Members banned from this thread: Jeremy


Page 3 of 150 FirstFirst 123451353103 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 1496
Thanks Tree523Thanks

Thread: Case of gay couple’s wedding cake heads to Supreme Court

  1. #21
    Veteran Member aboutenough's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    51,816
    Thanks
    2801

    From
    Washington state
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    There is no such war. You are making that up.
    Right, while you are leading the charge

  2. #22
    Veteran Member DebateDrone's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    31,666
    Thanks
    26738

    From
    SWUSA
    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    The baker did not refuse service to these customers. He had made them cakes in the past. He refused to make a rainbow wedding cake for a same sex marriage saying that it was compromising his religious values. The same sex couple, customers of his, felt that their rights as LGBT trumped his religious rights and demanded that he make the cake. Then sued him over it.
    The case came about because Colorado placed LGBT folk under the protection of their anti-discrimination laws.

    Mississippi gave business protections against litigation as their state's right. Mississippi also has not placed LGBT folk under their state's anti-discrimination laws.

    This has zero to do with a business owner's precieved right of refusal ...EEOC and Federal law had set the precedent that religious liberty claim can not be made unless federal law stupulates that exemption. [Hobby Lobby].

    In Colorado, LGBT persons are protected. The Supreme Court will be deciding whether states have that right to add or exclude LGBT persons from the state's anti-discrimination laws.

    If Mississppi and other states have the right to exclude, then does Colorado and other states have the right to include?

  3. #23
    Veteran Member Southern Dad's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    32,877
    Thanks
    6844

    From
    A Month Away
    Quote Originally Posted by DebateDrone View Post
    The case came about because Colorado placed LGBT folk under the protection of their anti-discrimination laws.

    Mississippi gave business protections against litigation as their state's right. Mississippi also has not placed LGBT folk under their state's anti-discrimination laws.

    This has zero to do with a business owner's precieved right of refusal ...EEOC and Federal law had set the precedent that religious liberty claim can not be made unless federal law stupulates that exemption. [Hobby Lobby].

    In Colorado, LGBT persons are protected. The Supreme Court will be deciding whether states have that right to add or exclude LGBT persons from the state's anti-discrimination laws.

    If Mississppi and other states have the right to exclude, then does Colorado and other states have the right to include?
    But here's the thing, he didn't refuse to serve them. He made them several cakes. He just refused to make this one cake citing religious grounds. You may be right and he may lose but if he wins, the LGBT community just got bitchslapped back a decade in their fight. Is it worth it?

  4. #24
    Veteran Member aboutenough's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    51,816
    Thanks
    2801

    From
    Washington state
    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    These lawsuits brought by the more militant LGBT that have no tolerance for others while demanding tolerance for their lifestyle choices have the potential to hurt the entire LGBT community. If the ruling goes in favor of the baker it will set LGBT rights back a decade. Filing lawsuits against bakers, pastors, photographers, and county clerk's that refuse to be a part of this seems like a good idea. No doubt there have been some court wins. But all it takes is one major loss at the Supreme Court to knock those rights backward.

    The LGBT community would be far better served if they were to use tolerance, education, and social pressure to effect this acceptance rather than the courts to compel it. Think about it, Melissa never made that cake. Kim never signed those licenses. Even when faced with bankruptcy, and jail, these believers did not capitulate. Don and Evelyn Knapp still won't marry same sex couples in their wedding chapel. Freedom of religion is a constitutionally protected right that is clearly spelled out in the Constitution.

    Some feel that they must trample on the rights of others to get their will imposed. I am afraid the LGBT community may see one of these cases not go their way resulting in a major change in this country.
    I agree, this ruling could set LGBT right back a decade. If they had not "bullied" their rights with activist lawsuits that were set up for furthering their rights, they would not be at this place in the Supreme Court. Even the left has put their "weight" on this issue, so if the baker wins here, it will set Democrat party back a ways. I can say , "they deserve it", because they sided with the Bullies.

  5. #25
    Veteran Member DebateDrone's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    31,666
    Thanks
    26738

    From
    SWUSA
    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    The religion of gays. The democrats put gays above the constitution

    Democrats show they put gays above Christians. More bigotry from democrats. Special law and agendas for democrat special interest groups
    Every human being is above the US Constitution.

    The US Constitution is a guide. The American people have the ultimate right to decide what the Constitution means. The designers of the Constitution meant for that to happen and gave Americans a way to do just that.
    Thanks from Panzareta

  6. #26
    Chaos in fourteen lines Minotaur's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    18,691
    Thanks
    15002

    From
    USA
    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    Simple, the religious person feels that he or she is being told they have to put their religion aside to accommodate the lifestyle choices of another. Religious people are believers. Believers are dangerous. The Constitution clearly states in the First Amendment that "the Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" These people believe that their religion prohibits them from being involved with a same sex marriage.

