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.

 

Christian Complaint that Baker Refuses to Decorate Cake with Anti-Gay Message

page: 5
44
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Logarock
Positive message?


Yes, like "Praise the Lord!" or "The Lord is my Shepherd". You know, POSITIVE MESSAGES. Not negative messages like, "Homosexuals are Despicable Sinners!"

Got it?


So now you want to dictate fair and acceptable religious speech? Is that it?


Denouncing homosexuals isn't religious speech. It is hate speech.




posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: buster2010
Did what the man want written on the cake come from the bible? If not then he really can't say that the baker is discriminating against his religion. Just because the Christian faith is against homosexuality doesn't mean you say whatever you want about it and claim it's my religion.



Well it was a private business proposition were the personal preferences of the persons providing service were brought to bear on the outcome in both cases.

Just because it was a private business proposition doesn't mean the baker has to put hate speech on the cake the man wanted. Crying it's my religion doesn't give a person an automatic free pass on spreading hate.


Was he "spreading hate" or just trolling? If one refuses a cake based on moral grounds, "I won't put hateful messages on my cakes," why can't another refuse on moral grounds, "I won't bake a cake for a gay wedding." Both are moral positions. Both are probably based on deep seated feelings and beliefs. Why should the government force one but not the other?


It's quite simple. One is about denying service to one group of people. The other is about denying offensive wording to EVERYONE. That's not discriminatory at all.


It's even simpler.

The baker CAN discriminate based on offensive wording.

He can happily put whatever offensive wording he wants on a cake, and deny doing it for offensive wording he doesn't want.

The baker can act as a censor in his own business. It would work the same the other way. If a gay guy wanted the words, "I love being gay" on the cake, the baker doesn't have to write that.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Logarock
She has obviously decided that she won't give full service to some.


No, she won't give full service to ANYONE that wants hate filled rhetoric on their cake. She also wouldn't have done one that said "Christians suck."



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Jamie1
Not only doesn't the baker have to write the message, he doesn't have to sell them the cake.

Business owners are free to fire customers who are a##holes. There's no law against that.


Yes there is a law against that.

That is why this whole fiasco and ill conceived idea by the customer began.

There are laws against not doing business with culturally protected ------, (can't write even your word T&C). I am not implying any particular protected class of people here, just saying, there are quite a few culturally protected groups, and refusing service of any kind to any of the culturally protected is illegal now. No matter how the business owner feels and regardless of what the culturally protected person wants the business owner to do within the boundaries of what they sell and/or their business in general.
That is the point the really idiotic customer was trying to make.


If we are not careful in the US, then when cultural norms shift, as they always do,
you may be forced to do something on the job that is against your values or morals,
with the penalty of job loss or loss of cultural reputation,
that is the real danger,
a consensus in the US that cultural norms or cultural values
trump personal values
and personal values must bend to the current cultural norms.



Except he went about it in a completely wrong way which only made matters worse.


edit on 10Fri, 16 Jan 2015 10:59:07 -0600am11601amk165 by grandmakdw because: addition



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic


But the baker is still discriminating, making a distinction, based on their own personal views. The other guy wasn't allowed to do that.

The customer here was trying to get the baker to decorate a cake in a manner that is obviously offensive to the baker personally. For the christian baker it was was no less offensive really than putting two men's name on a wedding cake or a figurine of two men.



And that is the whole point of he exercise. What is good for the goose should be good for the gander.


Except that the point of this exercise is apparently what's good for the goose should be good for the .... alien on a space ship (i.e., apples/oranges). It WILL get thrown out of court.


Oh, I don't doubt it will get thrown out of court, however, it just seems that some discrimination is okay in our society and some is not.


That may or may not be true, but in THIS case, there is no discrimination.


How? What makes what he wanted to say any more or less hateful or unpleasant than a thousand other things people put on cakes? Seems like a subjective stance to me. What one person finds hateful may not be hateful to another. I think many people here would find a gun shaped cake for a child abhorrent whereas many would not think so at all.


I know you understand the legal definition of discrimination. The baker is well within her rights to decide not to decorate a cake any way she likes. That's her product. The only thing is, she has to be consistent about that no matter who she is selling to. That means she can't decide to put an anti-gay message on a cake for an atheist, but refuse to put the same anti-gay message on a cake for a Christian. If she refuses to put an anti-gay message on a cake, no matter who the customer is, that is not discrimination.

If the baker refuses to put figurines of two same-sex people on the wedding cake she makes - no problem. But she can't refuse to sell the same type of wedding cake to a gay couple that she would sell to a straight couple.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Logarock
So now you want to dictate fair and acceptable religious speech? Is that it?


I think you've jumped the shark. If you don't see the difference between "Praise the Lord!" and "Homosexuals are Detestable Sinners", I really have no hope that you'll understand.


Na. What I am doing is challenging your underpinnings. You are not really the determiner of which of your above selections is proper and fitting. You are trying to dictate acceptable wording by a norm based method. Its all extreamly subjective and should make any real free thinking person cringe.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Jamie1

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: buster2010
Did what the man want written on the cake come from the bible? If not then he really can't say that the baker is discriminating against his religion. Just because the Christian faith is against homosexuality doesn't mean you say whatever you want about it and claim it's my religion.



Well it was a private business proposition were the personal preferences of the persons providing service were brought to bear on the outcome in both cases.


Just because it was a private business proposition doesn't mean the baker has to put hate speech on the cake the man wanted. Crying it's my religion doesn't give a person an automatic free pass on spreading hate.


Was he "spreading hate" or just trolling? If one refuses a cake based on moral grounds, "I won't put hateful messages on my cakes," why can't another refuse on moral grounds, "I won't bake a cake for a gay wedding." Both are moral positions. Both are probably based on deep seated feelings and beliefs. Why should the government force one but not the other?


