Gay wedding cakes and the bigots who won't bake them.

twostrokenut · Mar 5, 2014

I will answer when you pull those quotes I asked for.
You are so predictable that
I have the answer copied ready to paste soon as you are done massah.
My name is kunta not toby....you comply, then I will.

JohnnySocko · Mar 5, 2014

why even read this thread...anyone with a modicum of common sense can see using "religious freedom" is nothing more than a curtain to hide behind the usual homophobic prejudices...
this is a DUMBASS slippery slope put forth by the usual right wingers to expand their voting base towards the usual suspect bigots & haters
whats next, Neo Nazi's claiming they serve "mud people" because their God Lord Adolph says so?

Rob Roy · Mar 5, 2014

JohnnySocko said:
why even read this thread...anyone with a modicum of common sense can see using "religious freedom" is nothing more than a curtain to hide behind the usual homophobic prejudices...
this is a DUMBASS slippery slope put forth by the usual right wingers to expand their voting base towards the usual suspect bigots & haters
whats next, Neo Nazi's claiming they serve "mud people" because their God Lord Adolph says so?

All kinds of "freedom", religious or otherwise must include the ability of people to disassociate with those they prefer not to associate with. That doesn't mean you or I have to agree with a particular ideology, but as long as a person is not coming to OUR property to tell us what to do, they should be ignored or certainly not deprived of their property right to use their OWN property as they see fit.

When "equality zealots" interfere with a persons ability to control their own property, the "equality zealot" is participating in taking away freedom.

midgetaus · Mar 5, 2014

Rob Roy said:
All kinds of "freedom", religious or otherwise must include the ability of people to disassociate with those they prefer not to associate with. That doesn't mean you or I have to agree with a particular ideology, but as long as a person is not coming to OUR property to tell us what to do, they should be ignored or certainly not deprived of their property right to use their OWN property as they see fit.

When "equality zealots" interfere with a persons ability to control their own property, the "equality zealot" is participating in taking away freedom.

whats amusing is its almost always white christians who want the freedom to discriminate...
Still waiting for the bible verse that states Christians should discriminate against gays due to their religious belief.... Do unto others is obviously thrown out when this law was considered...

Rob Roy · Mar 5, 2014

midgetaus said:
whats amusing is its almost always white christians who want the freedom to discriminate...
Still waiting for the bible verse that states Christians should discriminate against gays due to their religious belief.... Do unto others is obviously thrown out when this law was considered...

When a person has the ability to control their own property have they had a right taken away? Using offensive force to ensure somebody use their property as we would like them to is not a good policy to pursue in my opinion. There will always be hypocrites, but when they stay on their own property, there is no moral justification to make them do anything.

tokeprep · Mar 5, 2014

twostrokenut said:
Why would the state need to?
As you so stupidly defeated your own argument earlier, the district court worked.
Last I checked that was a federal court.
You don't have all your teeth do you?

Perhaps I can clear something up here. Existing LGBT protections in federal law are derived from Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bans discrimination based on sex. Transgender people have successfully argued that discrimination against them is based on sex; likewise, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has decreed that discrimination against LGBT people based on sex-stereotyping is forbidden under Title VII.

Hopefully it's immediately clear how limited these protections are. A gay person can basically only make a Title VII case by arguing that they were fired for acting feminine--not conforming to sex stereotypes. For example, if I got fired for painting my nails but women are allowed to paint their nails, I might have a Title VII argument. If I were fired simply because my supervisor hates gay people, I have no Title VII case and no federal protection. In states that don't prohibit this kind of discrimination there is no recourse in federal court.

midgetaus · Mar 5, 2014

Rob Roy said:
When a person has the ability to control their own property have they had a right taken away? Using offensive force to ensure somebody use their property as we would like them to is not a good policy to pursue in my opinion. There will always be hypocrites, but when they stay on their own property, there is no moral justification to make them do anything.

