Good news: Anti-gay bakers owe lesbian couple $135,000 (birth control, abortion, Muslim)

[Nozzferrahhtoo]

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

There is no universal moral argument to support racism. None. No one can make a case that it is justified. You can't say the same about homosexuality. And despite the false sense of reality in this forum, many many people out there agree with me.

Ah the old "I have not supported my claim, so I will instead suggest people agree with me" canard. No surprise from you. There has been no arguments against the morality of homosexuality presented to me I must say, much less from you. So if you think a case can be made, by all means make the attempt for once.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

Why because you said so? In the real world, homosexuality causes real problems like the spread of HIV.

So does heterosexuality. Stop pretending it is the purview of one sexuality only. It is not. In fact lesbian homosexuality would be the lowest spreading group of them all for example. So the HIV-Homosexuality like fails and you are just pulling your usual canard here of pretending one particular group of MSM is synonymous with homosexuality as a whole.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

If you support SSM then you lose the right to morally object against any other kind of consensual union or you are a hypocrite.

No. You do not. Because each case has their own merits and demerits. And each one should be argued on the basis of those merits and demerits. What you are doing is playing the canard and fallacy of "Slippery Slope". We put thought into it and do not simply throw our hands up in intellectual laziness and declare if you allow one you allow them all.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

Baloney. Just looked how quickly and casually my article was brushed off by people here when it involved several gay bakeries refusing to serve a Christian.

You are right, what you just said is baloney. Because your article was not brushed off. In fact I very clearly and explicitly said to you myself that they should be prosecuted the exact same way if they broke the exact same law. But of course my agreement with you does not fit with your persecution narrative, so of course you simply pretend it never happened.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

Bottom line is you want the government to have laws that only favor your side.

No that is you. You are the one in post after post acting like Christians should have exemption from this law. You want it to be one rule for you and one rule for everyone else. So it is amazingly hypocrisy to falsely accuse someone else of this, while not acknowledging it even once in yourself.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

So you are making up situations that don't even exist in reality. Got it.

That is rich coming from the guy who bases all his opinions on the opinion of a god you have not ONCE moved to even begin to substantiate the existence of. You are the last person on this forum with the position to be hypocritical enough to throw this accusation at anyone.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

You don't accept people who are sexually orientated to be attracted to children. How is that different on this basic level?

Because with homosexuality there is no moral conflicts, but with children there is no capability of "informed consent". Massive difference, and one you try with such fetid desperation to ignore daily.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

Then stop arguing against our right to protest the law.

No one has. Protest the law all you like. You will find me helping you do so some of the time too. What I do argue against is your special pleading to be made exempt from the law due to your religion..... or your constant whinging and whining that people who blatantly break the law are prosecuted for doing so.

Pretending to not understand what we are actually arguing against, and instead pretending we are arguing against something else, just makes you look silly. Not us.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

The law has breached freedom of religion.

Your interpretation of "freedom of religion" perhaps. But not the actual one that exists out here in the real world where you are yet to join us.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

The annoying thing is your side will not compromise and try to work out a solution that satisfies both sides of the fences.

And the same lie again that I have already called you on, where you feed your false persecution narrative by simply ignoring the people who HAVE suggested fixes and compromises so you can pretend no one is offering a compromise. Yet time and time again I have told you I do not like the law and would love to see owners of a PRIVATE business being allowed to enter into business with whomever they want for whatever reasons.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

My impression is that it must always be your way or get out of town, jack.

An impression you maintain to feed your on going narratives by simply ignoring any and all posters and posts that do not feed into it, and reacting with disproportionate haughtiness to the minuscule number that do.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

Millions of people would disagree with you. Atheism is a small minority.

And back to your dodging backing up your position by instead referring to people you imagine agree with you. Yet I have seen few people agreeing with you on this forum, even among the Christian Cohort on here. Look up "Arumentum Ad Populum" some time. Learn what it is, and how to avoid doing it.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

And yet you and your friends are the ones launching personal insults and attacks like the suggestion today that I sniffed lead paint as a child.

And yet you can find not one post anywhere ever where I have done any such thing. In fact I have treated you with a high standard of decorum and patience since day one.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

Your question is a FAIL because we were all designed to be heterosexual.

Citations needed, substantiation fail here. Any evidence AT ALL to back up this FAIL of a claim?

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

Do you believe bestiality is a sin?

Once again I suggest you look up the concept of "informed consent". It would do the standard of your posts a world of good to learn what it means and how we apply it.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

Or people could just respect other's religious beliefs.

