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.
Lol there is no gender discrimination at play here but nice try.
Really?
A male can marry a female, but a male can not marry a male. Discrimination based on gender.
A female can marry a male, but a female can not marry a female. Discrimination based on gender.
I can't believe that you guys are trying that same arguments that were shot down in the past.
Quote:
The fifth, and final, argument judges would use to justify miscegenation law was undoubtedly the most important; it used these claims that interracial marriage was unnatural and immoral to find a way around the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of "equal protection under the laws." How did judges do this? They insisted that because miscegenation laws punished both the black and white partners to an interracial marriage, they affected blacks and whites "equally." This argument, which is usually called the equal application claim, was hammered out in state supreme courts in the late 1870s, endorsed by the United States Supreme Court in 1882, and would be repeated by judges for the next 85 years.
1. YOU are saying that the Oregon baker has no rights, as you do not recognize his right, as a Christian, to not participate in an event which conflicts with his religious beliefs. If you are correct (which you are not- liberals never are), then-
Lesbians can-
a. demand that Muslim restaurant owners provide them with alcohol
b. Muslim vendors sell them pork
c. Hindu vendors must sell them beef
d. Jews must open thier closed shops on the Sabbath to accomodate lesbians
2. You do not understand public accomodation. Exercising one's rights cannot void another's (liberals, as fascists, don't understand this)
a. the baker was not selling GAY WEDDING CAKES. He was only selling wedding cakes. He had sold many other baked goods to gays. You are saying that he has no right to refuse someone, even though it violates his rights.
3. The lesbians were asking the baker to participate in an illegal activity, as "gay marriage" was not legal in Oregon. Should he be forced to sell crack pipes to lesbians?
Wake up. Political correctness and liberalism CAN BE SO CONFUSING as it is so contradictory and defies logic. Try again. Your "arguments" lack any logic and reveal your fascist beliefs.
The christian baker made the CHOICE to open a business. By doing so he agreed to follow the laws of the state in which he is doing business. One of those laws is a law that says that public accommodations can not discriminate based on sexual orientation.
If the christian baker can not follow the laws of the state he can close his business, or stop selling wedding cakes.
Quote:
Lesbians can-
a. demand that Muslim restaurant owners provide them with alcohol
b. Muslim vendors sell them pork
c. Hindu vendors must sell them beef
d. Jews must open thier closed shops on the Sabbath to accomodate lesbians
If a business does not sell pork it can not be required to sell pork.
If a business does not sell alcohol, it can not be required to sell alcohol.
If a business does not sell beef it can not be required to sell beef.
If a business does not operate on the Sabbath, it can not be required to open on the Sabbath.
THIS baker makes wedding cakes, he can not discriminate based on sexual orientation to whom he sells wedding cakes.
There is no such thing as a "gay" wedding cake, as cakes do not have sexual orientations.
Gay marriage ceremonies are not illegal, they are simply not recognized by the state of Oregon.
And you claim to be a physician. I thought that required an education, which you seem to be lacking.
The christian baker made the CHOICE to open a business. By doing so he agreed to follow the laws of the state in which he is doing business. One of those laws is a law that says that public accommodations can not discriminate based on sexual orientation.
If the christian baker can not follow the laws of the state he can close his business, or stop selling wedding cakes.
If a business does not sell pork it can not be required to sell pork.
If a business does not sell alcohol, it can not be required to sell alcohol.
If a business does not sell beef it can not be required to sell beef.
If a business does not operate on the Sabbath, it can not be required to open on the Sabbath.
THIS baker makes wedding cakes, he can not discriminate based on sexual orientation to whom he sells wedding cakes.
There is no such thing as a "gay" wedding cake, as cakes do not have sexual orientations.
Gay marriage ceremonies are not illegal, they are simply not recognized by the state of Oregon.
And you claim to be a physician. I thought that required an education, which you seem to be lacking.
1. He DID agree to abide by the laws of the state (he had many gay customers), until the two lesbians VIOLATED HIS RIGHTS.
2. He was selling WEDDING CAKES- NOT GAY WEDDING CAKES. Just as
the muslim refusing to sell pork
the muslim refusing to sell alcohol
the hindu refusing to sell beef
the jew not being open on the Sabbath
NONE OF THEM are selling what the prospective lesbian "customer" wants. However, in YOUR FASCIST LIBERAL WORLD, the lesbians now have the right to DEMAND what they are not selling.
3. Gay marriage was illegal in Oregon at the time. Why should someone be compelled to sell products that are specifically made for illegal activities? Should the baker be compelled now to sell crack pipes to lesbians?
4. If gay marriages were not the law, then by definition they were illegal. Let's say that prior to gay marriage being enacted, the two lesbians were "married" and one died. The other lesbian would not be entitled to "steal" any of the assets of thier partner nor the insurance benefits. The practice would be illegal.
5. The baker also has rights. He legally exercised them by not selling the wedding cake. Are you again saying that you do not recognize his right to religious freedom? Let's hear you say it, as you are, by your argument, defacto stating that this is true, and that the rights of the lesbians are GREATER than his.
The more you argue, the more ridiculous you appear. Don't worry- liberalism IS the failed defense of the absurd, therefore NO ONE can logically defend its tenents.
1. He DID agree to abide by the laws of the state (he had many gay customers), until the two lesbians VIOLATED HIS RIGHTS.
2. He was selling WEDDING CAKES- NOT GAY WEDDING CAKES. Just as
the muslim refusing to sell pork
the muslim refusing to sell alcohol
the hindu refusing to sell beef
the jew not being open on the Sabbath
NONE OF THEM are selling what the prospective lesbian "customer" wants. However, in YOUR FASCIST LIBERAL WORLD, the lesbians now have the right to DEMAND what they are not selling.
3. Gay marriage was illegal in Oregon at the time. Why should someone be compelled to sell products that are specifically made for illegal activities? Should the baker be compelled now to sell crack pipes to lesbians?
4. If gay marriages were not the law, then by definition they were illegal. Let's say that prior to gay marriage being enacted, the two lesbians were "married" and one died. The other lesbian would not be entitled to "steal" any of the assets of thier partner nor the insurance benefits. The practice would be illegal.
5. The baker also has rights. He legally exercised them by not selling the wedding cake. Are you again saying that you do not recognize his right to religious freedom? Let's hear you say it, as you are, by your argument, defacto stating that this is true, and that the rights of the lesbians are GREATER than his.
The more you argue, the more ridiculous you appear. Don't worry- liberalism IS the failed defense of the absurd, therefore NO ONE can logically defend its tenents.
Try again.
Birthday parties are not the law, does that make having one illegal?
Having a ceremony is not illegal, I can have a ceremony in my back yard tomorrow, and it is not illegal. It would not be recognized by the state, but it is not illegal.
Are you "stealing" your spouses assets if they die? Should someone else ba allowed to have the assets you two worked for together? Should you have to pay taxes on half of the assets you worked for together?
Stop with your complaining. You obviously do not know ANYTHING about the law, and continue to show your ignorance by posting this drivel.
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.
