-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
In that case endorsing gay marriage is not tantamount to endorsing gay sex and the morallity of such acts asside there is suddenly no logical objection.
"Religious Freedom" = Discrimination = Hate
Posts
Total:
737
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
I don't think much of a deity that judges people based on the actions of others.What if gay people are jeopardizing religious peoples afterlife. Unfortunately this has to be considered right?
-->
@secularmerlin
By that rational getting married need not involve sex (though like being homosexual it generally does) so the bakers objection to a non sex act is still quite puzzling.
I don't know what his deal is to be honest, probably something to do with marriage if it is a wedding cake. The point is that he was mistreated by his government.
-->
@3RU7AL
Someone does not have to justify their religious beliefs.
Freedom of religion means that someone can be in a church of 1. If that church of 1 considers same sex marriage to be a non-reality, and so refuses to feed into other's delusions about that through participation in their sin, it is unethical to force them to go against that.
The Church has such a reverence for free will that freedom of religion very naturally comes from that. Not just religion, but even the freedom to sin.
Secularism, as a religion, by its very nature deals in coercion. Morality is a thing to be enforced. Secularism even by name has to do with things of this world.
Freedom of religion means that someone can be in a church of 1. If that church of 1 considers same sex marriage to be a non-reality, and so refuses to feed into other's delusions about that through participation in their sin, it is unethical to force them to go against that.
The Church has such a reverence for free will that freedom of religion very naturally comes from that. Not just religion, but even the freedom to sin.
Secularism, as a religion, by its very nature deals in coercion. Morality is a thing to be enforced. Secularism even by name has to do with things of this world.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
First of all, the cake guy does this all day long, this is not "forced labor".lol dude come on, it's forced labor if he doesn't want to do it isn't it? I mean that IS the definition.
This is no different than you or I. We can choose to do our jobs, OR quit.
The cake guy could have chosen to quit making custom cakes. For everyone. No problem. No "forced labor".
Are you afraid someone is going to walk up to you on the street and ask you to make a gay wedding cake?
Are you afraid that you will be sent to the gulags and forced to frost gay cakes for the rest of your life?
The objection was based on their sexual orientation alone, not that they were asking for a ridiculous cake.the objection was based on a gay marriage as they were able to pick a cake from the case, so it was not actually based on their sexual orientation because he would have still provided a product to them.
The objection wasn't to "selling" but "making". The cake guy presumably made a custom cake for the very next person who offered to pay.
Can we force a restaurant employee to make a milkshake or a cappuccino for a minority they hate? Yes.correct as I have been explaining to secularmerlin it's about an action/verb and not a noun, please read those posts I don't feel like typing it out all again.
Well, you agree with "forced labor" it's now just a matter of drawing a line between "routine" and "creative" tasks.
-->
@Mopac
What if my religion believes blacks are afflicted with evil. Should I have the right to exclude blacks from my business? What if I believe the disabled are afflicted because of their sin. Should I have the right to exclude the disabled?
-->
@Mopac
Someone does not have to justify their religious beliefs.
How is this qualitatively distinct from anarchy?
-->
@Stronn
Show me the holy text.What if my religion believes that blacks are afflicted with evil. Should I have the right to exclude blacks from my business? What if I believe the disabled are afflicted because of their sin. Should I have the right to exclude the disabled?
-->
@3RU7AL
Someone does not have to justify their religious beliefs.How is this qualitatively distinct from anarchy?
Separation of Church and State
-->
@Stronn
You also have the right to lose business, get negative attention, etc from these business decisions.
-->
@3RU7AL
23,000 plus nominally Christian denominations is religious anarchy, isn't it obvious?
And I for one appreciate the first amendment, even if it allows for the existence of all these heretical churches and false religions. Even God deniers!
The Church respects free will. Freedom of religion is very much in line with what we believe as far as coercion being unacceptable in spiritual healing.
