U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-12-2019, 11:48 AM
 
15,566 posts, read 13,559,246 times
Reputation: 21354

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pennyone View Post
Should it? I don’t see why not. What’s wrong with a cake with a Christian theme, or a wicken theme, or a Muslim theme? So long as it doesn’t depict violence or hateful message it should not be a problem. If a cake should have a message that reads let’s bomb Israel, or let’s gas all the gays or let’s decapitate all the Muslims.....then the store has a right to refuse. Hate speech is not free speech.
Hate speech is free speech...

Would you support forcing the bakery to make a Nazi celebration cake?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-12-2019, 11:51 AM
 
12,698 posts, read 10,528,548 times
Reputation: 17606
Quote:
Originally Posted by katharsis View Post
Glad to see that about 90% of the people posting on this thread are against this kind of (imo) far left lunacy! As others have stated so well, it works both ways. If conservative bakers can be forced to bake cakes for extreme liberals, why shouldn't liberal bakers be forced to bake cakes for extreme conservatives?

Again, as long as a life is not at stake or involves an actual hate crime, businesses should have the right to choose, imo -- and isn't the "right to choose" a cornerstone of liberal (and moderate) thinking?
You (and OP I think) are mischaracterizing the problem in the actual cases, which cited a religious and not political basis. It is not one's political affiliation that was relevant, but religious affiliation. A super conservative should have no problem doing business with someone who is super liberal. Even if the cake says "MAGA" or "Eff Trump" or "Go Israel" or "Free Palestine." Who the hell cares? If your business is decorating cakes, decorate cakes. You are doing what your customer wants. Unless it calls for violence or is extremely offensive in some way, do your job or refuse entire categories to not pick and choose, so don't do cakes with political messages at all if you want to avoid endorsing a candidate via your cake which you are selling and giving to another person who asked for it. From a business perspective, this makes the most sense.

Whatever business owners legally can do doesn't necessarily equate with what is morally right or what makes sense as a business owner. Like others are saying, people who go into business go into business, presumably, to make money. That is their livelihood. If they want to go around citing "religious beliefs" as a reason to not sell a certain cake to a certain person, if the law says they can, then they can (and if it says they can't, then they can't). But that doesn't mean it's a smart or wise decision from a business perspective to refuse to make a cake for someone because they are gay or like Donald Trump and want MAGA on a cake, or even a wise decision from a human or moral perspective.

Whatever the law says on discrimination in these types of cases is what everyone should have to adhere to, no matter who they are. If one can discriminate based on their religion (like refusing to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple because your religion apparently says so) or lack of (so not be forced to write religious messages on cakes, like a Bible verse because they don't believe), then everyone should be able to discriminate on this basis no matter what political affiliation they have. If it says you CAN'T do that, then no one should be able to. etc. But don't forget, the First Amendment also protects those who are NOT religious, not just those who are. So if this to someone with a simple black and white mind means a "liberal," then yes, liberals may also be protected under the religion clauses of the First Amendment. Free to exercise or NOT exercise religion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2019, 11:57 AM
 
29,785 posts, read 16,467,363 times
Reputation: 13843
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyGirl415 View Post
So let's say every landlord in a particular city refuses to rent to black people because none of them want to or like black people. Still okay, for people of one race to be denied leases in the entire city and have to live elsewhere?

This is why protections for race exist in the first place, other protected classes as well. To protect from arbitrary "I don't like you because reasons and it's my business so I can do what I want" people on a power trip, thinking that because they own a business they can truly freely discriminate.
Should your right to determine who enters your home be subjet to the whims and fancies of politicians? Of course not.
Hanging a sign over your door and defining your home as a place of business shouldn't change a thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2019, 12:01 PM
 
12,698 posts, read 10,528,548 times
Reputation: 17606
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Should your right to determine who enters your home be subjet to the whims and fancies of politicians? Of course not.
Hanging a sign over your door and defining your home as a place of business shouldn't change a thing.
But a home and a business are not the same thing.

And do you want to answer the question I asked? So it should be totally fine for landlords in an entire city to basically keep out members of one race, stop them from living in any rental, just because in your opinion they shouldn't be told what to do by the government?

