Indianapolis Bakery Refuses To Bake Gay Cupcakes

It's kind of ironic really. We are all about our rights and liberties... we scream and rant and post endlessly about how trod-upon we are.

But.. then someone using those same rights it set upon by those who feel they are "bigots" and worse. Nothing like good ol' double standards and hypocrisy.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Cobra.EXE
i dont blame this bakery for denying these people. if i walked into a bakery and told them i wanted anti-obama cookies or anti-zionist cookies i wouldnt be suprised if they denied me.

not only that, they have the right to refuse service to anybody. homos can go home and bake their own godamn filthy cookies.

i mean get real, dont walk into a public place and ask them to further promote or endorse your agenda lmao. big WOW!

Go read the thread.

All has been covered - - even what you seem to think is your "new edition" rant.

maybe im just exercising my right to express my thoughts instead of reading your worthless garble?

have a nice day, im sorry you didnt get your cookies baked the way you wanted them.

Originally posted by fleabit
It's kind of ironic really. We are all about our rights and liberties... we scream and rant and post endlessly about how trod-upon we are.

But.. then someone using those same rights it set upon by those who feel they are "bigots" and worse. Nothing like good ol' double standards and hypocrisy.

Please explain.

I find your point unclear.

reply to post by hotbakedtater

The only people I know of who discriminate against gays, and get frothing upset at defending their right to refuse to do business with them, are overwhemingly Christian.

Is that why you claim the Dad "hates" gay's?
Is that also why you introduced and titled an earlier link the way you did?

The Christian Bastions of Righteousness, the Indiana American Family Association, is riding to the rescue of the Bakery's virtue, and defending the ownder's honor!! Whew!

These Christian Hates teh gay cupcakes too

What do you have against Christians?
Do you truly think Christians hate gays?
I'm asking for clarity to your posts.

sl

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
I think boycotting is the best way to show your feelings towards social injustices.

In this case we have people who want to claim they have the right to discriminate against gays, even though the city has an ordinance banning that and their lease does too.

I think these American enterpenuers just learned a valuable lesson in business 101.

Are you thinking boycotting this business BEFORE you know the whole story is fair?

What do you mean when you say you support their right to be bigots? Is that because you are also a bigot? I ask because you call for boycotting a business who hasn't even been found guilty yet. You spin Christians hating gays twice now, maybe more I'm not going to search your posts to get an accurate count.Twice is enough for me.

I'm sorry I just don't understand where you are coming from and I hope you answer the questions.
sl

Originally posted by sweetliberty
Is that why you claim the Dad "hates" gay's?

That fact that he refuses to bake rainbow coloured cupcakes because he does not want his kids being exposed to homosexuality. Cupcakes that are rainbow coloured. It is fairly obvious, unless he refuses to bake them for some other reason? Maybe he doesnt really hate gays, just what they do and how they act? I don't know, maybe you have unique way of seeing things.

Any attempt to illustrate the vitriol constantly spewed at the gay community by a variety of Christian sects will undoubtedly be rebutted by either the "No True Christian" or the "Hate the Sin, Not the Sinner" response, followed by a "turn the other cheek" chiding for not tolerating the intolerant.
If villifying a groupfrom the pulpit, shunning them, working tirelessly to infringe upon their rights, and attempting to outlaw their behavior isn't hating them, what does it take to earn the term? Do they have to be putting gays to death (Rick Warren, Uganda)? As long as they aren't hanging gays in the village square (Islam), it just dislike of the lifestyle?
Lots of people have a problem with some Christians. Even with their boot on the throat of others, they have the nerve to play the martyr.

reply to post by sweetliberty


It is just my style of writing, SL. You are projecting too much of your own feelings onto me and what yu perceive to be my motives or intentions.

I like to write in an attention grabbing manner. In case you haven't noticed, (apperently not) I am a bit of an attention whore poster, it is not a crime (yet).

Some people are sublte, I go for reaction and emotion a lot of times, it is a device used by those who enjoy debating to get the debate going, engage in lively discussion what have you. I have been trying to work on presenting my views in a more palatable manner, but just like this thread, you cannot please everone's tastes.

reply to post by sweetliberty


I did not realize this was a criminal case, I am not looking it at this from a guilt pov.

In my pov they are suffering something called social consequences for their actions.

Specifically the way the father responded to the situation.

What does guilt have to do with this?

Am I bigot for lovong and supporting the constitution? So be it, call me all the names you like, it still does not change the bottom line.