People certainly have the right to be wrong!
-->
@3RU7AL
This is no different than you or I. We can choose to do our jobs, OR quit.
I work for an employer and by doing so I have agreed to the details and expectations of my job.
The cake guy could have chosen to quit making custom cakes. For everyone. No problem. No "forced labor".
either he has to quit making custom cakes or make any custom cake anyone desires, sounds forced to me.
The cake guy presumably made a custom cake for the very next person who offered to pay.
if he chose to, yes, he's not a slave that I'm aware of, it would be up to him to choose to do so.
Well, you agree with "forced labor" it's now just a matter of drawing a line between "routine" and "creative" tasks.
not exactly, I agree they can't discriminate based on a race they hate, race being a noun directly related to the individual, where as a marriage is a ceremony in the previous context, as far as being 'forced to' that's probably too strong a word, if they don't perform within their job scope that can be fired.
society has already decided that you can't discriminate on race, religion etc but denying something that is custom, off the menu isn't the same thing in this context of an event,ceremony whatever you want to call it
Was he willing to sell them a cake, yes.
no discrimination, no issue
Was he willing to make them a custom cake for their gay wedding, no.
he claimed an objection to the gay wedding, not the gay individuals.
until very recently gay people were not legally allowed to marry so this objection has been well known and existed for a very long time, this is nothing new.
so in that case what was the remedy to his refusal, a lawsuit and to put him out of business just because he refused to do something that he believed linked him and made him part of something he had an objection to. that's a threat of forced labor, you either do x or you'll be punished, fascist imo
would you force me to make a custom cake for a bris if I don't want to because I consider it genital mutilation? Can I just refuse or do I need to justify it and or have a religious objection to it? I'll sell them a cake sure, but not one that celebrates that ritual. Should I be sued, put out of business or in jail for not complying?
are people allowed to have different moral objections and act accordingly in the context of what I have posted? Doesn't do me any good to have a moral objection to something if you are going to force or penalize me for it, again fascist.
-->
@Mopac
23,000 plus nominally Christian denominations is religious anarchy, isn't it obvious?And I for one appreciate the first amendment, even if it allows for the existence of all these heretical churches and false religions. Even God deniers!The Church respects free will. Freedom of religion is very much in line with what we believe as far as coercion being unacceptable in spiritual healing.People certainly have the right to be wrong!
So if personal conscience is a "church of one", would you abolish the Civil Rights Act?
-->
@3RU7AL
I believe that government and government funded or contracted businesses be held to a different standard than private businesses.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
This is no different than you or I. We can choose to do our jobs, OR quit.I work for an employer and by doing so I have agreed to the details and expectations of my job.
Agreed. Even if it involves interacting with homos.
The cake guy could have chosen to quit making custom cakes. For everyone. No problem. No "forced labor".either he has to quit making custom cakes or make any custom cake anyone desires, sounds forced to me.
OR OPEN A PRIVATE CLUB.
The cake guy presumably made a custom cake for the very next person who offered to pay.if he chose to, yes, he's not a slave that I'm aware of, it would be up to him to choose to do so.
There was no mention in the court case about him arbitrarily refusing to create cakes for every third customer.
The only custom cake that was refused was a gay cake.
Well, you agree with "forced labor" it's now just a matter of drawing a line between "routine" and "creative" tasks.not exactly, I agree they can't discriminate based on a race they hate, race being a noun directly related to the individual, where as a marriage is a ceremony in the previous context, as far as being 'forced to' that's probably too strong a word, if they don't perform within their job scope that can be fired.society has already decided that you can't discriminate on race, religion etc but denying something that is custom, off the menu isn't the same thing in this context of an event,ceremony whatever you want to call it
Creating a wedding cake with two boy names on it is not dramatically outside the norm. It would be like requesting "extra cheese" on your bacon-burger.
Was he willing to sell them a cake, yes.no discrimination, no issue
Offering limited service based on a "protected class" is still discrimination.
