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: 23
61
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Ironclad2000

Are you including the gay bigots in your equation ? What's good for the goose and all.....




posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ironclad2000

originally posted by: undo
a reply to: Ironclad2000

oh that'd go over well, particularly if you wanted to start a revolution.


That's would probably be a good thing...

With any luck all the bigots would be wiped out and the world would be a blissful place.



let me translate that for you:

all the white taxpayers, particularly the white christian taxpayers, and statistically, the white male christian taxpayers . aren't you a nice fella. there there little non-bigot.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:24 AM
link   
a reply to: undo




posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Christian Voice
a reply to: undo



i'm going fish lady (see french revolution) on that guy. this stuff is tickin' me off, but i'm not willing to kill people over it. he apparently doesn't care if the most of the country is decimated. i mean, aren't white christians the majority still? solves that pesky agenda 21 problem. depopulation. thanks united nations. btw, i'm a gay progressive (not really but you get the freakin' idea)


edit on 5-6-2014 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Well it appears this bakery found an answer...

www.cbsnews.com...

Plus, it appears to have worked out for him anyway.

kdvr.com...

looks like he doesn't have to acquiesce to pressure, or lose monetarily.


edit on 5-6-2014 by Degradation33 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: undo
The thing about gay people today is they have this ideology of "You either agree with me or you hate me",,,, that's just not true. I disagree with homosexuality so I'm a bigot but they disagree with me and with Christianity and they are not bigots but moral people being treated unfairly.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:31 AM
link   
if I am an old fashioned women who sincerely believes that I shouldn't be "mingling" with the opposite sex and well can back this up with the scriptures of several religions and I own a small grocery store that is the only store in a twenty mile radius. Can I place a "No Males Allowed" sign in the front window and refuse to allow allow the poor father that has no car buy diapers for his baby?

Question here. Whose beliefs do you desire be supported laws? Just Christian beliefs or are Islamics allowed also? If those beliefs be supported for business owners should they not also be supported for the employees? Wonder how many employees lie for their bosses although they have a strong belief that it's wrong to do so just so they provide a roof over
their family's head and food on the table?? Do these Beliefs have to be accepted by a mainstream religious doctrine or can ones own personal beliefs also be protected? And well how does one prove that they have this strong belief to begin with rather than just a strong bias against a group? Where in the Bible does it forbid a christian from baking a cake for a gay person?? And reckon how many people throughout ages did things they they truly believed weren't right to do at the command of kings, masters, employers, husbands and others that their religion commanded them to obey???



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dark Ghost
This story is little more than a distraction.

I fail to see how making a cake for a gay couple is on par with accepting/promoting homosexuality. Then again, even though the baker was being ridiculous, it's his right to be that way. The couple simply should have taken their business somewhere else and deprived the owner in question of a sale.


So in your opinion, unless there is non-christian baker in their city, they should go from door to door to see if anyone would do business with them.

What would be next - someone declining to connect cable in their home, or someone not willing to sell them cloth, because of their religious view...

And what if someone does not like to teach their kids in school?

Do you see where we going with this?

No, giving someone right to discriminate on sexual orientation would mean all other business owners would have the same right.

I am glad this non-sense will have to stop right there, at the beginning, before we had all those other cases...



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Christian Voice
a reply to: undo
The thing about gay people today is they have this ideology of "You either agree with me or you hate me",,,, that's just not true. I disagree with homosexuality so I'm a bigot but they disagree with me and with Christianity and they are not bigots but moral people being treated unfairly.



i don't think this is true across the board. that's over stating your case. which is the problem to begin with. the baker over-reacted, the judge over-reacted. everywhere, people over-reacting.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

Where in the Bible does it say that seatbelts are a moral imperative ?



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: undo

I believe the baker reacted appropriately in every sense. His business, his rules.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Sorry, didn't read all the posts, so maybe it's been addressed. Other posters danced around it up to this point. And not to single you out, but your post sums up one side's viewpoint quite succinctly.


originally posted by: CranialSponge
Independent business policies DO NOT trump state or federal law.

Religious beliefs DO NOT trump state or federal law.

Freedom to be an idiot DOES NOT trump state or federal law.


Any hyperbolic soap boxing outside of those above three simple facts, are completely moot.




Article [I]13
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


That's line one. So, the way I read that, yeah, religious freedoms do trump state law, as they are federal law. Otherwise the states are discriminating against a protected class (religious), no?

It get's dicey.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Christian Voice
a reply to: undo

I believe the baker reacted appropriately in every sense. His business, his rules.



the cake wasn't for an actual wedding so it wasn't a wedding cake. he's willing to make wedding cakes for situations that are not real marriages, like dog weddings. same thing. that's the issue. he over-reacted like the whole meat sacrificed to idols thing. he offended himself. doh



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:40 AM
link   
Ok, I will admit right now that I only read the first 10 pages of posts, so I am not sure if this was covered after that. No one has addressed these facts in the portions I read.

First, the baker agreed to not discriminate against gays when they filled out their business license application. If he wanted to claim a religious based business, he could have very easily done that - but he chose not to. As such, the agreement he made with the state to not discriminate based on sexual orientation was broken - by him. That is why he lost the case.

If the baker had the foresight to file as a religious based business in the beginning, it would have never proceeded to the point where it did legally.

Despite how some of you are seeing this, the baker was/is not being forced to perform services he doesn't want. He chose to break his business license agreement and is now paying the price so he doesn't loose it entirely. That is what he agreed to when he opened the bakery.

Most of the threads I am reading are completely missing these points. This has nothing to do with religious bullying in one direction or another. This is a simple contract law case.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: TLomon
I want to know what business license you people keep referring to where it states these things. My license and the app both said no such things



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: undo
Read the OP,


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. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...


It was for a same sex wedding.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Christian Voice

are people refusing to buckle up based on their religious beliefs? Doubt it!!
So I am finding it difficult to see the relevance of your question.

So how do we determine what is truly a belief?? And shouldn't we be protecting the individual's rights before we protect business owners and groups?
edit on 5-6-2014 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar
People being refused a wedding cake need protecting how ? The owner did not say get out or you are dead did he ? They were told NO about something and like children they threw a hissy.
As far as the seatbelt thing, I thought you were questioning laws in regard to the Bible. You asked if the Bible says it is wrong to bake a cake for gays. So I asked if the Bible said it is wrong to wear a seatbelt.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: undo

originally posted by: Christian Voice
a reply to: undo

I believe the baker reacted appropriately in every sense. His business, his rules.



the cake wasn't for an actual wedding so it wasn't a wedding cake. he's willing to make wedding cakes for situations that are not real marriages, like dog weddings. same thing. that's the issue. he over-reacted like the whole meat sacrificed to idols thing. he offended himself. doh


You're right in a sense, because they were already legally married in another state. They had family and friends in Colorado, so they wanted an unofficial ceremony that all could be a part of.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Christian Voice

It is about law read the judges summary.



new topics




 
61
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join