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.
I'm sorry if this is too complicated for you to grasp, but if shop X does not sell Z. They do not have to sell Z to anyone.
IF shop X does sell product Z then they have to sell it to anyone.
If the owner of shop X has a problem with selling product Z then they should not offer product Z in their store.
No Shop X does sell Z if Z = wedding cake. You have placed parameters on the DESIGN of the wedding cake.
Your own statements were if shop X sells z=wedding flowers, then they have to sell to everyone. You have never put conditions on the florist's right to decline providing flowers to the gay customers.
It was only after you were called out for supporting the denial of service by a baker, based solely on the cake design, that you started backtracking and making up "conditions."
A wedding cake and any other cake all contain the basic same ingredients. The only difference is the design. If a gay couple was denied service at the bakery, regardless of the design request, I have no doubt you would be championing the gay couple - but you stuck your foot in it and you are scrambling to distance yourself from your own words.
Stop adding a condition that is not part of the question. My question to you is, can a baker who bakes all different shapes of cakes for weddings, refuse to bake a rainbow colored, penis shaped wedding cake for a gay customer. The ingredients for the requested cake is available to the baker, the design would be the creation of the baker, same as any other wedding cake requested by anyone else.
You previously stated that the gay customer could be refused service based on that request. You did not limit your answer to "if they didn't offer a penis cake."
You have always stated that if a florist sells flowers for weddings, then the florist cannot refuse to provide wedding flowers to gays. You never limited your statement by saying that the florist had the right to refuse the gay couple if they sought a flower that was not in stock.
Now you are arguing that discrimination against gays is acceptable when certain conditions are included (like the shape of a cake or an out of season flower).
What part of no business has to sell anything that thye do not choose to offer do you not get?
IF the baker offers penis cakes, they he has to sell them to anyone that wants one.
IF the baker does not sell penis cakes, then they do not have to sell them to anyone.
That is not the issue. The issue is the baker will create wedding cakes for people. These customers are gay and want a wedding cake of a specific design. Can they be refused service of the baker to provide them a wedding cake? Just because the baker may not like the design the gay couple chose, is that a valid bases to deny service to the gay coupled?
Yes.
If the gay couple insists on a design that the baker would not make for anyone under any circumstances, then yes, the baker could absolutely refuse to make the gay couple's wedding cake. That's not discrimination based on sexual orientation - that's simply not selling a product the baker doesn't want to sell.
Quote:
Why is the baker's distaste, discomfort, whatever, in creating a penis cake a more valid reason to deny service than a constitutionally guaranteed right of the free exercise of religion?
I reject the premise of the question. Selling cakes is an exercise of commerce, not an exercise of religion.
No Shop X does sell Z if Z = wedding cake. You have placed parameters on the DESIGN of the wedding cake.
Your own statements were if shop X sells z=wedding flowers, then they have to sell to everyone. You have never put conditions on the florist's right to decline providing flowers to the gay customers.
It was only after you were called out for supporting the denial of service by a baker, based solely on the cake design, that you started backtracking and making up "conditions."
A wedding cake and any other cake all contain the basic same ingredients. The only difference is the design. If a gay couple was denied service at the bakery, regardless of the design request, I have no doubt you would be championing the gay couple - but you stuck your foot in it and you are scrambling to distance yourself from your own words.
A restaurant may sell beef, but it may not sell steak. They may sell burgers made of sirloin, but not sell sirloin. An ice cream shop may sell ice cream, but not cherry ice cream.
A dress shop may sell dresses, but not mini skirts.
A book store may sell books, but not erotica.
A jewelry store may sell jewelry, but not bracelets.
A lighting store may sell lights, but not table lamps.
A cake shop may sell wedding cakes, but not penis shaped wedding cakes.
The design may involve a pan that they do not have to make the cake. Or they simply do not make cakes in that shape.
What part of no business has to sell anything that thye do not choose to offer do you not get?
IF the baker offers penis cakes, they he has to sell them to anyone that wants one.
IF the baker does not sell penis cakes, then they do not have to sell them to anyone.
The baker sells wedding cakes. The customer sought a wedding cake. You state that gays can be denied a wedding cake based solely on the shape of the cake.
A restaurant may sell beef, but it may not sell steak. They may sell burgers made of sirloin, but not sell sirloin. An ice cream shop may sell ice cream, but not cherry ice cream.
A dress shop may sell dresses, but not mini skirts.
A book store may sell books, but not erotica.
A jewelry store may sell jewelry, but not bracelets.
A lighting store may sell lights, but not table lamps.
A cake shop may sell wedding cakes, but not penis shaped wedding cakes.
The design may involve a pan that they do not have to make the cake. Or they simply do not make cakes in that shape.
We are not talking about anything but the bakery and wedding cakes. You specifically stated that if a business sells a product to one customer, i.e., a wedding cake, then it is against the law to refuse to provide a wedding cake to a gay customer.
Now you are saying that gay customers can be denied service because of the style of wedding cake they request.
Where in the constitution or the RFRA does it specify that only christians or jews have those protections and everyone else is SOL?
It doesn't the issue in this case relates to a Christian business owner. The congressional discussions around RFRA call out the Davis case specifically and that has nothing to do with either Christianity or Judaism.
Than if his money was good enough for a decade, why wasn't it good enough now?
BTW are you her or a friend of hers?
I am not a friend. I live across the state. I have donated to her defense fund. It has nothing to do with the customer's money. It has to do with the underlying event and the fact that her involvement would conflict with her religious beliefs.
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.