Was he willing to make them a custom cake for their gay wedding, no.he claimed an objection to the gay wedding, not the gay individuals.
So basically two boy names instead of a boy name and a girl name.
Trying to split a hair between "gay person" and "gay wedding" is a distinction without a difference.
until very recently gay people were not legally allowed to marry so this objection has been well known and existed for a very long time, this is nothing new.
For the majority of the history of the world, nations have owned slaves and allowed people to be sold as property. This is nothing new.
so in that case what was the remedy to his refusal, a lawsuit and to put him out of business just because he refused to do something that he believed linked him and made him part of something he had an objection to. that's a threat of forced labor, you either do x or you'll be punished, fascist imo
Or he could have made some reasonable accommodation. He could have discussed the cake design, and perhaps asked them to add the names to the cake later or something.
The whole point is that this custom cake shop was OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
If you want to hand-pick your customers OPEN A PRIVATE CLUB.
would you force me to make a custom cake for a bris if I don't want to because I consider it genital mutilation? Can I just refuse or do I need to justify it and or have a religious objection to it? I'll sell them a cake sure, but not one that celebrates that ritual. Should I be sued, put out of business or in jail for not complying?
If you are OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, then you should act as a mercenary and make anything that someone can pay for.
are people allowed to have different moral objections and act accordingly in the context of what I have posted? Doesn't do me any good to have a moral objection to something if you are going to force or penalize me for it, again fascist.
Look, if you're a devout, whatever, and you studiously follow your magic rule book, and your rule book says "don't make gay cakes", and you are a business owner, OPEN A PRIVATE CLUB.
If you can't serve the public, then don't open a business that is open to the public.
-->
@3RU7AL
Offering limited service based on a "protected class" is still discrimination.
The guy wasn't picking his customers though, hence, open to the public. You incorrectly assume he's picking out gay people for custom services, but there is in fact no evidence that he does not offer custom services on the basis of any so-called "protected-class"
So basically two boy names instead of a boy name and a girl name.Trying to split a hair between "gay person" and "gay wedding" is a distinction without a difference.
Trying to split a hair between a white person, and white supremacist meeting is a distinction without difference, NOT. You can't seriously think just because someone doesn't support your lifestyle, that they are basing it upon whatever identity you ascribe yourself.
And besides, you can practically marry whatever you want, and do any number of things regardless of whether you define yourself by sexuality. Someone who is considered bisexual could attend a same sex wedding, a traditional wedding, or neither. Someone who is married to a member of the opposite sex could buy stuff for a "gay" event, and you must know this. Guess what, you aren't entitled to other people's work. Its something you should be thankful for, and we can appreciate so much more since its not forced but volunteered of our own will.
I wanr a cake with frosty depictions of puppy murder. Heres my money, you have to make it now.
-->
@3RU7AL
OR OPEN A PRIVATE CLUB.
Private vs. Public Company: What's the Difference?
it's a business not a club
The only custom cake that was refused was a gay cake.
sure but it is my belief he has the right to not do something with his creativity, artistry etc if he doesn't wish to
Creating a wedding cake with two boy names on it is not dramatically outside the norm.
but obviously it is because gay marriage is a very new thing
Offering limited service based on a "protected class" is still discrimination.
ok but that's not what he was doing, he was limiting events he would labor for.
Trying to split a hair between "gay person" and "gay wedding" is a distinction without a difference.
one is a noun the other a verb, you don't have to have a gay wedding, afaik you can not stop being gay, or do you think being gay is a choice? because marriage and weddings are a choice, if you think being gay is one as well that could take things in a different direction.
Or he could have made some reasonable accommodation. He could have discussed the cake design, and perhaps asked them to add the names to the cake later or something.
I don't recall the specifics but that sound very familiar like that was offered, but I'm not positive on the details.
