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.
You actually have a valid point about how Jesus works with Sinners. The Bakery was holding true to its core values based on Religious life choices which is protected by law. They Obviously believe in traditional Marriage Happy Gay couples life style offended the values of the business. Yes good business has values.
Look at Hobby Lobby and Chick Filet.
Christian owned Businesses that values are used everyday. Yet they serve all groups of people providing services and values to the customer. Gay customers understand they are entering and supporting a Christian based business to do business.
This is a clear case of targeting and reverse Discrimination since the Law in Oregon. was written. Technically speaking the 2 claims have cancel each other out based on Discrimination.
1. The couples right to buying product ( I would of found a more willing vender)
2. The rights of 1st and 14 Amendment of a Christian Believer. Which technical apply to both parties in this case.
This has turned into a Religious Debate, because the way you trying to portray Christians. You can simple throw a phrase and not be called on it. Every case has 2 sides to a story which you chose to ignore , how many times?
I lost count!
How many times have Gay's use the word "Offended"?? Please!
How are gays to know when a bigotted Christian is operating a business? Does the business put out signs saying no gays allowed? The case is clear, the business owner wants to discriminate using her bible and trump the laws that everyone else must follow, her beliefs do not trump the law or everyone elses rights.
The point is that the government should not be able to force you to do business (associate) with people you choose not to associate.
However, just as freedom of speech is not absolute, either should the freedom of association. Some businesses like doctors, pharmacists, grocers, etc should be forced to do business with everyone - businesses that provide essential services.
The point is that no one is forced to open a business. By CHOOSING to open a business you agree to follow all laws and regulation of operating a business.
It is on topic, since this comes down to personal liberty.
People are on here essentially saying that government should be able to tell you who you must associate. They then say that since you make the "choice" of opening a business, the government can intrude into such areas. Well, since using a phone is a "choice", shouldn't the government be able to suspend your personal liberties since you are not forced to use a phone?
Completely and totally unrelated, different issues.
In one, you have government regulation of commerce - something specifically enumerated as a power of the federal government, and something every State has as part of its plenary police power.
The other describes an unreasonable, warrantless search in violation of the 4th Amendment.
So you agree that the government should be allowed to say "if you want to have a phone, you must sign this contract giving us permission to listen to your calls whenever we choose"?
If they did, I would still have the CHOICE to accept the terms of having a phone, just like businesses have the CHOICE to open a business knowing the laws of the state.
Specifically, what purpose does it serve to make a baker bake a cake for people he doesn't not want to associate?
If the baker does not want to associate with the general public, they should not have opened a business. They could have opened a private membership only bakery, or only sold cakes to members of their church, but they chose to open a business knowing that it was a public accommodation under the laws of the state.
Nope, the baker simply doesn't want to assist in preparing a ceremony that they believe is morally wrong.
And they cannot use their religion to discriminate. Geez some people have rocks for brains on this forum. If this were turned around the other way and Christians were denied service just for being Christian, they would be screaming foul play. Maybe these businesses should post signs our declaring what sins they will refuse to bake a cake for. But we all know that is not the case, they are singling out homosexuals and discriminating against them.
No, people are saying that if you CHOOSE to open a business you have to follow the laws that all other businesses have to follow. There are laws that I don't like, but I have to follow them while working to get them changed or I can be fined or imprisoned.
Anti-discrimination laws in places of public accommodation have nothing to do with phone service.
All you are doing is arguing "if it's a law, it must be followed".
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose
The point is that no one is forced to open a business. By CHOOSING to open a business you agree to follow all laws and regulation of operating a business.
This matches exactly with my phone comparison.
Using a phone is a choice. Phones use has laws and regulations for use. Therefore, since you choose to use a phone that has regulation, you agree to forfeit rights.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammertime33
Completely and totally unrelated, different issues.
In one, you have government regulation of commerce - something specifically enumerated as a power of the federal government, and something every State has as part of its plenary police power.
The other describes an unreasonable, warrantless search in violation of the 4th Amendment.
So, are you declaring that the government doesn't regulate phone usage?
Specifically, what type of regulation of commerce can the government control? Can the government go to a grocery store and say that since nobody within 50 miles sells plumbing supplies, the store must sell plumbing supplies to serve the community properly?
They lost their business, was harassed, and now probably will go into financial ruin and bankruptcy. All because a gay couple got offended. So yea, I would say they are the victims here.
NO, all because they chose to break the law, get that, THEY CHOSE TO BREAK THE LAW, their beliefs do not trump the law, no matter what the religion is. GET THIS SOME OF YOU CHRISTIANS, THE 1st APPLIES TO ALL OF US, NOT JUST YOU.
Why do we need the government to tell us who to do business with? Can anyone understand that is a problem? What is the purpose of government?
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.
