Colorado Supreme Court Rules You Can't Cite Religion For Not Baking A Cake (suicide, punishment)
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.
And Christians business owners don't currently service gay weddings.
No, but they do sell wedding cakes. The question is, should they be required to sell them to any customer who comes in the door or should they be able to refuse to sell to certain minorities on a whim?
No, but they do sell wedding cakes. The question is, should they be required to sell them to any customer who comes in the door or should they be able to refuse to sell to certain minorities on a whim?
I can make the same argument for the gay baker. They do sell cakes. They refused to sell same product to a Christian because they were uncomfortable doing so. You can't have it both ways.
Do you think when a lawmaker dies, a law becomes null and void? Your religious laws stem from an unenforceable, superstitious, belief system based on faith, not fact. Stop trying to compare our legal system to your belief system.
It wasn't that long ago that homosexuality was illegal we had laws like DOMA. Did that law become null and void? Stop using "it's the law, follow it" as a moral argument. The law is wrong and needs to be changed.
Quite irrelevant when talking about Colorado, but the point remains the same. In Texas, it is not against the law. Maybe the CO bakers should move to Texas so they can hate gays freely? Religious freedom is the law, yes. Does this also go for the Muslims who would like to use Sharia law? Fact is, whether you can understand it or not, is that religious freedom does not allow you to discriminate or hurt others. You may think it does, but it doesn't. In the case of Texas, it is a bassackwards state that any thinking person should stay away from. Don't think their discrimination laws won't be challenged either.
See, this just shows your close minded reasoning. They don't want to get involved with gay marriage. That's all. Nothing to do with the person. Yet you dial it up to 11 and make the baseless claim that they hate gays. Offensive and unfounded. And then to take a massive dump on the entire state of Texas only cements your refusal to look at the situation fairly and objectively. Go ahead and hate on Texas. We won't lose any sleep if you don't want to live here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by southernbored
We all know you don't give a rat's butt about freedom of religion, Jeff, you care about freedom for YOUR religion.
Nope, I don't think anyone should be forced to violated their religious beliefs. Including Muslims.
Quote:
Originally Posted by southernbored
See, this is what you seem to be unable to wrap you mind around Jeff, so I will try to explain it to you for the umpteenth time.
Wedding cakes, whether for a straight wedding or gay wedding, are the EXACT SAME CAKES. If there were two cakes sitting in front of you, and I said, "Pick out the gay wedding cake", you couldn't do it. The only difference is in the bakers very small, ignorant mind.
A gun owner sells guns. It's the exact same gun. Customer A tells him that he wants to buy a gun for hunting. Customer B tells the owner that he wants to buy a gun to go murder people. With your logic, it is discrimination if the owner refuses to sell to customer B. The product is irrelevant. It's the situation or use of their product that is different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by southernbored
Now, where are the examples of Christians being turned away for being Christian? Can't find any to support your cause?
Oh I'm sure I could find some if I had the time or money to travel the country and talk to Christian bakers. But I certainly won't go to the efforts to appease close minded people here. You already shown your card by stating they hate gays.
It wasn't that long ago that homosexuality was illegal we had laws like DOMA. Did that law become null and void? Stop using "it's the law, follow it" as a moral argument. The law is wrong and needs to be changed.
Murder is against the law. Should we all be free to kill whomever we wish? After all, the moral compunction against killing is codified in law.
How about theft? Am I morally justified in walking into your house and taking your TV? After all, you said that moral arguments have no place when it comes to the law.
Or perhaps we're morally permitted to peddle drugs to children? I mean, I can't think of anything more immoral and sleazy, but, well...you said not to use 'follow the law' as a moral argument.
See where I'm going, Jeff? Morality has everything to do with obeying the law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
A gun owner sells guns. It's the exact same gun. Customer A tells him that he wants to buy a gun for hunting. Customer B tells the owner that he wants to buy a gun to go murder people. With your logic, it is discrimination if the owner refuses to sell to customer B. The product is irrelevant. It's the situation or use of their product that is different.
A hammer can drive a nail, or crack a skull. Should we disallow drug addicts from buying hammers, just in case they kill someone?
Oh, and one question: how would a gay couple use a cake that a straight couple wouldn't? I mean, I can think of some very kinky things to do with cake, and I'm sure Google's indexed a million search results on the topic (it's already got every other disturbing fetish, so why not cake-play?), but your argument, Jeff, boils down to 'gay people will eat cake differently'. Which is both hysterical and deeply disturbing.