This sounds kinda like parts of history and these pesky things called the Equal Protection Clause and Civil Rights Act of 1964 got in the way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2019, 12:19 PM
 
6,659 posts, read 1,377,211 times
Reputation: 16738
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyGirl415 View Post
You (and OP I think) are mischaracterizing the problem in the actual cases, which cited a religious and not political basis..
Granted. But the point that I (and I think others) is making is that businesses should have the right to decline any business for any reason UNLESS it would cause actual harm to someone (such as denying a particular group of people from being able to live in decent accommodations, have enough food to eat, receive medical care, etc.). Cakes do not fall into that category. Also, the point is that if a stance is taken on an issue, it should apply to everyone, not just to those with a certain view, whether that view is religious or political.

Anyway, we are talking about something that I think that most people (including myself) would say is actually a relatively trivial issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2019, 12:23 PM
 
Location: Somewhere out there.
6,869 posts, read 3,793,329 times
Reputation: 4606
Is this for real? Whats wrong with people? I'm a stong liberal and these lawsuits are stupid. No other word for it

I fail to understand why you would force someone to make ANYTHING for you against their will. It's just daft. Ask someone to do it who will take joy out of doing it.

Should an abstract artist be forced to paint landscapes?
Should a bespoke tailor be forced to make MAGA hats?

Why would you ask a Baker to make a cake they dont want make,, like they're the only Baker on the planet? Ridic in my opinion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2019, 01:25 PM
 
4,595 posts, read 903,785 times
Reputation: 1928
One thing I do wonder about some of these same-sex couples and Christian baker stories: Suppose that couple knows the baker is ultra-conservative. Why would they go to the bakery any and ask for "Adam & Steve's Wedding Cake" or "Mildred & Latoya's Wedding Cake" to labeled on the cake if they know the baker would object? To me, it seems like they are doing that just for attention, to put the baker in a bad situation, and to garner sympathy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2019, 01:29 PM
 
Location: USA
17,928 posts, read 8,921,474 times
Reputation: 13430
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie View Post
But to quote you once again: "I don't understand the entire concept of FORCING businesses, and business owners to do anything they don't want to do. It is THEIR business! They should be able to refuse to do things just based upon their ownership rights." Who knows how many business owners would discriminate if they legally could? To quote you again, "Of course there is still prejudices". So, no doubt, you're in conflict with yourself! So, no, Pilot1, while this country has made progress, sadly, it isn't past racism. And what you wrote doesn't help the situation at all.
We already have anti discrimination laws. I understand what you are saying and respect that you feel that way, but I just disagree.

There will always be prejudices as long as there are humans. We judge based on a host of things. Looks, dress, gender, height, weight, sometimes skin color, accent, etc. It is human nature. The trick is, and our goal should be to not treat people poorly due to those differences.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2019, 01:33 PM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
23,339 posts, read 11,558,074 times
Reputation: 4320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilot1 View Post
No. It should be up to the owner. Just like no shirt, no shoes, no service is up to the owner.
that doesnt technically discriminate against anyone ,so its different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2019, 01:51 PM
 
Location: Columbia, SC
18,243 posts, read 10,161,464 times
Reputation: 7080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian View Post
Point being, you do think voluntary association is fine for a business, you just argue over which criteria they can use when choosing or denying associations.

It is perfectly fine (and per your own words, morally required) to voluntarily deny an association with a neo-nazi, but not perfectly fine to voluntarily deny an association based on religious belief.

Oh wait, now I get it. You think YOU get to define for others what their criteria for forming or denying voluntary associations are/should be. YOU think it's OK to deny association with a neo-nazi, but YOU think it is not OK to deny association with someone based on religious beliefs, and therefore, the rules of voluntary association should be what YOU say they are.

Is it tiring, being the self-appointed moral compass and arbiter of individual natural rights for an entire nation?
Religion is a fairy tale, with no supporting empirical evidence to back it up. What you choose to believe along those lines is absolutely harmless until you try to force it on others.

Nazism is an historic reality. They murdered six million people, and the evil philosophy behind the reality hasn't changed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top