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.
As far as the Constitution is concerned, however, the First Amendment's religious freedom protections are clear that government is not to judge the validity/appropriateness/etc. of one's religious beliefs. Plain and simple. .
I'm guessing the gay couple that is refused a wedding cake is going to make sure the locals know. And that is their right. Odds are it will cost the bakery. Not too many gay couples that are refused a wedding cake are going to go back and buy Sunday croissants after that.
Who cares. Everyone is entitled to their values and beliefs. It the food tastes good, I will eat it and I don't care whether a gay couple got really mad at a baker when the baker wouldn't do as demanded.
Status:
"Smartened up and walked away!"
(set 21 days ago)
11,770 posts, read 5,783,856 times
Reputation: 14187
I'm not anti gay but feel a business has a right to not serve or do business with whoever they please. If this bakery had refused to bake a cake for a racist redneck couple - the libs would be having a parade in the streets - but because thee owner feels it's against his religious principles - something many libs abhor - than it's a terrible thing.
That's the Supremes for you. They'll screw both sides over with arbitrary rulings on meaningless cases( like this one) turned into landmark rulings by the media. But when REAL cases come before them, ones that impact the middle class, the economy, personal freedoms against an authoritarian government, then they'll side against the people every time and back big business and the elite. Gotta love the deep state.
Being black is not an agenda. The civil rights movement was about removing an agenda. This case was about a gay couple forcing someone to accept an agenda.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby Snacks
It still irritates the heck out of me that reporters consistently describe this bigot baker as a Christian and the couple as just gay. Like a man with decidedly un-Christlike attitudes is the one who is Christian but gay people can't be Christian
Great precedent, which will lead future ones, in 50 states, to stay within our founding fathers intent, and not judge religion.
The Commission members in Colorado are likely going to be sued, as they should be, and settle out of court, which would be their prudent choice.
They were 100% biased against the baker simply because he is a religious man.
The only precedent I saw was that public commissions cannot be openly hostile to business owners, that's it. This really should have been solved locally using some commons sense. The supreme court wanted no part in addressing free speech or religion and we should not expect these cases to get to this level. People need to get along and be reasonable and that goes for both sides in this discussion.
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.
