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.
Ten years ago, people would have probably laughed at the notion of putting a Christian in jail for not issuing marriage licenses to gay couples.
Show us one example of a Christian being put in jail for not issuing a marriage licence to a gay couple. If you are thinking of Kim Davis it was for contempt of court as she refused to allow any of her staff to issue licences for marriage of gay couples. Contempt of court. And the judge was a religious person who sentenced her.
You keep claiming that government offices can discriminate against people if the person in charge of that office wishes to discriminate. That is not how any government office should work in a western democracy.
You very well may be in favour of discrimination against gays at least in preventing them from getting married and enjoying the benefits of a marriage but at least be honest about it, Davis told a judge that she was unprepared to allow her staff to issue marriage licenses that gay couples were legally entitled to.
You keep putting up strawman scenarios.
How about this one?: A same sex couple opens a bakery in the Bible Belt in a Fundie populated town.
The townfolk all go in to do business...but upon seeing the Same Sex Couple, refuse to patronize the business, and let them know why in no uncertain terms. Their business is failing because of this.
You can see all these people patronizing a bakery 10 miles away..operated by a fellow Fundie. Buying the exact same goods sold at the local bakery operated by the homosexuals.
Should the law force them to be Buyers the local bakery that they refuse to buy from on no other basis than their prejudice toward the homosexual Sellers that run it?
No, they shouldn't be forced to patronize a business they do not want to. They are not serving the business, the business is serving them. You know the risks of going into business. If you didn't, then you should have thought a little harder before opening. Not to mention, if a same sex couple opened a bakery in a fundie, Bible belt town, they didn't do their homework. That is THEIR issue.
I couldn't help but notice, you did not answer the questions. Why not? Do you not have an answer that doesn't make you look like the hypocrite you are?
DENVER — The Colorado Supreme Court on Monday declined to take up the case of a suburban Denver baker who refused to make a cake for a same-sex wedding, letting stand a previous ruling that the Masterpiece Cakeshop owner must provide service despite his Christian beliefs.
Great. If the States that are passing anti-equality legislation now would listen, then they can save their taxpayers a ton of money having to defend unconstitutional laws. This gay couple went to court, because, in their words:
"Craig said they persisted with the case throughout a complicated legal process because they felt it was important to set the precedent that discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation was not only wrong but illegal.
“We didn’t want anyone to have to go through what we did,” Craig said.
It's time to stop the silliness of the culture wars, and recognize that everyone has to be treated equally. If you are a business, you're in business for everyone, purple, red, black, white, grey, orange tanned like Trump, or any other mixture, straight, homosexual, lesbian, confused, swing both ways, old, young or what ever, you are constrained by the laws of the land.
When will the fundamentalists get that?
The only silliness is another couple smelling a Christian, and going there instead of to a bakery that doesn't advertise itself as Christian (...or maybe a Muslim bakery. No, huh? Their refusal wouldn't offend your sensibilities?) as many do.
Oh and BTW, the thread title says it all: Selling a cake is one thing. Being forced to bake one, is another. And if I owned a Christian bakery, I would use one of the many creative ways to get around baking a cake with phallic symbols or including anti-Christian writing. The control freaks wouldn't win that one. Believe it.
The only silliness is another couple smelling a Christian, and going there instead of to a bakery that doesn't advertise itself as Christian (...or maybe a Muslim bakery. No, huh? Their refusal wouldn't offend your sensibilities?) as many do.
Oh and BTW, the thread title says it all: Selling a cake is one thing. Being forced to bake one, is another. And if I owned a Christian bakery, I would use one of the many creative ways to get around baking a cake with phallic symbols or including anti-Christian writing. The control freaks wouldn't win that one. Believe it.
I do not bake cakes in the shape of your penis for anyone. If I were so inclined,, it would be more of a penis cupcake to keep in tune with reality. Think of the statue of David. Cupcake size Christian penis.
The only silliness is another couple smelling a Christian, and going there instead of to a bakery that doesn't advertise itself as Christian (...or maybe a Muslim bakery. No, huh? Their refusal wouldn't offend your sensibilities?) as many do.
Oh and BTW, the thread title says it all: Selling a cake is one thing. Being forced to bake one, is another. And if I owned a Christian bakery, I would use one of the many creative ways to get around baking a cake with phallic symbols or including anti-Christian writing. The control freaks wouldn't win that one. Believe it.