It's quite simple. One is about denying service to one group of people. The other is about denying offensive wording to EVERYONE. That's not discriminatory at all.


It's even simpler.

The baker CAN discriminate based on offensive wording.

He can happily put whatever offensive wording he wants on a cake, and deny doing it for offensive wording he doesn't want.

The baker can act as a censor in his own business. It would work the same the other way. If a gay guy wanted the words, "I love being gay" on the cake, the baker doesn't have to write that.


Or if a gay baker wants to write "Straight people suck!" on a cake, that's his choice. So what.
edit on 16-1-2015 by newWorldSamurai because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: newWorldSamurai
Or if a gay baker want to write "Straight people suck!" on a cake, that's his choice. So what.


Actually, it would be fine for a gay baker to write that, if he was also okay with making cakes that said, "Gay people suck!"

Which I highly doubt a gay baker would have a problem with.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: NavyDoc

I'm really having trouble seeing your point. If you look at this from a business standpoint, the baker doesn't offer a product that comes with a hate filled message. You just cannot buy such a product from her shop.

What you are trying to do is make a business sell something that they don't carry in their inventory, all to appease some bigot feigning a Christian persecution complex.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheArrow

originally posted by: newWorldSamurai
Or if a gay baker want to write "Straight people suck!" on a cake, that's his choice. So what.


Actually, it would be fine for a gay baker to write that, if he was also okay with making cakes that said, "Gay people suck!"

Which I highly doubt a gay baker would have a problem with.


Or we could just physically force all bakers to produce cakes that the moral majority deemed acceptable. That way would could ensure that everyone feels good. /Sarc Off



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
SHE wouldn't write "Christians are Detestable Bigots" on a cake, either.


We know this how?


Because of what she said:



"In the same manner we would not … make a discriminatory cake against Christians, we will not make one that discriminates against gays."




Would she have refused to, for example, make a "Screw the NRA cake?" We don't know, do we?


I do not know. The NRA is not a protected group, however. And I know you don't like protected groups and think they shouldn't exist. That's neither here nor there.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Jamie1

Here's another way of looking at it. If a baker decides that they will only decorate wedding cakes with crosses decorated on them, and a Jewish couple comes in and wants a wedding cake without the cross, the baker is within her rights to refuse. She only offers one product - wedding cakes with crosses decorated on them, no matter who the customer is. That is not discrimination against the Jewish couple.
edit on 16-1-2015 by kaylaluv because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Jamie1

Here's another way of looking at it. If a baker decides that they will only decorate wedding cakes with crosses decorated on them, and a Jewish couple comes in and wants a wedding cake without the cross, the baker is within her rights to refuse. She only offers one product - wedding cakes with crosses decorated on them, no matter who the customer is. That is not discrimination against the Jewish couple.


I don't know many Christian bookstores that carry High Times or OUT or Hustler.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Logarock
She has obviously decided that she won't give full service to some.


No, she won't give full service to ANYONE that wants hate filled rhetoric on their cake. She also wouldn't have done one that said "Christians suck."


The fact that she says she wouldn't do hatful language on any cake is beside the point. Sounds fair and balanced but its not something that has any legal standing based on that fact alone. So one baker just wont put any ol thing on a cake and the other wont make a cake at all. No difference really in a service context.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: NavyDoc

I'm really having trouble seeing your point. If you look at this from a business standpoint, the baker doesn't offer a product that comes with a hate filled message. You just cannot buy such a product from her shop.

What you are trying to do is make a business sell something that they don't carry in their inventory, all to appease some bigot feigning a Christian persecution complex.



But she does write on cakes otherwise. Thats in the inventory.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Logarock
So one baker just wont put any ol thing on a cake and the other wont make a cake at all. No difference really in a service context.


If you won't see the difference there's no further point of discussion.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Logarock
She has obviously decided that she won't give full service to some.


No, she won't give full service to ANYONE that wants hate filled rhetoric on their cake. She also wouldn't have done one that said "Christians suck."


The fact that she says she wouldn't do hatful language on any cake is beside the point. Sounds fair and balanced but its not something that has any legal standing based on that fact alone. So one baker just wont put any ol thing on a cake and the other wont make a cake at all. No difference really in a service context.


methinks you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

guess that renders discussion moot.
edit on 16-1-2015 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Logarock
She has obviously decided that she won't give full service to some.


No, she won't give full service to ANYONE that wants hate filled rhetoric on their cake. She also wouldn't have done one that said "Christians suck."


The fact that she says she wouldn't do hatful language on any cake is beside the point. Sounds fair and balanced but its not something that has any legal standing based on that fact alone. So one baker just wont put any ol thing on a cake and the other wont make a cake at all. No difference really in a service context.


Actually there is a HUGE difference in a service context. One situation people are being denied service for being part of a certain minority group. The other situation someone isn't getting exactly what they wanted because the store doesn't carry that item in the inventory (whether it can be made on the spot or not is irrelevant).

Blockbuster Video (when it was in business) never used to carry porn in their stores. Would I be within my rights to get offended that I wasn't able to rent porn at one of their stores?
edit on 16-1-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Logarock
Positive message?


Yes, like "Praise the Lord!" or "The Lord is my Shepherd". You know, POSITIVE MESSAGES. Not negative messages like, "Homosexuals are Despicable Sinners!"

Got it?


So now you want to dictate fair and acceptable religious speech? Is that it?


Denouncing homosexuals isn't religious speech. It is hate speech.



Well so when are we going to be discussing the outlaw of the bible then? Ah I just realized we cant do that because the bible discriminates equally.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:13 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

This is why I prefer pie. Cake's too damn political.




As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



new topics

top topics



 
44
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join