Still no bible verse stating that according to the religion of christianity it is OK to discriminate against peoples sexual preference... after all this was a "religious freedom" bill and I cant find where Christianity says that is is part of their religion to discriminate according to its teaching

tokeprep · Mar 5, 2014

midgetaus said:
Still no bible verse stating that according to the religion of christianity it is OK to discriminate against peoples sexual preference... after all this was a "religious freedom" bill and I cant find where Christianity says that is is part of their religion to discriminate according to its teaching

If you haven't figured it out, Rob Roy doesn't give a shit about discrimination. He'd see a totally segregated country with minorities treated like the worst kind of scum by the economically empowered and say "Property rights!" The human costs involved mean absolutely nothing to him.

BigNBushy · Mar 5, 2014

midgetaus said:
Still no bible verse stating that according to the religion of christianity it is OK to discriminate against peoples sexual preference... after all this was a "religious freedom" bill and I cant find where Christianity says that is is part of their religion to discriminate according to its teaching

To be fair, there are Bible verses in the OT that would permit it. So perhaps a Jewish bakery would have a leg to stand on using religious freedoms.

Having said that, as a Christian you have to realize that the NT abrogates the OT, which should only be used as a historical context to better understand the NT. In the areas where they conflict, the NT wins out.

So where the OT might permit you to kill a homosexual, the NT demands that you love your neighbor, not judge him, and only when the first person among us with no sin throws his stone can the rest of us do so.

BigNBushy · Mar 5, 2014

Buzz'd said:
How many of you have read the bible word for word? I have, and if I remember correctly I noted 52 verses from Genesis to Revelation that speak against homosexuality. Why do I bring this up? Well, lets just say I am a Christian and I wanted to know what God had to say about homosexuality. When you read the bible you need to ask yourself a few questions. First, what did the scripture mean when it was written? Second, what is God trying to say? Third, what is God saying to me today? You need to put aside your beliefs, values, and emotions and let God speak to your heart. When you read it, and understand it, you will see that the old testament is looking forward to Jesus, and the new testament is looking back at Jesus. The bible was written by men who were inspired by God through the Holy Spirit. It is sacred! None of us are without sin, but God is love, and the bible says in John 3:16 that "For God loved the world in this way: He gave His One and Only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life." HCSB Then, John writes in his letter in 1 John 3:16 " This is how we have come to know love: He laid down his life for us. We should also lay down our lives for our brothers. HCSB

God's son Jesus died for me and you. Jesus paid the price for the sin of the world. God sees us through his son. God does not look upon our sin because of Jesus's sacrifice. Read the bible and you will see clearly what I saw when I read it. LOVE.

Now, go roll a fatty!

While I can't find anything in here that I disagree with, I also find it hard to find a point in all of it.

While you might be right about the number of times homosexuality is mentioned, I did not read a side being taken in your post as to if you support the wedding planner who turns down the gay couple, or if you think that the wedding planner should take the business despite having strong convictions against same sex marriage.

greentrip · Mar 5, 2014

0bviously businesses must sell products to gays but they certainly don't have to participate in
gay weddings.

Dr Kynes · Mar 5, 2014

greentrip said:
0bviously businesses must sell products to gays but they certainly don't have to participate in
gay weddings.

the question is, can the governemnt force me to bake a cake for the nuptials of two dudes, even if i, as a baker, find the idea repellant?

if you sell flour, you cant refuse to sell to gays, but baking and decorating a cake with two little dudes in tuxedoes on top is very different.

if somebody placed an order for a cake with a burning cross, and 3 klansmen lynching a black dude on top, refusing to bake that shit would get you a "profile in courage" while a govt bureaucrat who forced you to serve the klansman would be pilloried.

lefties really only care about rights when it features a message they like, but do their damnedest to violate the rights of anyone who holds an unapproved opinion.

Dr Kynes · Mar 5, 2014

BigNBushy said:
While I can't find anything in here that I disagree with, I also find it hard to find a point in all of it.

