You Don't Have to Bake a Gay Cake - SCOTUS

Guess SCOTUS ruled in favor of the Colorado baker who refused to bake a gay wedding cake on religious grounds...

SCOTUS Ruling

The justices, in a 7-2 decision, faulted the Colorado Civil Rights Commission's handling of the claims brought against Jack Phillips, saying it had showed a hostility to religion. In doing so, the commission violated his religious rights under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Thoughts?

I don't think a business should be forced to serve anyone for any reason. Idiot businesses turning away hard earned cash will likely find themselves out of business. Secondly, if a company doesn't want my money, I am going to take my business elsewhere.

a reply to: Edumakated

Ya beat me by 2 minutes....lol

a reply to: Edumakated

I don't think anyone should be forced to do what their conscience
tells them is wrong.This ruling will help many businesses adhere to
their faith and beliefs.

a reply to: Edumakated

We had a debate lately on the university about LGBTQA(etc) rights in Poland. One woman starts to talk about this sittuation and claimed that the owner should have to be forced by Court to do the cake and accept their view point. I asked her, If they are about free choice to change gender why do they have a problem with private bussineses? Her answer was very diplomatic, nonsense to quote.

My bussines my money, is that really hard to understand? I have no problem with them but forcing ones views is red line.

A bakery refusing to bake a cake bearing a pro same sex marriage message has been a massive issue in Northern Ireland the last few years with the original ruling in favour of the complainant, the company lost their appeal and have now taken to the supreme court www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk...

a reply to: Edumakated

I don't know if this is good or not.

Sure, people should have the right to have their business how they want it. But where is that line drawn?

They should make the state pay them back every single dime they had to shell out to fight this, along with lost wages with losing their business up until the date of this judgement......

Maybe that will make Colorado and other states think twice about mandating business owners do something, if they have to eat crow by publicly paying them back possible hundreds of thousands...

a reply to: Edumakated

I don't have issue with this ruling.

What if a gay baker refuses to bake a boobie cake or an atheist refuses to bake a jesus cake? The whole issue is ludacriss. Let the market decide.





a reply to: Edumakated

originally posted by: Edumakated
Secondly, if a company doesn't want my money, I am going to take my business elsewhere.

I completely agree with this statement. When I ran my business I liked money, if it was green I didn't care what your personal life details were.

The 7-2 ruling surprises me, I had a feeling they would side with the baker in a 5-4 but this was not expected on my end. The use of the word 'narrowly' in the article is misleading, it wasn't narrow, it was fairly decisive.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Edumakated

I don't know if this is good or not.

Sure, people should have the right to have their business how they want it. But where is that line drawn?

Let the free market sort it out........

If im gay and the guy tells me "Im not baking you a cake because youre gay" cool, im gonna go to his competition and let them know why they wouldnt do it, and let everyone else I know , they wont bake cakes for gays......

You cant mandate morality

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Edumakated

I don't know if this is good or not.

Sure, people should have the right to have their business how they want it. But where is that line drawn?

The free market draws the line...

If a business doesn't want to cater to minorities, then that is a business decision. Word gets out and people choose not to do business with that company. Company either capitulates or goes out of business or very well may be successful in a niche.

I'm sure there are plenty of gay bakers willing to bake a rainbow cake.

It is funny, because a lot of minority businesses started and thrives precisely because the majority ignored the market.

I can't wait for the inevitable, over-the-top, hysterical op-eds about how this is the first step towards Trump rounding up gays and putting them in camps.

Good ruling though. I'm not a religious person, and I would've baked them the cake, but that doesn't change the fact that this guy had the right not to. When the government starts picking and choosing who the Constitution does and doesn't protect, we all lose.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
They should make the state pay them back every single dime they had to shell out to fight this, along with lost wages with losing their business up until the date of this judgement......

Maybe that will make Colorado and other states think twice about mandating business owners do something, if they have to eat crow by publicly paying them back possible hundreds of thousands...

I live in Colorado and I fully agree. The proper way to have handled this would be to tell everyone you know about them not baking that cake, and let the free market put them out of business. There are far more people who would stop going there because of that than there would be people buying cakes to support them.

Wow. Common sense is such a rare commodity these days that it's actually surprising to see. How refreshing!

It's a step, albeit a small one, in the right direction.

It'll be interesting to see how many progressives and SJW's just completely lose their mind over this.

Probably EXTREMELY entertaining, as well!

originally posted by: face23785
I can't wait for the inevitable, over-the-top, hysterical op-eds about how this is the first step towards Trump rounding up gays and putting them in camps.

I don't imagine you'll have to wait very long. Progressives are nothing, if not predictable.

originally posted by: Necrobile

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
They should make the state pay them back every single dime they had to shell out to fight this, along with lost wages with losing their business up until the date of this judgement......

Maybe that will make Colorado and other states think twice about mandating business owners do something, if they have to eat crow by publicly paying them back possible hundreds of thousands...

I live in Colorado and I fully agree. The proper way to have handled this would be to tell everyone you know about them not baking that cake, and let the free market put them out of business. There are far more people who would stop going there because of that than there would be people buying cakes to support them.

If that's the outcome, that's the outcome. I would much rather see it handled that way as well, much better than the government getting involved.

I think that a business should provide services to all people, but should have the right to deny service to jerks. Many businesses are booked up and if this ruling had passed, businesses would have been able to be bullied into taking gay people's work before straight people just because they might get sued using precedence from this ruling if they had sided with the gays.

Everyone has equal rights, this policy of forcing rights of one group on others is not good. I believe that that cake place should have made them a cake if they could have but I do not agree that this lawsuit should have even been allowed. Religions have their rights too.

a reply to: Edumakated

The rainbow is a sign from God promising never to destroy the earth
with another flood.The gay community stole the rainbow and corrupted
it's meaning to fit into their agenda.

www.wnd.com...

a reply to: DBCowboy

It isn't. No line. You can run your business any way you want. Your choice to serve anyone you want. Their choice you enter into contact with you. That's what business is, mutual contract.

I offer a service for a price you choose to accept it or go elsewhere. You don't get to dictate what services I offer.

Jaden