Last edited by FredNotBob; 05-13-2016 at 07:34 AM..
No one bats an eye when Casinos discriminate against advantage players.
I would think it's fair for the baker to reject offering service to the gay couple on any basis.
-
That said, I don't think it is morally right. They should be allowed to make decisions like that, as long as they're okay with any consequences (reduced business, poor PR.) That's proper capitalism.
Murder is against the law. Should we all be free to kill whomever we wish? After all, the moral compunction against killing is codified in law.
How about theft? Am I morally justified in walking into your house and taking your TV? After all, you said that moral arguments have no place when it comes to the law.
Or perhaps we're morally permitted to peddle drugs to children? I mean, I can't think of anything more immoral and sleazy, but, well...you said not to use 'follow the law' as a moral argument.
See where I'm going, Jeff? Morality has everything to do with obeying the law.
When did I ever say that? You can't separate morality from the law which means you want to oppose your ideology and force us to change our moral standard with no real benefit to society. The world is not going to collapse if a gay couple can't buy their cake at some bakery. Now telling me "it's the law" is just a cheap close door tactic that refuses to even discuss the morality of the law!
Quote:
Originally Posted by FredNotBob
A hammer can drive a nail, or crack a skull. Should we disallow drug addicts from buying hammers, just in case they kill someone?
If we have foreknowledge that they are going to use that product to harm people, you should be allowed to refuse that sale.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FredNotBob
Oh, and one question: how would a gay couple use a cake that a straight couple wouldn't? I mean, I can think of some very kinky things to do with cake, and I'm sure Google's indexed a million search results on the topic (it's already got every other disturbing fetish, so why not cake-play?), but your argument, Jeff, boils down to 'gay people will eat cake differently'. Which is both hysterical and deeply disturbing.
How is a gun used for hunting vs murder any different? Your whole argument is focused on the product itself. They don't want their product to be used in an immoral ceremony even if it is just on a symbolic level. Why is that so hard to grasp?
It wasn't that long ago that homosexuality was illegal we had laws like DOMA. Did that law become null and void? Stop using "it's the law, follow it" as a moral argument. The law is wrong and needs to be changed.
It wasn't that long ago that Christianity had a strong influence in our country. Most of us are smart enough to question ideas that don't make sense, and we began to question the Bible instead of blindly following ancient superstitions. Calling homosexuality immoral just because it says so in the Bible, doesn't make sense. Treating women as chattel, just because the Bible tells you to, doesn't make sense. Keeping slaves, just because the Bible tells you it is OK, doesn't make sense. How dare you call the mistreatment of minorities the moral thing to do. Thank goodness we have evolved as a country!
You can't separate morality from the law which means you want to oppose your ideology and force us to change our moral standard with no real benefit to society.
I'm laughing so hard at the irony that is, once again, just beyond your reach.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
If we have foreknowledge that they are going to use that product to harm people, you should be allowed to refuse that sale.
By that logic, US military suppliers should be able to 'refuse' a contract from the DOD if it offends their morals -- after all, they definitely have foreknowledge that their products will be used to hurt people.
Then again, it can't be moral to sell guns to people who might use them to commit murder. So, which moral code trumps which? Refusing to sell to the military, and continuing to sell to the civilian population, or refusing to sell to civilians, and selling via contract to the military?
I mean, they can't just stop selling guns entirely -- they have a business to run, after all. So, which refusal has a stronger moral justification?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
How is a gun used for hunting vs murder any different? Your whole argument is focused on the product itself. They don't want their product to be used in an immoral ceremony even if it is just on a symbolic level. Why is that so hard to grasp?
So, a gun-store owner should refuse to sell to hunters, on the basis that murder is immoral and a hunter might suddenly go postal? Or perhaps he should ask his customers if they intend to kill anyone, just to make sure his guns only go to 'moral' animal-killing hunters?
I've gotta say, your tortured logic continues to amaze me, Jeff.
The benefits to society is that gays and lesbians are treated the same as everyone else and they are able to legalize their commitment to each other as well as to obtain the benefits and responsibilities that any other married couple obtain.
If you do not think that there is any benefit to this is it because you do not think that gays and lesbians deserve an equal place in society?
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.
Your religious laws stem from an unenforceable, superstitious, belief system based on faith, not fact. Stop trying to compare our legal system to your belief system.
