Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-04-2018, 09:10 AM
 
19,573 posts, read 8,509,846 times
Reputation: 10096

Advertisements

With this the Democrat left's "Political correctness" agenda takes a hard, steel-toed boot kick right to the family jewels.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-04-2018, 09:10 AM
 
11,186 posts, read 6,499,804 times
Reputation: 4622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dockside View Post
I like the headlines...

"Supreme Court rules narrowly for Colorado baker who wouldn't make same-sex wedding cake"

5-4 is a narrow ruling. 7-2 is as close to a sweep as you are going to get these days.
Headline cracked me up. I expected a 'narrow' 5-4 decision for the baker. Breyer and Kagan joining the majority is as big a win as the SC can give on a freedom of religion case.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2018, 09:11 AM
 
3,072 posts, read 1,539,015 times
Reputation: 6199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cape Cod Todd View Post
I never understood why any business would turn away a customer and I certainly don't understand why anyone would want to buy something from someone that doesn't want to and even worse is when they are forced to sell to you.



Would you honestly eat a cake from a bakery that you had to sue to force them to make you that cake?



I own a real estate company and we don't care if our clients are gay, a minority, followers of some whacky religion, total loudmouth know it all jerks or if they voted for Hillary or Trump. We will help them to the best of our ability.



I don't know why a business would turn away a paying customer but it is nice to hear that a business has that right.
Because this was about creating a custom cake, a one time cake for the couple. The couple was free to choose a cake in the refrig. They wanted a custom cake. The freedom to create and not to create stands behind this view of religious freedom. Suppose I was an artist and I painted portraits of privately owned dogs, horses, houses, etc. why should I be forced to paint a portrait of you or your dog etc when I dont lke you or your dog. But I have prints made of many breeds of dogs including yours. You are free to buy a print. But why would the law force me to create a custom portrait for you? Now we need to have a case that truly protects artistic and religious freedom.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2018, 09:11 AM
 
10,086 posts, read 5,726,432 times
Reputation: 2899
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby Snacks View Post
Tell me where in the Bible Jesus said it's OK to hate gays, or where Jesus treated ANYONE badly. Newsflash: he didn't. Jesus said, "Love one another." That's pretty simple, with zero room for interpretation. Liberals don't need to spin this negatively: the so called Christian baker did a great job all on his own.

You shouldn't have to engage or support a person's sinful lifestyle in order to have love in your heart for the individual. Jesus loved the prostitute, but your statements would be like saying Jesus should have been willing to build her a new bed frame so she could perform better for her customers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2018, 09:11 AM
 
Location: Honolulu/DMV Area/NYC
30,608 posts, read 18,175,005 times
Reputation: 34459
Note I think narrow ruling refers to the scope of the ruling as a matter of law not in terms of the vote outcome. But a good decision nonetheless! A win for freedom!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2018, 09:12 AM
 
Location: Austin
15,622 posts, read 10,375,150 times
Reputation: 19506
I think I understand what the "narrow" victory being reported means. it means the ruling was narrow in scope. the supreme court didn't resolve the broad range of problems that can arise between the first amendment right to practice one's religion and anti-discrimination laws: that conflict will have to litigated in other cases, it seems. this ruling was for this case alone.... case specific.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2018, 09:13 AM
 
16,376 posts, read 22,467,039 times
Reputation: 14397
Does this mean a landlord can legally refuse to rent to an unmarried man and woman with a baby, due to the landlord's religious beliefs that they should be married? Even if they qualify for the rental otherwise.

Or does the 'narrow' ruling mean that other such discrimination versus religion doesn't apply.

Does it only apply to the 1 Colorado case? I am not understanding the 'narrow' part of the ruling. How narrow? How does it impact precedence?

Last edited by sware2cod; 06-04-2018 at 09:21 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2018, 09:15 AM
 
Location: Born in L.A. - NYC is Second Home - Rustbelt is Home Base
1,607 posts, read 1,084,199 times
Reputation: 1372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cape Cod Todd View Post
I never understood why any business would turn away a customer and I certainly don't understand why anyone would want to buy something from someone that doesn't want to and even worse is when they are forced to sell to you.

Would you honestly eat a cake from a bakery that you had to sue to force them to make you that cake?

I own a real estate company and we don't care if our clients are gay, a minority, followers of some whacky religion, total loudmouth know it all jerks or if they voted for Hillary or Trump. We will help them to the best of our ability.

I don't know why a business would turn away a paying customer but it is nice to hear that a business has that right.

Your train of thought does not extend to homosexuals. Homosexuals are mentally ill to start with, so they don't accept reality.

In the big picture,acceptance is not enuf for the homosexuals. You must approve and embrace homosexuality. That is the only thing a homosexual will allow for.

A normal person would not want to have food made by someone that hates them...but leave it to the homosexuals. The key word 'normal' is missing from their life - homosexuals are abnormal.

If Obama or Hil was in, you could bet the baker would have lost and the homosexuals would be eating cake.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2018, 09:15 AM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,192,207 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakin View Post
Does it not make the Religious argument more valid though? Don't want to make Hoodies for the KKK, then you should have that right.
Not so far according to my understanding. In what I have read of the ruling so far it appears to rule on how the commission acted during the initial case and not the law itself. I haven't finished reading yet though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2018, 09:15 AM
 
79,913 posts, read 44,150,874 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40 View Post
You shouldn't have to engage or support a person's sinful lifestyle in order to have love in your heart for the individual. Jesus loved the prostitute, but your statements would be like saying Jesus should have been willing to build her a new bed frame so she could perform better for her customers.
Jesus ate dinner with the "sinners" and this did not make the church very happy. Jesus had no problem associating with those whose actions he did not agree with.

W.W.J.D.?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:50 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top