wedding (which means man+ woman)
It's already been established that this bakery wanted to sell cakes. It IS a bakery, after all. They just didn't want to sell a cake to THESE people.
It was not just a birthday cake or a desert cake but a wedding specific cake and under Oregon law homosexual “weddings” are not recognized. If the state does not recognize homosexual “weddings” the bakery does not have to recognize, support, acknowledge or provide for them either.
The lesbians have a prior history of already being served by this bakery.
Did they know at the time it was a gay couple? If so, did they honestly think this couple wasn't having sex? Since another poster just mentioned that the wedding wouldn't be legally recognised, then it's not really a wedding cake, is it? It's just a cake. It's no more significant than selling them a dozen cupcakes or muffins.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