This is a civil manner more than anything.

SL this thread is not about my personal feelings towards Xians, I am not up for debate.

Just a friendly reminder you seem to be skating very close to harrassing me with your line of questioning that has little bearing on the facts of the case.

All I did was bring a topic to the table here for debate.

I did not bring my personal views up for debate.

Whether I love or hate Xians is not relevant to the facts of the thread.

ETA:

Not once have I attacked you for anything in this thread, nor have I demanded any personal information from you for debate.

Originally posted by sweetliberty
Either that or you choose to give the government yet another reason to censor the internet.

Well. Isn't this whole situation one big catch 22? Funny to see you threatening government internet censorship, unless people use the internet the way you feel is responsible. You must have some major pull.

That's the thing. We have freedoms here (or at least that's our moto). We can choose to open a business, and we can choose to refuse service based on factors that really have little to do with what we're selling, like race, religion, sexual preference, etc., but that we have a personal problem with. The people we refuse have the right to make it known that they were refused, and people who disagree with that refusal have the right to not buy anything from that business. People who agree with it, also have the right to buy more stuff from that business. It really comes down to the reason you open your business to begin with, I guess. Do they need the money? Was it a wise move to gamble their business taking moral stands against the personal lives of consenting adult strangers? Time will tell how this works out for them I guess. Hope all the bigots here like cupcakes, one of your own needs you.

reply to post by Southern Guardian

True. What I don't understand is why the op would assume as much as she has, not knowing much about the business owners and in a sense, speaking his feelings for him when "not wanting to be a part of someone or something" to her, is the same as them "hate"-ing someone. Thats why I'm asking her for clarity. Thanks.
sl

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
reply to post by sweetliberty

 

It is just my style of writing, SL. You are projecting too much of your own feelings onto me and what yu perceive to be my motives or intentions.

I like to write in an attention grabbing manner. In case you haven't noticed, (apperently not) I am a bit of an attention whore poster, it is not a crime (yet).

Some people are sublte, I go for reaction and emotion a lot of times, it is a device used by those who enjoy debating to get the debate going, engage in lively discussion what have you. I have been trying to work on presenting my views in a more palatable manner, but just like this thread, you cannot please everone's tastes.

Lol, you have puzzled me lately with some of your postings. I've been trying to understand some of your posts without assumptions but it's been a little difficult as I never would have suspected you to show such animosity towards people who claim to be "Christians" or any other religion for that matter.

sl

reply to post by hotbakedtater


Well, what I've been reading from you is a lot of assumptions, such as the owners "hate" gays, the American Family Association must hate them too..... you making it as "Christian" hate.
It looks/looked like you will demean one person over another when you truly don't know the whole story. For instance, I would doubt the business owners are anti rainbow colors, probably never even associated rainbow colors to gay's, I don't know but I doubt this had to do with rainbow colors.

I feel until we know more, until they are found at fault or not, there is NO reason whatsoever to think they should be boycotted period.

sl

Originally posted by Annee
He is devout Catholic. Someone revealed it for him - after the fact. Very helpful person joining the fray - wouldn't you say.

Sometimes the Obvious is really the Obvious and does not need to be spelled out letter for letter.

So he's a father who was concerned about how the order may affect his daughters, and he happens to be a Catholic.

Again, what's wrong with that ?

It appears a lot of people on this thread are just bigoted against other people's religious beliefs.

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
SL this thread is not about my personal feelings towards Xians, I am not up for debate.

Just a friendly reminder you seem to be skating very close to harrassing me with your line of questioning that has little bearing on the facts of the case.

All I did was bring a topic to the table here for debate.

I did not bring my personal views up for debate.

ETA:

Not once have I attacked you for anything in this thread, nor have I demanded any personal information from you for debate.

edit on 5-10-2010 by hotbakedtater because: (no reason given)

Don't tell me you're one of those thread starters that post words such as hate, xians, bigots, boycotting ect., yet no one is allowed to ask you to clarify you're words?
I didn't know what your rules were, I do now!

I am not attacking you nor am I asking for "personal information", I could care less about any "personal information" from you.
I did however, ask you to clarify your posts.
If you begin a thread with "wow, what bigots", also bringing up suggestions as "boycotting" a small business, assuming Christians hate gays, ect.... being an attention whore as you put it, and saying this....

Some people are sublte, I go for reaction and emotion a lot of times, it is a device used by those who enjoy debating to get the debate going, engage in lively discussion what have you.

