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.
Now that's the rub. You define a baker saying he wishes to not participate in a gay wedding ceremony as "mistreating".
Yet...you believe (correctly I might add) that City-Data, Facebook, Twitter, etc all have the right to censor their posters? You don't see any issue with holding those contradicting views? A private business can do what they want.
No, I don't. A private business owner still has to follow laws. You don't get a free pass to discriminate because you hate gay weddings. A "private" business is not "private" if it is open to the public. If you make wedding cakes for Jack and Jill, then you have to make wedding cakes for Jack and John. Don't like it? Then either don't make wedding cakes, or don't have a business open to the public.
As has been explained to you before, this has nothing to do with censorship on a website. A website has rules, and everyone has to follow them. Break the rules, you get censored. A business owner, such as a baker, doesn't get to make their own laws, or decide which ones they want to follow.
Also as has been explained to you before, you have the right to say or do whatever you want, but that doesn't make you immune to consequences. These Christian business owners would have no problems if they weren't bigoted idiots.
If you are in the wedding vendor business, which is BIG time, you DO NOT participate in a ceremony by providing vendor services. You are NOT worshiping or condoning or participating in the ceremony at all, you are simply providing a service. If you bring your political views into this, and this is what this is, a political view and not a religious belief, you deserve to be seen in the wedding vendor business for what you are... discriminatory.
You have the right to your opinion. I don't agree.
Now, what about Facebook....are they justified in censoring the people they serve?
My ex wife owns a wedding venue. I've helped out there a time or two. They come way before the ceremony and set it up. They do not participate in the wedding ceremony.
Does the same baker refuse to sell to divorced Christians remarrying? Do the same bakers refuse to sell when said divorce was the product of adultery and said wedding ceremony is the marriage of the once adulterous couple? Do they preen into the affairs of all the people they make cakes for? Cause that is FAR more common. But denying those would probably cut into the profit line too steeply.
You hit the nail on the head with the bold. If they really valued their religious beliefs over all else, they would refuse to make ALL wedding cakes, because you just don't know what type of people they truly are. Or they would also refuse to make wedding cakes for any marriages that aren't the first. They don't do that though, because the fact is, they don't care about it being an "immoral ceremony", they only care about turning the gay couple away, and preaching at them, making them feel bad.
You have the right to your opinion. I don't agree.
Now, what about Facebook....are they justified in censoring the people they serve?
On what grounds should Facebook be prevented from censoring anyone they choose? Freedom of speech does not apply. That's to keep the government from censoring you.
BTW, just HOW does a cake baker participate in a wedding? I've been to a lot of weddings in my life, and I've never seen a cake baker in attendance.
The fact that your side simply states, without any evidence that us merely holding the moral conviction is wrong and harmful is the issue. That's bigotry to suggest that we are unable to hold a conviction while not acting to harm anyone in any way.
Who is saying that? I'm not.
NO one is saying that holding the conviction while not acting to harm anyone in any way, we are telling you that expressing your conviction the way you do is hate speech and leads directly to the kind of discrimination that has hiistorically been so flagrant and pervasive that many areas have felt the need to legislate against it.
NO one is saying that holding the conviction while not acting to harm anyone in any way, we are telling you that expressing your conviction the way you do is hate speech and leads directly to the kind of discrimination that has hiistorically been so flagrant and pervasive that many areas have felt the need to legislate against it.
So we can believe it as long as we don't actually open our mouths? Wow, Sarge, that's kind of you.
Because your opinion of the meaning of scrpture does not hold water and because no harm to anyone can be shown to be caused by a same sex relationship. Prejudice is not justification for opinions.
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.