Have you no reading comprehension? There is NO SUCH THING as a Christian bakery. If you want such, then you should bake cakes from your church, and keep from selling to the public. Don't like the anti-discrimination laws? A) Shows you are indeed NOT a Christian B) Don't open a business which may put you at odds with them.
There is a big difference between baking a wedding cake (which the already do) for a gay couple, and baking a cake with phallic symbols and anti-Christian writing on them. The fact that you can not see that... well, shows your lack of critical thinking skills.
No, they shouldn't be forced to patronize a business they do not want to. They are not serving the business, the business is serving them. You know the risks of going into business. If you didn't, then you should have thought a little harder before opening. Not to mention, if a same sex couple opened a bakery in a fundie, Bible belt town, they didn't do their homework. That is THEIR issue.
I couldn't help but notice, you did not answer the questions. Why not? Do you not have an answer that doesn't make you look like the hypocrite you are?
YOU are the hypocrite.
You think it is fine for the Seller to be discriminated against...with no legal sanctions for it.
As if Buyers don't serve the Seller...that's ignorant. Without Buyers, the Seller is not even viable...they serve them so crucially.
Why should them opening in the Bible-Belt be a factor...unless discrimination against them is considered acceptable? In a way that you hypocritically find unacceptable for the Buyer to have to endure!
I've answered all your questions with my stated position on the matter: The Buyer and the Seller should both be equally free to choose who they will or will not transact business with...for ANY reason.
Both are either equally free, or equally bound...that is the only fair way.
OK, folks. Opinions have been stated. Discrimination laws do not, and have never, restricted a customer's choice as to which business to patronize. If you want to change that entire part of society, please go start a thread in another forum, or take some other action. That has nothing to do with Religion or Spirituality (you know, the topics of this forum). Try to stay at least close to the topic of the thread.
YOU are the hypocrite.
You think it is fine for the Seller to be discriminated against...with no legal sanctions for it.
As if Buyers don't serve the Seller...that's ignorant. Without Buyers, the Seller is not even viable...they serve them so crucially.
Why should them opening in the Bible-Belt be a factor...unless discrimination against them is considered acceptable? In a way that you hypocritically find unacceptable for the Buyer to have to endure!
I've answered all your questions with my stated position on the matter: The Buyer and the Seller should both be equally free to choose who they will or will not transact business with...for ANY reason.
Both are either equally free, or equally bound...that is the only fair way.
STILL didn't answer the questions I see.... Anyway, buyers and sellers are different. Get over it. The law is not, and will never be, on your side of things. It must be nice that your religion lets you so freely discriminate. It must be nice worshipping this nothing God of yours! Do whatever you want to whoever you want with no consequences! Sweet!
As for the topic of this thread, in Colorado, a bakery is not a religious institution, therefore bakers can not discriminate. If a baker doesn't like that, then they should find a new business, or get off their high horse. Is their God SOOOOO puny, that he needs them to hate the gays for him?
STILL didn't answer the questions I see.... Anyway, buyers and sellers are different. Get over it. The law is not, and will never be, on your side of things. It must be nice that your religion lets you so freely discriminate. It must be nice worshipping this nothing God of yours! Do whatever you want to whoever you want with no consequences! Sweet!
As for the topic of this thread, in Colorado, a bakery is not a religious institution, therefore bakers can not discriminate. If a baker doesn't like that, then they should find a new business, or get off their high horse. Is their God SOOOOO puny, that he needs them to hate the gays for him?
I did answer the question(s). AGAIN: All Parties to the transaction should be free to choose who they will or will not do business with....IMO.
THAT is my critique of the "equality" of the ruling cited in the OP...and the so-called "anti-discrimination laws" (that actually CAUSE discrimination) now in place it is based upon.
I am arguing for the "equality" noted in the OP to be granted for all concerned.
As far as what the concept of Pantheism "allows" relative to the issue...it places no actual judgement on it, with a preference for fairness and equality. It is what it is, wherever, at any given time.
Obviously though...if you endorse these new "regulations", your Atheism Religion does allow for discrimination...as that is what this law causes.
The fact is...in case you didn't notice...these laws are VERY new. How long have "business transactions" taken place? Many thousands of years?
I prefer less regulations...not more.
Christians are jailed every day for breaking the law. Robert Dear, the Bundys, and Hastert comes to mind.
Yea but they lose their xian card when arrested and convicted.
No true xian would ever get arrested.
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.
...or maybe a Muslim bakery. No, huh? Their refusal wouldn't offend your sensibilities?) as many do.
to get around baking a cake with phallic symbols or including anti-Christian writing. The control freaks wouldn't win that one. Believe it.
