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.
Funny how your side must always use irrelevant comparisons to prop up your argument. For one thing, a gay wedding is a public commitment and announcement to the world that you intend to continue living this sinful lifestyle. An illegitimate child could be the product of a past sin that has been forgiven. Now if the baker was asked to bake a cake for a ceremony that celebrates adultery, I'm sure they wouldn't do it either!
If your standard is that the baker must only sell to sinless people to not be hypocritical then they would have zero customers as we are all sinners.
Not if the parents aren't married and it's a baby shower cake. That's an announcement to the world that Mom had sex out of wedlock. Why aren't bakeries checking the marriage certificates of all their mothers to be before they bake a shower cake? Why do they condone and "participate" in a celebration of something that violates their beliefs in such an in your face fashion?
Not if the parents aren't married and it's a baby shower cake. That's an announcement to the world that Mom had sex out of wedlock. Why aren't bakeries checking the marriage certificates of all their mothers to be before they bake a shower cake?
Irrelevant question, just as HL's lack of having completely vetted every employee to assure no sin was ever committed was irrelevant in SCOTUS's HL ruling.
The fact remains that just as SCOTUS ruled that a law cannot mandate a closely held corporation to violate the religious beliefs of its owner. Doing so substantially burdens the owners’ religious beliefs when there are less-restrictive means of providing similar goods/services.
No, I get it exactly. And effectively refuted it, as did SCOTUS in the HL ruling.
No, you didn't.
My post has nothing to do with rulings, and everything to do with the selective and disingenuous use of "substantially violates the owner's relgious beliefs" by inconsistent business owners.
Irrelevant question, just as HL's lack of having completely vetted every employee to assure no sin was ever committed was irrelevant in SCOTUS's HL ruling.
The fact remains that just as SCOTUS ruled that a law cannot mandate a closely held corporation to violate the religious beliefs of its owner. Doing so substantially burdens the owners’ religious beliefs when there are less-restrictive means of providing similar goods/services.
It's not irrelevant.
You're trying to draw parallels between Hobby Lobby/paying for birth control, and bakers discriminating, when the parallels do not exist. The baker isn't being asked to PAY for something that is against his religion. While I think SCOTUS got it wrong in the Hobby Lobby case, because the owners of Hobby Lobby severed the company from themselves with the act of incorporation, there is no parity between a law which asks a company to PAY for something they disagree with, and a law which prohibits a business from discriminating.
Irrelevant question, just as HL's lack of having completely vetted every employee to assure no sin was ever committed was irrelevant in SCOTUS's HL ruling.
The fact remains that just as SCOTUS ruled that a law cannot mandate a closely held corporation to violate the religious beliefs of its owner. Doing so substantially burdens the owners’ religious beliefs when there are less-restrictive means of providing similar goods/services.
How is it irrelevant? Are the bakers participating in the celebration of the illegitimate child or are they not?
If they care about violating their beliefs, they WOULD vet everyone ordering a shower cake, whether required by law or otherwise.
Not if the parents aren't married and it's a baby shower cake. That's an announcement to the world that Mom had sex out of wedlock. Why aren't bakeries checking the marriage certificates of all their mothers to be before they bake a shower cake? Why do they condone and "participate" in a celebration of something that violates their beliefs in such an in your face fashion?
No, it's still a past sinful act versus present ongoing sinful lifestyle. If you are having a ceremony that celebrates premarital sex, I'm sure the baker wouldn't like that either.
My post has nothing to do with rulings, and everything to do with the selective and disingenuous use of "substantially violates the owner's relgious beliefs" by inconsistent business owners.
You can think whatever you want. That's your right. But SCOTUS has ruled. The government cannot mandate a closely held corporation to violate the religious beliefs of its owner. Doing so substantially burdens the owners’ religious beliefs when there are less-restrictive means of providing similar goods/services.
Buy a wedding cake somewhere else, like any of these sources. They're beautiful:
Can someone explain to me exactly what this new amended religious rights bill in Indiana and the new one in Arkansas can and cannot do and does and does not allow ? It is getting confusing.
Can a business owner refuse to service a gay wedding or can they not? And the wording in the law now mentions no discrimination against gays and lesbians does that add new protections for gays that were not there in the states before or not? The other states lifted their ban on traveling to Indiana after the amended laws but some on both sides are still not happy . Is there anyone on here with a legal understanding of this new bill and what it does?
No, it's still a past sinful act versus present ongoing sinful lifestyle. If you are having a ceremony that celebrates premarital sex, I'm sure the baker wouldn't like that either.
It's a ceremony that celebrates bringing an illegitimate child into the world. Isn't that a sinful act? Shouldn't the baker insist the couple get married and legitimize their offspring?
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.