    Rather than taking their money elsewhere, the same sex couples that bring these lawsuits want courts to compel the baker, photographer, pastor, or whatever other service provider to participate. This particular case, the cake maker made several cakes for the couple over the years but would not make the rainbow wedding cake for their ceremony. They did get the cake made elsewhere, actually for free but want this baker to be forced to make cakes for same sex weddings when he says it is against his religion.

    A better course of action, in my opinion would be to take your business elsewhere. This baker would not only lose the money for making the wedding cake but all future business of the couple. They were customers of the baker. They bought several cakes there. Can the baker afford to run off customers? Customers who will tell others that even if not LGBT support the LGBT community? There are other bakers that are happy to bake that cake and make that money.
    What is beautiful about America is the US Constitution. You can believe hetro or gay anal sex behind closed doors is a sin, and what you think is as meaningless to everyone's Freedom as you hating pork chops. You can't halt the sale of Pork Chops based on a flimsy excuse. Believers are not God. You can believe in anything but if it is illegal you can't act on it.

  7. #27
    Veteran Member DebateDrone's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    31,666
    Thanks
    26738

    From
    SWUSA
    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    But here's the thing, he didn't refuse to serve them. He made them several cakes. He just refused to make this one cake citing religious grounds. You may be right and he may lose but if he wins, the LGBT community just got bitchslapped back a decade in their fight. Is it worth it?
    The law does not see the baker's acceptance of the couple's prior business as a reasoning to allowing denial of service in any other occasion.

    That law does not care about prior transactions unless they were to show a pattern of denial service.
    Last edited by DebateDrone; 27th June 2017 at 08:00 AM.

  8. #28
    Nuisance Factor Yeti 8 Jungle Swing Champion, YetiSports 4 - Albatross Overload Champion, YetiSports7 - Snowboard FreeRide Champion, Alu`s Revenge Champion boontito's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    87,114
    Thanks
    62599

    From
    out of nowhere!
    Quote Originally Posted by KnotaFrayed View Post
    What religion do rainbow flags represent?
    Wait for it... wait for it...

  9. #29
    Veteran Member Southern Dad's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    32,877
    Thanks
    6844

    From
    A Month Away
    Quote Originally Posted by aboutenough View Post
    I agree, this ruling could set LGBT right back a decade. If they had not "bullied" their rights with activist lawsuits that were set up for furthering their rights, they would not be at this place in the Supreme Court. Even the left has put their "weight" on this issue, so if the baker wins here, it will set Democrat party back a ways. I can say , "they deserve it", because they sided with the Bullies.
    I look at the way the LDS church gained tolerance and acceptance across this country. They were persecuted, ridiculed, and even killed for their beliefs. They didn't file lawsuit after lawsuit. They went on an education campaign. They walked the walk as well as talked the talk. When the Southern Baptists treated the Mormons like crap when they held their convention in Atlanta, the chance came to return the favor when the Southern Baptists held their convention in Salt Lake City. They didn't. They treated them like honored guests. When did this happen, you ask? June 9 - 11, 1998.
    Thanks from aboutenough

  10. #30
    Veteran Member Southern Dad's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    32,877
    Thanks
    6844

    From
    A Month Away
    Quote Originally Posted by Minotaur View Post
    What is beautiful about America is the US Constitution. You can believe hetro or gay anal sex behind closed doors is a sin, and what you think is as meaningless to everyone's Freedom as you hating pork chops. You can't halt the sale of Pork Chops based on a flimsy excuse. Believers are not God. You can believe in anything but if it is illegal you can't act on it.
    Two rights have come into conflict here, the same sex couple's rights and the baker's rights. Unfortunately, some want to compel the baker by court order to put aside his religion. Did Melissa of Sweets by Melissa make that cake? No, she didn't. Did the couple that owned The Hitching Post perform same sex marriages? No, they didn't. Did Kim sign those marriage licenses? No, she didn't. I do not believe that any court decision is going to make this man bake a cake for a same sex couple. What is it going to do? It's going to cause his pastor to tell the whole congregation that those damned gays just put another god fearing man out of business because he wouldn't bow to their lifestyle choice. That's going to rev up the congregation to hate the LGBT.

Page 3 of 150 FirstFirst 123451353103 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Gay Wedding Cake Case Heads To Supreme Court
    By aboutenough in forum Current Events
    Replies: 320
    Last Post: 6th August 2016, 08:14 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 25th May 2016, 06:26 PM
  3. Replies: 424
    Last Post: 16th May 2016, 02:44 PM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 16th May 2016, 12:00 PM
  5. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 7th March 2016, 02:40 PM

Search tags for this page

Click on a term to search for related topics.

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed