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: 6
59
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:20 PM
link   
a reply to: WarPig1939

Apparently Christian fundamentalist bakers care a great deal.




posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:21 PM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

Should Dick's be forced to sell guns to people under 21?



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:21 PM
link   
a reply to: WarPig1939



No one gives a flip about gay people. People are tired of hearing about it.

We are tired of listening to Christians moaning about their muh religious liberty and gay people.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Annee

That's what I thought. I've never heard of a case in the U.S. where a baker was forced to decorate something specific on a cake.


The couple ordered a custom cake from the shop.

Stop being a side-stepper and a tangent builder.



Link?


Look it up on wikipedia.

But I know you knew already.

😉



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: WarPig1939

Apparently Christian fundamentalist bakers care a great deal.



It was a decision based off of their beliefs. They can deal with it and find a place that is more "accommodating".

Do you really want to FORCE someone against their will to provide a service for the sake of inclusiveness?
edit on 4-6-2018 by WarPig1939 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Did you actually read what this SC ruling was about?



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: RowanBean


Funny thing is Muslims say the same thing and no one is complaining. Or do people have a bias against Christianity that much? I wonder.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:25 PM
link   
I see lots of emotional knee jerk reactions about how horrible this is, and yet precious little information from these people about why its wrong.
Does anyone have some information, a legal ruling something that would show the SC got this wrong?

Cause with what has been presented so far, they got it right and in fact got it so right even some people that typically side with the LGBT community agreed to side with the baker.

So what earth shattering information do the rest of us (including the SC) not have?



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

I don't really have a lot time to post atm (Monday's are always a bitch) but I wanted to weigh in.

1. The ruling was very narrow and doesn't actually address the issue of the constitutionality of a business owner refusing service to a person based on his religious beliefs. The ruling was essentially that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission was not neutral in regards to the baker's religious beliefs in making their determination against him.

That's why the ruling is being described as "narrow."

2. As for those making the argument that "nobody should be forced..." :

Businesses only exist in the context of a society. Without customers, an economic system, infrastructure, etc, a business cannot exist. Therefore, operating a business should properly be viewed as a benefit of membership in a society akin to a right. And we would not tolerate people being denied the right to own and operate a business on the basis of their race, gender, religion, sexual preference, etc. Can you imagine the Christian baker was denied a business license because he was Christian?

Business ownership is one half of two inextricable sides of market access.

The other side of market access, which is equally a benefit of being a member of a society, is access to businesses within the marketplace. This is where we encounter the concept of public accommodations. Public accommodations are defined (loosely) as any facility, publicly or privately owned, which is open to the public.

Just as it would be intolerable to deny a business owner access to the public marketplace based on race/gender/religion/sexual preferences/etc, it is also fundamentally wrong to deny consumers access to businesses for the same.
edit on 2018-6-4 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: kaylaluv

Should Dick's be forced to sell guns to people under 21?


Apparently dicks should get to chose because they agree with her view point... just like the baker should not get to chose.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: WarPig1939
a reply to: RowanBean


Funny thing is Muslims say the same thing and no one is complaining. Or do people have a bias against Christianity that much? I wonder.


I haven't heard that? FYI Christians are the majority here in the USA.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Irishhaf
I see lots of emotional knee jerk reactions about how horrible this is, and yet precious little information from these people about why its wrong.
Does anyone have some information, a legal ruling something that would show the SC got this wrong?

Cause with what has been presented so far, they got it right and in fact got it so right even some people that typically side with the LGBT community agreed to side with the baker.

So what earth shattering information do the rest of us (including the SC) not have?


Read what the ruling was actually about. The OP provided a good link.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Should they be forced to sell guns to 4 year olds? Are guns capable of killing people? Are cakes capable of killing people? You are comparing apples to oranges. Guns are a safety issue. Cakes are not.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Should they be forced to sell guns to 4 year olds? Are guns capable of killing people? Are cakes capable of killing people? You are comparing apples to oranges. Guns are a safety issue. Cakes are not.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: kaylaluv

Should Dick's be forced to sell guns to people under 21?


only if dicks has the market cornered on self protection.

if they are the only reasonable choice for purchase then yes they have to sell



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: WarPig1939

See Jim Crow laws. Do you really want to go back to that?



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: WarPig1939

See Jim Crow laws. Do you really want to go back to that?


What does this have to do with Jim Crow? Jim Crow was based off of segregation by skin color. There is no way where this issue would inexplicably lead to a separation by sexual attraction. You are being overly dramatic.

The gay couple got denied and lost the case. They will get over it or they will find a hard life to live if they can't figure out there is a thing called "choice".

The baker will deal with his own problems as well so no one is a winner anyhow.



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Personally....I wouldn't even want to eat a cake someone was forced to make for me against their wishes...that #'s not gonna be very good..I'm sure very little effort would've been made for that cake and they probably enjoyed whatever cake they end up did getting better anyway.

How is this a #ing issue?...if someone doesn't want to serve you....for any reason honestly....just go somewhere else....why would you want service of any kind from someone that doesn't want to do it? That's just #ing stupid and asking to have #ty service anyway.

This reminds me of people who get upset because their friends don't talk to them or don't answer messages...if someone doesn't want to associate with you....even if they're ignorant #s...it's pointless getting upset about it...just move on...
edit on 4/6/2018 by dug88 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Narrow ruling; States can still protect civil rights.

Next?



posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 12:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Should they be forced to sell guns to 4 year olds? Are guns capable of killing people? Are cakes capable of killing people? You are comparing apples to oranges. Guns are a safety issue. Cakes are not.


Unless of course, the cake is religiously offensive to some people.

😁



new topics

top topics



 
59
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join