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

a reply to: Aedaeum

Right anybody that is a mason knows it's NOT a religious organization and many people beileve in god without a religion it's called spirituality you do know what that means don't you?

Also if you had studied the Masonic teachings like you hinted too maybe you should take the ea degree again

originally posted by: Logan123
a reply to: Aedaeum

Right anybody that is a mason knows it's NOT a religious organization and many people beileve in god without a religion it's called spirituality you do know what that means don't you?

criteria for being a mason (among other things) is that you must believe in a god of some kind. there's various holy books at the altar, depending on the temple. i think some shriner lodges have a koran. some lodges/temples have a bible. they are issued masonic bibles. solomon's temple is part of what they learn about.

seems rather religious to me.

originally posted by: Aedaeum
a reply to: Logan123

Christian or not, this country was founded on the principles of religion. I guess everyone forgets what it says on our money.... "In God we trust".

the "in god we trust" motto was added in the 1960s i think. 60's or 50's, thereabouts.

a reply to: Annee

This baker baked wedding cakes.

No one walked in and asked him to bake what he didn't already bake.

Your argument is ridiculous and does not apply.

Except they weren't having a real wedding.

The baker could have said "I only craft wedding cakes for actual weddings."

a reply to: smarterthanyou

'cept he made a cake for a dog wedding. lol

originally posted by: Logan123
And I hate to break it to everyone but America has never been a Christian nation it was started as the exact opposite

OK, refusing to enter that argument because it won't go aywhere, allow me to offer a different angled retort... America was absolutely founded on personal liberty and freedom, and forcing a business owner to perform a service for an individual they do not wish to work for, REGARDLESS OF THEIR REASON, infringes upon that business owner's liberty and freedom.

originally posted by: llpoolej
Question, say a photographer doesn't want to photograph a wedding of a woman and man who are already pregnant, because it goes against their religious beliefs. Should they be forced to do so because someone asked them to? How about the baker? Say he is devout whatever, and doesn't want to bake a cake with a wedding topper that has a pregnant woman on it. But, they are a white hetero couple. Will these examples be covered?

Whoever bakes your cake for a wedding is a part of the wedding itself. Same with a photographer. I'd personally rather do a gay wedding than a straight wedding, but, not much for wedding photography in general. Will it become I MUST do all weddings if I do one?

This is my only objection to the ruling. At what point do business owners have to sacrifice their own beliefs? Its really not a gay issue to me, but, a business one. As far as I am concerned, gay, straight, married, not, black, white, whatever, I just want to deal with the people I want to, as I provide a very personal service. I have not turned anyone away for any reason beyond I was not going to be able to work well with *them*. (The one most notably turned away was a spoiled white girl with way more attitude than I wanted to suffer through) I would HATE to be forced to deal with someone because I must by law.

Bakers, wedding planners, photographers, ect; are just different than Walmart or your local eatery. They are dealing with you on a very personal level.

very true about the personal level.
that's how they generate biz for themselves. caterers, bands, function halls, florists, printers also.

people can see their work in action and might use it in the future when they get married.

the baker didn't want to open that pandora's box so he won't make a cake for anyone now. (off the street, anyway)
it's a dam shame.
wedding cakes are big money and he has to forfeit an income stream.

and sensitivity training for employees!
wow. talk about gov mind control.

originally posted by: undo
a reply to: smarterthanyou

'cept he made a cake for a dog wedding. lol

The really sad part is that equality has to be forced.

I went through this with my disabled mother prior to the Disability Act.

We were refused entrance and/or kicked out of businesses for various reasons. All at the whim of the proprietor.

a reply to: Annee
And you really want to throw your money to them kinds of businesses? Now they may allow you with a smile, then spit in her food.

a reply to: undo

Yes every lodge has divine law and yes every man must have faith in a supreme being that I will agree with however no where in any law or by law does it mention a member must be religouis in any blue lodge or from any grand lodge the exception will be the York rite

Remember, people can always choose to NOT support a business due to the businesses views. The gay community has ever right and every reason to have boycotted this baker. Instead, they just destroyed him, which, to me is sad. All because they didn't like his worldview. The higher road would have to have just not used him, told their friends not to use him and taken support away.

Its the whole "You must not trample on my rights or I will take yours" that really bothers me. Even though I don't agree with the baker's view.

We shouldn’t loose site of the crux of this issue: that is pre-modern views of religion versus postmodern secular humanist views.

On the most part, eventhough I criticize this decision, I agree with the postmodern views mostly. Though not all.

But this issue, pre-modern religious faiths versus modernism is devastating some Arab Muslim countries and some African countries.

They have never went through a modernist secular movement as the west has so you have the murder and mayhem in many third world lands such as in Nigeria and the Arab countries as well in Iran.

Fortunately, America and the west, though do have acute differences in this regard, aren’t even remotely as violent as those described above.

