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.

 

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

page: 26
59
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 09:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: JinMI

I would say that a business if they are going to deny service based on sexual orientation should have to state so in the public venue (on their signage, building ... or as you say in their windows.)

I for one would be glad to totally avoid darkening their door.


Agreed.




posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 09:51 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

But there can also be a sign that's reads: 'pls don't come here if you are gay. I will not serve you. Thank you for your understanding in my religious beliefs. Have a great day' this I would absolutely not like to see



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 09:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: JinMI

That is my understanding (hippies) of the actual intent of the "public health" consideration.


So is this still good practice or a veiled discrimination policy abuse?

I



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 09:52 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

I would be the first to say that we have in many ways totally left behind the idea of equality before the law and civil rights.

As I grow older, the focus from "either side" of the issue on sexual orientation seems ... stupid.

However, the reality is (which many today simply don't remember) is that there were laws on the books that were directed at gays and Lesbians specifically. Folks were jailed, lost their jobs, etc. simply because of their (evident or believed) sexual preferences. (Sodomy laws weren't declared unconstitutional until 2003.)

Some gays and Lesbians were treated to Electro-shock treatments and even lobotomies to "fix' them by the courts and somemtimes by their loving families.

It hasn't always been about parading down the street in leather chaps and a rainbow wig. (And it shouldn't be now, IMO.)
edit on 4-6-2018 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Nightrider83

I see what you're aiming at. Are you of the opinion that instead of being something that would negatively effect businesses that instead it would catch on?

LGBT+ has only been gaining in acceptance and even appreciation in many different parts of American culture.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 09:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nightrider83
a reply to: JinMI

But there can also be a sign that's reads: 'pls don't come here if you are gay. I will not serve you. Thank you for your understanding in my religious beliefs. Have a great day' this I would absolutely not like to see

Yeah. It can be pretty hurtful.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

I don't have a problem with shirtlessness. Bare feet however? Yes, that's a health hazard.

However, if men can go shirtless, women should be able to as well. /shrug



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 09:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66



However, if men can go shirtless, women should be able to as well.

Sign me up for that.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 09:56 PM
link   
a reply to: RowanBean

LOL. Fair's fair.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 09:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Conservative views on sexual preference! I'm...SHOCKED!


I don't think the majority thinks too far apart on the actual issues. Marriage, healthcare, adoption and overall quality of life for those that choose a partner outside the long considered norm. However it doesn't stop the fringes from being the loudest.






posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 09:57 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI
No signs! I was just being hypothetical. In the end your community will ultimately decide your fate in terms of success.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 09:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
However it doesn't stop the fringes from being the loudest.



A true assessment of the crisis of our times.




posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 09:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: JinMI

I don't have a problem with shirtlessness. Bare feet however? Yes, that's a health hazard.

However, if men can go shirtless, women should be able to as well. /shrug


I could get along with that. My fiance would also be aboard the no shirt freedoms!!






Then would we see visual sexual assault as a thing???



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:00 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

LOL ... then we might have to face one of the differences in the way we as "enlightened Westerners" truly see women's bodies.

Pun intended, although it's not a laughing matter.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:00 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

Haha this is great! Visual sexual assault haha



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nightrider83
a reply to: JinMI
No signs! I was just being hypothetical. In the end your community will ultimately decide your fate in terms of success.


It was from my perspective (opinion) only. If you are going to be bigoted on who you see your goods and services to, as you are serving the public, then be transparent about it.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I'd have to wear a sign then.....



Although, it may take away the stigma. Tunnel all the mystery away. I wonder if there has been any study on that. The attraction between perceived bodies (fully clothed) vs the actuality of the naked human form.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

speaking as someone who has spent much of her adult life walking where ever she had to go, sometimes with three little ones in tow....
I don't think there is words that could express just how irked I would be if I got someplace to buy something that I had every reason to believe would be available... like birth control at a pharmacy... just to find out that their "religious beliefs" was gonna prevent them from providing it. lol... I'd probably go so far as to have editorials in the local newspaper expressing my anger and alerting others so they wouldn't waste the two or so hours I did walking to the danged place just to be turned away.
to me, if they are gonna start allowing business owners to follow whatever belief they may have and turn people away refusing to sell them things that common sense would indicate should be available there...
then yes, they should be required to make their policies known to the public.
of course, since the supreme court has decided to give bakeries this ability, we could all start calling our local bakeries and asking them if they sell gay wedding cakes... and we could be oh so helpful to our community by canvassing all of the bakeries in our towns and cities and publish a listing stating their policy on the matter. and well, if the pharmacies decide their religious beliefs are more important than the convenience to their customers, we could do the same with them...



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: RowanBean

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: JinMI
For the same token, if you're a gay couple in the market for a cake, go where they will be extremely happy to take your business. Get the service you desire.


That's the confusing part. If they have convinced themselves that the baker hates them, why do they want him to prepare anything related to what should be the happiest day of their life?

By the same token gay people shouldn't be going to restaurants because there might be anti-gay bigots working there. Sorry I'm watching "Waiting" and it's nauseating.


Poor/Negligent/Hateful service is a risk for anyone going to a restaurant. Your comparison here is not very good.



Besides why would a Christian baker do that anyway? Jesus said to love your neighbors.


So you expect them to selectively practice their faith?



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

Well said!




top topics



 
59
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join