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.
And forcing businesses to treat people of all races equally never did in put a Christian business owner into any kind of moral conflict. In fact, being racist is being anti-Christian. That's a lot different that forcing a business owner to endorse an immoral ceremony which is an activity that someone CHOOSES to have. I wouldn't want to be told I had to cater a swinger's convention either. Same thing.
Who in a secular society is to judge what is immoral, if it is not illegal? And why would that judgement supersede the law?
I've had customers whose businesses I didn't care for, as it conflicted with my personal moral code, but what they were doing was legal. I would not, nor should I, discriminate against them based on my morals.
I remember when going into an eatery, more often than not, there was a sign posted, "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone".
Don't see many of these signs anymore.
The reason being, it is illegal to refuse service based on a business's idea of who is allowed and who isn't.
You operate a business dealing solely with the public, you serve all the public, you don't get to pick and choose who you serve, and how.
If you do, you are opening yourself to a law suit.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.â€"
(set 2 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,175 posts, read 13,455,286 times
Reputation: 19472
Exactly the same thing happened in relation to a Christian bakery in Northern Ireland who refused to make a cake supporting gay marriage.
The bakery went on to lose the case and lose the appeal. Rather bizzarely the cake had Sesame Street charchters "Bert and Ernie" on it. So Bert and Ernie also became part of the Court Case. Thankfully Ronald Grump was not asked to give evidence.
If you work with the public you work with them. Just like if a black couple had come in and he had refused.
There is a difference though between refusing to serve the person ("I won't bake you a cake because you are black") versus refusing to provide a specific service ("I won't bake you a cake celebrating Martin Luther King Jr's birthday because I don't think it should be a holiday.")
A different way to think of this, would the baker have still refused the same cake for a same-sex wedding if a straight person had ordered it? Or if the same homosexual person had order a generic wedding cake for a different wedding?
I actually think the case, as stated, is rather interesting because of the focus on a wedding cake of any kind, regardless of whose wedding, being sold to a homosexual couple, e.g. the "I will sell you any other kind of cake" line. It may have to draw a line on what is considered providing or not providing service. As an extreme example, offering to only sell an African-American person water at a lunch counter is clearly not providing service. Seems like this case has to hinge on whether a cake decorated in a specific way or meant for a specific occasion is a separate service or part of a large provided service. (So, if all cakes are the same, it is not discrimination to refuse to sell them a wedding cake for a same sex marriage as the baker would not sell any cake for a same sex marriage but offers many alternatives in the same service. If, instead, all wedding cakes are the same, then it is discrimination because the baker is only refusing service on the basis of their sexual orientation. But if all wedding cakes for same sex marriages are the same, then it is, again, not discrimination, because the baker would not sell a wedding cake for a same sex marriage regardless of the sexual orientation of the buyer.)
Last edited by marigolds6; 06-28-2017 at 05:29 PM..
Well, this is why this case is going all the way to the top. Is a business owner obligated, by state and local laws against discrimination, to serve customers that conflict with his religious convictions?
Well, where does that end?
Suppose his 'religious convictions' say he can't serve any woman without a dress down to her feet and a head covering?
Suppose his religious convictions say a divorced male and female are sinners and he can't bake them a cake?
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.