We respect people, not beliefs or ideas. Try it sometime.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

Just because you are anti-Christian doesn't give you the right to destroy freedom of religion.

Not subscribing to your warping of what "freedom of religion" means is not the same as destroying it.

[old_cold]

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

There should be outrage. This is a ridiculous overblown fine for a minor offense.

The overblown fine?
Not much of a hardship for the bakery in the long run since people like you paid most of it with the gofundme donations.

[mensaguy]

Originally Posted by Wardendresden

<snip>

I don't know if the gay couple mentioned in this thread intentionally targeted a baker (who obviously touted his bakery? or did God whisper that in your ear, too?) but the baker here in Colorado whose case is going to the Colorado Supreme Court, surprised the gay couple here with his refusal. They had no idea they would be denied.

<snip>

The girls knew Melissa's Sweet Cakes because Melissa had made a cake for one of the girls' mother's wedding. When they went in to discuss having a cake made, the mother and daughter went in together. Melissa's husband asked them for the name of the bride and groom. When he was told that there were two brides but no groom, he turned them away.

Originally Posted by zthatzmanz28

And baking a cake for a second or third wedding? How many bakers refuse that request?

It seems logical to assume that Melissa's Sweet Cakes had no problem with a second wedding, since they had made a cake for the mother mentioned above. As I recall the news sorry, they did not say if the mother was a widow, or if she had been divorced, or if she had been an unmarried mother. If she had been divorced, the news reports did not say if it was grounded in adultery (which is the only legitimate reason for divorce mentioned in the Bible).

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

The topic isn't divorce and I explained the difference.

Divorce is very much relevant to the discussion since the baker in question did indeed make a cake for a wedding that may very well have violated their Biblical principles, prior to refusing to make a cake for the girls' celebration.

[zthatzmanz28]

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

The topic isn't divorce and I explained the difference.

The topic is participating in an event that is immoral...therfore baking a wedding cake toi celebrate a 2nd 3rd or 5th marriage would be like the christian baker supporting divorce and participating in the "sin."

[zthatzmanz28]

Originally Posted by TroutDude

What you don't understand, Petunia, is jeff's god hates gays more than he hates adulterers.

Which - coincidentally - mirrors jeff's very own thoughts on the matter!

Weird how that happens....

Jeff's god HATES everyone who doe not think and believe like Jeff...

[jeffbase40]

Originally Posted by TroutDude

You're partly right: RIP American Fundamentalism.

And good riddance.

And now that our country is more divided, more economically unstable, less moral, more weather problems, more self centered, and the perhaps most unstable in US history on a level of national security and threats. But hey, at least you can now celebrate your biogtry against Christians. Go team Satan!

[zthatzmanz28]

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

And now that our country is more divided, more economically unstable, less moral, more weather problems, more self centered, and the perhaps most unstable in US history on a level of national security and threats. But hey, at least you can now celebrate your biogtry against Christians. Go team Satan!

Eventually the fundie will see the error in thier ways and join the rest of humanity and we can be as one.

[jeffbase40]

Originally Posted by zthatzmanz28

Eventually the fundie will see the error in thier ways and join the rest of humanity and we can be as one.

And one day you will realize that you are the one in error, but unfortunately it will probably be too late. You've been duped by the master of deception into thinking Christians are the enemy and concepts like love and forgiveness are bad things.

[zthatzmanz28]

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

And one day you will realize that you are the one in error, but unfortunately it will probably be too late. You've been duped by the master of deception into thinking Christians are the enemy and concepts like love and forgiveness are bad things.

This be why we are divide..

[jeffbase40]

Originally Posted by mensaguy

Divorce is very much relevant to the discussion since the baker in question did indeed make a cake for a wedding that may very well have violated their Biblical principles, prior to refusing to make a cake for the girls' celebration.

I fail to see the relevance. Ok, so you think they are hypocrites. That doesn't change the fact that the government demanded that they perform an action that they personally felt violated their moral beliefs. You can think those beliefs are messed up, but it is still their personal religious beliefs and the 1st amendment guarantees us that government will not make a law restricting our free exercise of religion. Well it did here and punished them severely.


As a Christian, I would certainly feel uncomfortable if a gay couple asked me to perform a service for their same sex wedding. Especially during a time where it was not even legal in that state. How could I be discriminating against something that didn't even exist at the time? If a divorced person asks for a cake, I don't feel it is my moral obligation to investigate and find out their background. If they told me the cake was to celebrate adultery like a same sex wedding is a celebration and commitment to continue living a sinful lifestyle then I would probably feel the same level of discomfort and not want to bake it.