It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Baker Forced to make gay wedding cakes, undergo sensitivity training, after losing lawsuit

page: 2
61
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

I'd have a very simple answer to the court on that "deal". I'd hit the judges/commissioners right between the eyes with my ring of door keys and tell him to run the damn bakery, they seem to know the business better than anyone and it's not worth it to bake a cake anymore.

What absurdity. If they WANT private business to know they have no freedom, this will do it. That alone is enough to get new business to say 'screw you' to the whole system in those cases where hassle would already have been pushing it. (Hassle is at new heights these days, as it is)

Having attempted to make a success of business a few times in my life? I think the "system" violated the rights of one private citizen to insure the perceived rights of another. A trade off the feds really shouldn't be making outside clear matters of constitutional principle and black letter law, IMO.




posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: beezzer

Oooo, is that how it works now?

We are so outlawing hamburgers tomorrow!



Unless someone wants hamburger, and makes you have them.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
You should not be forced to provide a service that is against your religious beliefs.


Jesus washed the feet of whores.

Just saying.......


+3 more 
posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: HandyDandy

originally posted by: Metallicus
You should not be forced to provide a service that is against your religious beliefs.


Jesus washed the feet of whores.

Just saying.......


Did Jesus do it on his own accord, or was he ordered to?



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:10 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Well there's always the balance between personal freedom and the personal freedom of others. When the U.S. government originally decided it could enforce non-discrimination on the basis that it had a right as the government to direct commerce it opened the door to stomp on people's beliefs in regard with whom to do business with.

You could argue that as a good or bad thing. Certainly it could easily become a slippery slope where something like a grocery store refused to serve gay people(or other examples like that). Certainly arguments can be made in either direction.

However, the current economy is a jumbled mess of laws and tax webs. The point is that the government does regulate commerce and non-discrimination laws. If it becomes where stores and businesses refuse to interact with gay patrons where is the line drawn? What about towns where 90% of the town refuses to interact with that individual?

So as you can see it can become a miserable existence for an individual and that's why non-discrimination laws happened in the first place(the more extreme example of course being segregation and no blacks allowed).


edit on 3-6-2014 by OrphanApology because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus

A family owned bakery has been ordered to make wedding cakes for gay couples and guarantee that its staff be given comprehensive training on Colorado’s anti-discrimination laws after the state’s Civil Rights Commission determined the Christian baker violated the law by refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.

Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, in Lakewood, Colorado was directed to change his store policies immediately and force his staff to attend the training sessions. For the next two years, Phillips will also be required to submit quarterly reports to the commission to confirm that he has not turned away customers based on their sexual orientation.


Nope, can't just go to a different baker. Better to sue someone and FORCE them to make a cake for you. This isn't a gay rights issue to me. This is a civil liberty issue. You should not be forced to provide a service that is against your religious beliefs. Period.

Source


And refusing service based on race is right also according to your way of thinking. I quote Jesus.
Don’t judge others, and God won’t judge you. Don’t be hard on others, and God won’t be hard on you. Forgive others, and God will forgive you.

This judging symbiotic love right and wrong should have been evolved out of humans thousands of years ago. Humanity is really pushing the patience a bit too far these days.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: HandyDandy

originally posted by: Metallicus

You should not be forced to provide a service that is against your religious beliefs.




Jesus washed the feet of whores.



Just saying.......


Unless she had clients with serious foot fetishes, Jesus wasn't doing anything that related directly to her sin. Little different situation when in regards to a gay wedding cake.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:13 PM
link   
The most frustrating thing is that the baker was an idiot. Yet, in America, you're free to be an idiot. . . . . .

No longer.

You have to conform.


Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people.

Soft despotism gives people the illusion that they are in control, when in fact they have very little influence over their government. Soft despotism breeds fear, uncertainty, and doubt in the general populace. Alexis de Tocqueville observed that this trend was avoided in America only by the "habits of the heart" of its 19th-century populace.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: LittleByLittle
This judging symbiotic love right and wrong should have been evolved out of humans thousands of years ago. Humanity is really pushing the patience a bit too far these days.