We have, though, the occasional abortion doctor murdered by pre-modern religious fanatics, the unfortunate child now and then exercised by sacred murder by religious lunatics, starved, beaten and other heinous acts by religionists who haven’t reconciled the pre-modern religion of ancient Israel and Arabia with current paradigms of modernist society.

This is where the problem lies and must be dealt with.

As of now we will argue this point into oblivion without trying to understand the etiology of it. Then perhaps this society can come to some middle course where we can reconcile the swift evolving ideas of modernism with the views of religion that reach back into antiquity, in which some ideas and tenets in those faiths are incompatible with modernity.

Again, tolerance, understanding, and respect for others, imo, is the key to resolution

originally posted by: llpoolej
Remember, people can always choose to NOT support a business due to the businesses views. The gay community has ever right and every reason to have boycotted this baker. Instead, they just destroyed him, which, to me is sad.

Just like allowing a drunk to drive, and making it your responsibility to stay out of his way.

Oh Boo Hoo, I'm all broken up this discriminating baker is sad.

What secular modernists have to TRY to understand is the perspective of the religious ethic in some people.

What they are taught is that one must do good deeds but also not contribute to what they consider to be corruption of the society.

SO some might not sell or drink liquor, drugs, all the way to the edict to not indulge in vain talk, gambling, back biting, vanity, narcissism, things like that, and of course sexual misdeeds are shunned as much as the person can stay away from, according to that particular religious school of thought.

If they do these things they believe they are adding to the corruption of society, AS THEY SEE IT, therefore they are to be avoided if they are to adhere to their religious ethic.

It’s about a religion of not only faith but action.

Many people take this seriously since they honestly believe to advance certain societal corruptions will endanger their very soul.

Maybe they are theologically in error but maybe they aren’t, but they honestly believe this.

This is what the secularists aren’t taking into consideration.

They are marginalizing sincere religious tenets where millions of people still abide by.

a reply to: Annee
Comparing a drunk driver to someone who refuses to bake a cake is dumb....

Drunk driver might kill people, baker refusing to make a cake might hurt some feelings. Not even close to a valid comparison.

Now, on the other hand.

The sincere desire of our gay brothers and sisters to be recognized as equals and their humanity taken seriously is a legitimate aspiration that should be respected and held sacred by all people.

Indeed, they are riding the real wave of modernist evolving ideas that often clash with many of the pre-modern views of our religious brothers and sisters.

We must meet somewhere and see the beauty in both paths, or at least learn to respect each other.

We can’t just override this modernist wave, where decades of wisdom have enhanced our society in many positive ways. As well, we shouldn’t throw away our wisdom of the past that religious knowledge has enriched our society with.

Both streams of evolving wisdoms should have a place in our great civilization.

One shouldn’t overtake the other. Indeed, it is our great times now that offers us, the modern man, an opportunity to merge these great human streams of wisdom somehow, to transcend their surface conflicts and merge the two and come out greater through dynamic fusion and uniquely enhance our society and civilization.

If we are to remain to be civilized people we can find a middle course and reach a just solution that is if sincere people seek honest compromise.

We shouldn’t have a extreme secular society where the ancient wisdom of our great religious teachers is thrown by the wayside, as long as we still have millions of people who live and thrive by those tenets that, although are not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, are none the lest precious to the spiritual aspirations of our religious people.

As well, we certainly shouldn’t cease progress in secular modernism, such as the sacred cause of gay rights and rights for all, and in sciences that has brought great comfort and advancements in understanding to humankind.

So let’s face the facts. Were not giving up the wisdom of modernism and were not giving up our ancient and precious, to many, religious and spiritual values.

Our challenge is to make the whole better by merging healthily the parts through wisdom and tolerance and that weird thing we call LOVE!

originally posted by: TKDRL
a reply to: Annee
Comparing a drunk driver to someone who refuses to bake a cake is retarded....

Drunk driver might kill people, baker refusing to make a cake might hurt some feelings. Not even close to a valid comparison.

It's the same principle.

It's not the customers responsibility to get out of the way of a business owners belief.

Well I may be a commie liberal, but I actually agree with our neocon, neo-confederate and "conservative" members here. It is not right to force the baker to make a cake that serves a symbolic piece in a religious ritual.

Or how about this ATS, would you force an Israeli baker to bake up a 40 year anniversary cake for Hamas???

How about make a black caterer service a KKK event???

You see my liberal friends, we have to make sure that our sense of morality is consistent and in this case I think is is not.

as i proved earlier in the thread, homosexuality embraced in society is nothing new. just ask the ancient greeks and romans (for starters). it's not even remotely a new or modern thing. it's just that christian social order was designed by judaism and rome. rome learned from the greeks that if you don't encourage heteros in society, your empire will destroy itself due to lack of families.