While you might be right about the number of times homosexuality is mentioned, I did not read a side being taken in your post as to if you support the wedding planner who turns down the gay couple, or if you think that the wedding planner should take the business despite having strong convictions against same sex marriage.

i dont care if your magic book features bold red-letter print with inline citations, extensive footers and a fat bibliography PROVING that your dogma really does say "God Hates Fags".

your god isnt worth a squirt of piss in my temple, and i dont care how many times your asshole of a deity tells you to stone homosexuals, it's still just YOUR bullshit religion, and mine has nothing in common with yours.

if you wanna thump a bible and preach your religious views, theres a forum specifically for that shit.

it's over that way ------>

greentrip · Mar 5, 2014

What is the greater harm refusing to bake a cake that can readily be obtained elsewhere, or ordering an American citizen to violate his constitutionally protected right to practice his religion. Who has an explicit protection written into the U.S. Constitution, the gays or the baker?

Buzz'd · Mar 5, 2014

Yea, sorry about that. I wasn't trying to take sides or make any points. I don't think the government should be telling anyone who to do business with. If a "wedding planner" doesn't want to do business with a gay couple that should be their decision to make. The "wedding planner" will answer to God one day like all of us will. If I was the one being discriminated against by the wedding planner I don't think I'd want their cake anyway. I'd take my business elsewhere.

Dr Kynes · Mar 5, 2014

greentrip said:
What is the greater harm refusing to bake a cake that can readily be obtained elsewhere, or ordering an American citizen to violate his constitutionally protected right to practice his religion. Who has an explicit protection written into the U.S. Constitution, the gays or the baker?

if somebody offered me enough cash i would totally bake a Cock Cake, with licorice whip pubes, a raspberry frosted head, fondant balls, and buttercream jism squirting from the tip.

if some government poindexter tried to force my grandma to bake that cake, he would get shot.

conversely my grammy probably would have happily baked a James Earl Ray commemorative sheet cake, with rifle and a bloodspattered MLK sculpted in exquisite detail, while somebody trying to force me to bake that cake would get kicked square in the nuts.

but lefties only support your right to refuse when youre refusing something they oppose.

the real crime is disagreeing with lefties, they really dont give a crap about what you think, as long as you submit to their agenda

tokeprep · Mar 5, 2014

greentrip said:
What is the greater harm refusing to bake a cake that can readily be obtained elsewhere, or ordering an American citizen to violate his constitutionally protected right to practice his religion. Who has an explicit protection written into the U.S. Constitution, the gays or the baker?

How is baking a cake practicing religion? Oh, it's not, it's baking a fucking cake, which has nothing to do with religion. If baking a cake were a religious exercise you might have a point. Alas...

BigNBushy · Mar 5, 2014

Dr Kynes said:
i dont care if your magic book features bold red-letter print with inline citations, extensive footers and a fat bibliography PROVING that your dogma really does say "God Hates Fags".

your god isnt worth a squirt of piss in my temple, and i dont care how many times your asshole of a deity tells you to stone homosexuals, it's still just YOUR bullshit religion, and mine has nothing in common with yours.

if you wanna thump a bible and preach your religious views, theres a forum specifically for that shit.

it's over that way ------>

I'll excuse you for your mistaken perception that I have been preaching in this thread. In fact, I started this thread with the point in mind to eviscerate the point folks are making that providing services for gay weddings and similar things are in violation of their Christian religion. It is not, their religion in damn near every form would almost require them to provide the servie in question.

What gave you the impression I was Bible thumping? Any thumping I have done has been strictly to make counter points to the view that Christians shouldn't serve homosexuals.

Dr Kynes · Mar 5, 2014

tokeprep said:
How is baking a cake practicing religion? Oh, it's not, it's baking a fucking cake, which has nothing to do with religion. If baking a cake were a religious exercise you might have a point. Alas...

so, a photographer should be required to photograph a gay wedding even if he and his religion find the very idea of gay weddings offensive?

i guess you think dry cleaners should be forced to clean press and martinize Klan robes, kosher and halal butchers should be forced to sell pork, children's bookstores should be required to stock Hustler and Phat Booty, and math tutors should be sued if retarded kids dont ace trigonometry

twostrokenut · Mar 5, 2014

Can anyone force me to make the butt baby cake?

Gay wedding cakes and the bigots who won't bake them.

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member