When something such as the above appears in an argument regarding religious freedom, it is painfully obvious that you're out of your element, my friend. Look at it in the same light as left leaning men view abortion: "I don't have a uterus, so I shouldn't have any say in this matter." I'd argue the irreligious don't have a personal relationship with God, thus they should keep their opinions out of the discussion.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: HandyDandy

originally posted by: Metallicus
You should not be forced to provide a service that is against your religious beliefs.


Jesus washed the feet of whores.

Just saying.......


Did Jesus do it on his own accord, or was he ordered to?


He did it because he wasn't small minded enough to know that everyone doesn't live by his beliefs. Maybe the baker would feel more at home in Texas where discrimination against gays is legal.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Its a huge injustice what happened with this baker but I would like to speak to bigger point if I could. How did the homosexual/gay community get some much power in America. there is this story then there is the guy with Morzilla Firefox. I mean if you have a stanc eon soemthing or hold a religious belief your enemy number 1 no questions asked your the ultimate bad guy. the homosexual community is 3-6% of the pupulation in America right but they have one of the hugest influences. That is just uncanny.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: HandyDandy

originally posted by: Metallicus
You should not be forced to provide a service that is against your religious beliefs.


Jesus washed the feet of whores.

Just saying.......


Did Jesus do it on his own accord, or was he ordered to?


He did it because he wasn't small minded enough to know that everyone doesn't live by his beliefs. Maybe the baker would feel more at home in Texas where discrimination against gays is legal.


Maybe. I'm not going to argue about the small-minded business man or his bakery.

As I've said countless times, he was an idiot.

But last time I checked, you were free to be an idiot!



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:30 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Indeed.. People have a right to be trolls and small minded bigots. Just as the American Nazi's had the right to march on Main street in Skokie, Illinois. America is (was) a place where being a complete fool isn't (wasn't) illegal.

Times are changing...and I hope we continue to roughly agree on the definitions here, since definitions are all it takes anymore.


edit on 6/3/2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: Removed odd symbol cutting my post.. Hmm..



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:33 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

I wish you luck on your path.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: American-philosopher
The homosexual community is 3-6% of the pupulation in America right but they have one of the hugest influences. That is just uncanny.


Do you think race equality would have happened if only blacks supported it?

You don't have to be part of a minority to support equality.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: LittleByLittle
This judging symbiotic love right and wrong should have been evolved out of humans thousands of years ago. Humanity is really pushing the patience a bit too far these days.


When something such as the above appears in an argument regarding religious freedom, it is painfully obvious that you're out of your element, my friend. Look at it in the same light as left leaning men view abortion: "I don't have a uterus, so I shouldn't have any say in this matter." I'd argue the irreligious don't have a personal relationship with God, thus they should keep their opinions out of the discussion.


Then the religious person needs to be remind that it isn't their place to judge others.
There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor? James 4:12
There is nothing in the bible that says just because a person is a homosexual it would be against their faith to do business with them. So this I won't do business with a person because it's against my faith is nothing more than BS they are just using their faith to discriminate against others.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: American-philosopher

Identifying as gay or lesbian and having same sex interactions are two separate things. Surveys and studies of lifetime same sex interactions sit at around 17-20% of the population, depending on the study. Higher for some(such as Kinsey way back in the day).

While my anecdotal experience is in no way scientific, if I could count how many "straight" women me and my friend's dalliances of youth consisted of...I'd run out of fingers.

When speaking to gay identifying males they share similar experiences with "straight" men.

While those people that participated at some point in same sex interactions may still be bigoted, my guess is that it would make them more prone to empathize to those that identify as glbt when presented with those sort of issues.
edit on 3-6-2014 by OrphanApology because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer



But last time I checked, you were free to be an idiot!

Yes a person is free to be an idiot. But in Colorado it is against the law to discriminate against gays.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:39 PM
link   
He still has his Religious Freedoms, he still has his freedom of speech and thought, he is just not allowed to discriminate, sorry not sorry



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

what are you talking about? I dont know if you got the point of what I was trying to say, but I will answer your question none the less.

No I think a consensus majority supporting race equality is needed for that type of change to happen



new topics

top topics



 
61
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join