If you want to hand-pick your customers OPEN A PRIVATE CLUB.
are things like the blacks only online dating etc private clubs?
If you are OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, then you should act as a mercenary and make anything that someone can pay for.
I would
If you can't serve the public, then don't open a business that is open to the public.
there are plenty of business that have restrictions, age being one, female only areas at the gym etc.
-->
@Snoopy
Guess what, you aren't entitled to other people's work.
thank you.
-->
@Snoopy
Offering limited service based on a "protected class" is still discrimination.The guy wasn't picking his customers though, hence, open to the public. You incorrectly assume he's picking out gay people for custom services, but there is in fact no evidence that he does not offer custom services on the basis of any so-called "protected-class"
The only denial of service was for a gay wedding cake. This is discrimination on the basis of sex and or creed, which are both listed as "protected classes".
So basically two boy names instead of a boy name and a girl name.Trying to split a hair between "gay person" and "gay wedding" is a distinction without a difference.Trying to split a hair between a white person, and white supremacist meeting is a distinction without difference, NOT. You can't seriously think just because someone doesn't support your lifestyle, that they are basing it upon whatever identity you ascribe yourself.
As long as "white supremacist" organizations are LEGAL entities, they should be given access to businesses that are OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
And besides, you can practically marry whatever you want, and do any number of things regardless of whether you define yourself by sexuality.
Ok...
Someone who is considered bisexual could attend a same sex wedding. Someone who is married to a member of the opposite sex could buy stuff for a "gay" event, and you must know this. Guess what buttercup, you aren't entitled to other people's work.
Nobody's "entitled" here. We're talking about PAID CASH MONEY SERVICES from any business that is OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
-->
@Mopac
I wanr a cake with frosty depictions of puppy murder. Heres my money, you have to make it now.
Which "protected class" status are you going to claim (IFF) your design proposal is denied?
-->
@3RU7AL
Nobody's "entitled" here. We're talking about PAID CASH MONEY SERVICES from any business that is OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
You are just saying this arbitrarily so that anyone conducting open business has all its employees forced to work for entitled jackasses. There is no reason that in opening my business to the public that I have to cater every single wish. If you don't like someone else's business, you can just stay out. Nobody is forcing you to do business with anyone, yet. You understand that we are talking about people right? If they welcome you to their establishment, that doesn't equate to making a mutual agreement for a business transaction.
-->
@Mopac
You didn't answer the question.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
OR OPEN A PRIVATE CLUB.Private vs. Public Company: What's the Difference?it's a business not a club
OPEN TO THE PUBLIC =/= PUBLICLY TRADED
Almost every organization that provides food, drink, lodging, or entertainment must obey the federal Civil Rights laws and any applicable state statutes. The federal laws are designed to protect all people from interference with their right to get a job or education, participate in government, and enjoy public accommodations.
Private membership clubs are exempted from these civil rights laws in order to preserve their rights to privacy and freedom of association. In attempting to determine whether an organization genuinely deserves private club status, courts have considered a number of factors, including the club's criteria for admission, membership fees, membership control over the organization's operations, and use of facilities by nonmembers. Because the courts have applied these factors on a case-by-case basis, the results have been inconsistent. For example, recreational sports clubs such as golf, tennis, fishing and hunting, private dining, and swimming clubs have generally been found to provide public accommodations. Fraternal orders and lodges have proven to be more difficult to categorize. [LINK]
The only custom cake that was refused was a gay cake.sure but it is my belief he has the right to not do something with his creativity, artistry etc if he doesn't wish to
But not if they offer that creative service TO THE PUBLIC.
Creating a wedding cake with two boy names on it is not dramatically outside the norm.but obviously it is because gay marriage is a very new thing
From a labor/design standpoint it is equivalent to any two names of similar length.
Offering limited service based on a "protected class" is still discrimination.ok but that's not what he was doing, he was limiting events he would labor for.
The "event" is not paying him. The person is. The "event" is made of people. You're hair-splitting trees from a forest.
Trying to split a hair between "gay person" and "gay wedding" is a distinction without a difference.one is a noun the other a verb, you don't have to have a gay wedding, afaik you can not stop being gay, or do you think being gay is a choice? because marriage and weddings are a choice, if you think being gay is one as well that could take things in a different direction.
Religion would also seem to be a "choice". Are you suggesting that religion shouldn't be protected at all because it's not something genetic?
WEDDING
Definitions
from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.
- noun The act of marrying.
- noun The ceremony or celebration of a marriage.
- noun The anniversary of a marriage.
- noun The act or an instance of joining closely.
- noun Anniversary of a wedding.
- noun Marriage; nuptials; nuptial ceremony or festivities, especially the latter: also used attributively: as, wedding cheer.
- noun Synonyms Nuptials, Matrimony, etc. See marriage.
- noun Nuptial ceremony; nuptial festivities; marriage; nuptials.
- noun a marriage favor. See under Marriage.
- verb To participate in a wedding.
- verb Present participle of wed.
- noun Marriage ceremony; a ritual officially celebrating the beginning of a marriage.
- noun Joining of two or more parts.
- noun the social event at which the ceremony of marriage is performed
- noun the act of marrying; the nuptial ceremony
- noun a party of people at a wedding
Apparently it can be either a noun or a verb. [LINK]
Or he could have made some reasonable accommodation. He could have discussed the cake design, and perhaps asked them to add the names to the cake later or something.I don't recall the specifics but that sound very familiar like that was offered, but I'm not positive on the details.
The specifics are that the cake man REFUSED to even discuss the design of the cake.
If you want to hand-pick your customers OPEN A PRIVATE CLUB.are things like the blacks only online dating etc private clubs?
They may not be strictly speaking, what you can do is try and sue one of them for discrimination (if your membership is rejected) and find out for yourself.
If you are OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, then you should act as a mercenary and make anything that someone can pay for.I would
This sounds fair.
If you can't serve the public, then don't open a business that is open to the public.there are plenty of business that have restrictions, age being one, female only areas at the gym etc.
Many of these are legal restrictions. People must be over 18 to be served at a bar. Female or male only bathrooms are not a business, they are a service or accomodation provided by a business.
Legal restrictions are exempt from "Idonwanna" discrimination objections.
-->
@Snoopy
There is no reason that in opening my business to the public that I have to cater every single wish.
Nobody said "every single wish".
If you offer one set of services to one customer, you must offer those same or equivalent services to all paying customers.
-->
@3RU7AL
As long as "white supremacist" organizations are LEGAL entities, they should be given access to businesses that are OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
Private business, is not a public utility. Intrusion must be justified.
There is no reason that in opening my business to the public that I have to cater every single wish.Nobody said "every single wish".If you offer one set of services to one customer, you must offer those same or equivalent services to all paying customers.
I will not cater a white supremacist event, for anyone. You are playing dumb. If you want to worship the state and believe money talks, that's your prerogative.
-->
@3RU7AL
Show me the holy text.
Are you contending that only religious beliefs with scriptural backing should be protected? If so, it begs the question of what constitutes scripture. For instance, say I had a revelation and wrote the Book of Stronn. Would that count?
If you will only accept mainstream scripture, then I give you the Vedas, the holy texts of Hinduism. In them disability is said to be caused by karma and possession by evil spirits. If I don't want people with bad karma or those possessed by evil spirits in my business, should I be forced to allow them?
-->
@Stronn
Which question?
If you are talking about the civil rights act question, I have no opinion other than the one I stated. Government should be held to a different standard than private business.
If you are talking about a different question, could you repeat it?
-->
@3RU7AL
Is sexual orientation evena protected class to begin with? In the context of a business being allowed to refuse service?
Not where I live. Not to my knowledge.
Has anyone ever tasted a gay cake?