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.
Was the wedding being held IN the store? No? Then my comments stand. There was no behavior INSIDE the store (AFAIK) that was objectionable, thus their "planning to use this for a wedding" doesn't = behavior that would be grounds for refusal of service. I'm not sure how much more clear I can explain this, but obviously 50+ pages still haven't sunk in to some of your minds.
A domestic partnership cake? That's a new one to me, LOL.
But we'll go with that for argument's sake, and again, it wouldn't fall under a protected class - unless you happen to live in a state (I think CA?) where marital status is a protected class, and then he probably WOULD be required to serve them equally. If he just didn't want to make it for a random reason, like the colors didn't agree with his palate, he could get away with that since it wouldn't be legally-defined discrimination. Again, I really cannot explain this any more clearly!
Laws aside, he needs to learn how to do business without personal feelings. I serve people EVERY DAY who have beliefs & behaviors I don't agree with, and I also help people find materials I don't like. I've helped them locate Mein Kampf (without asking or caring why), the Christian Bible, the Q'uran, etc. And as the main purchaser for adult materials at the library, I have also ordered books that go against my beliefs - like Ann Coulter, which I admit makes me shudder when I hit that order button.
Point being, work is for working... personal beliefs should be kept at home, church, social groups, or wherever you aren't being paid to do a JOB. Even if/when I didn't work for a public institution, I still do my work without letting personal feelings interfere with providing excellent service. Are people so self-absorbed and self-righteous these days, that this concept is now lost?
Apparently, they are. And these self-absorbed, self-righteous people are amply represented amongst the keyboard warriors of C-D. It's just amazing to me that so many think it's problematic to sell to people who disagree with them. Shouldn't the baker have been honored that these women found their wedding cakes beautiful and tasty enough to have at their own wedding? They weren't asking the baker to officiate, just to supply food for the customary monetary exchange. A business deal.
You're the last one to speak of open-mindedness, and having you on ignore is simply because THERE IS NO POINT in arguing with you... I've tried, believe me, and nothing has ever been accomplished. So for my own sanity, it's just easier to ignore your posts altogether. And yes, I am able to read this one - I just hit "view post," since I was curious to see how you responded. But that's it; back on ignore now!!
Interesting, because many of us feel every bit as strongly as you do in reverse and will never, ever compromise in any way, shape, or form on this issue. "Gay" marriage and "gay" marriage advocacy is lunacy beyond the farthest reaches of reasoned human beings. And the issue of free will and free thought that arises from the forced acceptance by government edict of something so perverse and so distasteful is a cause to which many will pledge their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. You are NOT going to win this....ever.
ALL outspoken "gay" marriage advocates here are on my ignore list. That's right - every....single....one....that I run across.
That might come as a surprise to all the same sex couples who have gotten married in my state (Washington) in the last two months, as well as nine other states and the District of Columbia.
Seriously, it is just a matter of time before ALL fifty states will have marriage equality; will you still be screaming that we are "NOT going to win this....ever" when that happens?
Quote:
ALL outspoken "gay" marriage advocates here are on my ignore list. That's right - every....single....one....that I run across.
The store owner didn't tell any homosexuals he wouldn't serve them. He serves them all the time. He sells them muffins, cupcakes, coffee, tea. Whatever's in the store, he sells to whomever comes into the store.
Right?
He doesn't sell wedding cakes to homos, but he does to heterosexuals. That's discrimination based on sexual orientation. It's pretty darn simple.
Last edited by hammertime33; 02-06-2013 at 09:09 PM..
Interesting, because many of us feel every bit as strongly as you do in reverse and will never, ever compromise in any way, shape, or form on this issue. "Gay" marriage and "gay" marriage advocacy is lunacy beyond the farthest reaches of reasoned human beings. And the issue of free will and free thought that arises from the forced acceptance by government edict of something so perverse and so distasteful is a cause to which many will pledge their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. You are NOT going to win this....ever.
As Cinebar said, you've already lost in many states - with still more to come, most likely mine (CA) being next on the list. The majority of Americans now support gay marriage, and those numbers are rising DAILY. So guess what, buddy? You already have lost.
I don't care what you think personally, and don't even know if I fully support anti-discrimination laws. But the laws stand for now, and again, gay marriage is rapidly becoming legal across the world. You can still hold whatever views you so desire, just don't be surprised when people like you become a rare entity.
Quote:
ALL outspoken "gay" marriage advocates here are on my ignore list. That's right - every....single....one....that I run across.
So, am I not "outspoken" enough - or am I on your ignore list too? Not that I care, LOL.
And unlike you (apparently), I don't just put people on ignore for disagreeing with me... tons of people on this forum have differing views from mine, and I only have maybe 4-5 active members on ignore. Why are THEY special? Because either they've personally insulted me beyond forgiveness (i.e. Holocaust denier), or they have a tendency to suck people into debate and go in circles forEVER. There is debate, there is argument, and then there are members who only accomplish making me do this:
ALL outspoken "gay" marriage advocates here are on my ignore list. That's right - every....single....one....that I run across.
I doubt this will get to you, but why participate in an online politics debate board if you're just going to "ignore" posters with different viewpoints?
I don't have a single person on my "ignore list" - I'm here to debate those who see things differently.
I doubt this will get to you, but why participate in an online politics debate board if you're just going to "ignore" posters with different viewpoints?
I don't have a single person on my "ignore list" - I'm here to debate those who see things differently.
I've had CrownVic on my ignore list for a long time. Nasty trolls that can't comprehend logic or evidence are pretty much a waste of time to debate with, thus they usually go on ignore. I get really fed up with reading posts saying gays are an abomination and will burn in Hell. Doesn't make me feel good, thus no reason to read those people's remarks.
I doubt this will get to you, but why participate in an online politics debate board if you're just going to "ignore" posters with different viewpoints?
I don't have a single person on my "ignore list" - I'm here to debate those who see things differently.
I've put a few people on ignore but curiosity always gets the better of me and I end up taking them off.
There would be no story had the women shown some class and simply gone to another bakery and had Lauren Bowman not filed the complaint. Now there's a story and Mr. Klein has every right to respond. It just frustrates some that he is not rolling over and he will openly and proudly defend himself.
It was their intention from the start to provoke an incident.
It was their intention from the start to provoke an incident.
Do you have any proof of this, or are you just speculating? Even if you were right (which I doubt you can prove), that doesn't change the fact that he broke a law... are you saying people should be able to break laws without consequence, and only the "whistle-blower" should be to blame?
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.