I ask you (which I know you might take as my asking for personal information, lol).. I ask. Why create a thread, using such tactics only to talk to yourself?

Whether I love or hate Xians is not relevant to the facts of the thread.

Had to look "Xians" up since I take people, religions, race, sexual orientation ect. at face value and I haven't felt the need to label others...
www.urbandictionary.com...

A word that atheists use because, for some reason, they think it's supposed to insult Christians.

Oh, ok, I see, lol.

Personally, I don't lure people with emotions, purposely for the sake of attention, only to be a tease! I try not to create trouble for myself that I might not be able to get out of.
As for the owners of the business in question, I'm sure there was no intentional agenda at play.If they discriminate, I hope they truly understand why they are at fault.
I don't tease for the sake of teasing only, and I don't like the idea of others who think it's fun to tease, with saying that, I will participate with the other posters.

Thank you
sl

reply to post by 27jd

What you said was very well put

Buttttttttt, lol, you must have misunderstood why I was speaking of "why people who engage in the internet should have a limit to harming the lives of other people" (main subject, paraphrasing.

For instance, there are hotheads on here who call for boycotting a family owned business BEFORE knowing the whole story. I feel it's too soon to suggest attacking their means of survival, they have children to feed and house, not to mention, the issue is still pending.
People are committing suicide due to the internet being abused, humiliating and bullying others.
I was saying, we should control ourselves so the government doesn't have an excuse to censor the internet.
I'm not saying we should tip-toe on the internet, I'm just saying those who use the internet to abuse people should realize they are bringing the possibility of censoring the internet even closer to happening.

Thanks
sl

Originally posted by sweetliberty

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
SL this thread is not about my personal feelings towards Xians, I am not up for debate.

Just a friendly reminder you seem to be skating very close to harrassing me with your line of questioning that has little bearing on the facts of the case.

All I did was bring a topic to the table here for debate.

I did not bring my personal views up for debate.

ETA:

Not once have I attacked you for anything in this thread, nor have I demanded any personal information from you for debate.

edit on 5-10-2010 by hotbakedtater because: (no reason given)

Don't tell me you're one of those thread starters that post words such as hate, xians, bigots, boycotting ect., yet no one is allowed to ask you to clarify you're words?
I didn't know what your rules were, I do now!

I am not attacking you nor am I asking for "personal information", I could care less about any "personal information" from you.
I did however, ask you to clarify your posts.
If you begin a thread with "wow, what bigots", also bringing up suggestions as "boycotting" a small business, assuming Christians hate gays, ect.... being an attention whore as you put it, and saying this....

Some people are sublte, I go for reaction and emotion a lot of times, it is a device used by those who enjoy debating to get the debate going, engage in lively discussion what have you.

I ask you (which I know you might take as my asking for personal information, lol).. I ask. Why create a thread, using such tactics only to talk to yourself?

Whether I love or hate Xians is not relevant to the facts of the thread.

Had to look "Xians" up since I take people, religions, race, sexual orientation ect. at face value and I haven't felt the need to label others...
www.urbandictionary.com...

A word that atheists use because, for some reason, they think it's supposed to insult Christians.

Oh, ok, I see, lol.

Personally, I don't lure people with emotions, purposely for the sake of attention, only to be a tease! I try not to create trouble for myself that I might not be able to get out of.
As for the owners of the business in question, I'm sure there was no intentional agenda at play.If they discriminate, I hope they truly understand why they are at fault.
I don't tease for the sake of teasing only, and I don't like the idea of others who think it's fun to tease, with saying that, I will participate with the other posters.

Thank you
sl

edit on 5-10-2010 by sweetliberty because: (no reason given)

Dont feed the troll.............


They want a debate, but won't debate their own personal views on it......................just a star and flag fest from a person more interested in that, then the truth or a sense of fairness..............fairy typical actually. Remember, you can't debate ignorance away, as once again has been proven here. When you state facts, you'll get more hyprebol from a group on here devout at being obtuse when they have posted without thinking. Fact is, they (the shop owners) aren't guilty of anything yet (not that it matters to some on here) and yet the tolerance they seek for the homosexuals isn't shown to anyone else.....a double standard here to stay. Ah well, another small business ste up and destroyed in a planned attack by the militant homosexual agenda and the liberally biased media.

Lol, this is a joke right?

I support gay rights, but come on, do we really want to make this world into a vanilla cupcake?
Owners of business have rights. Live with them

Cheers
Shane

Originally posted by sweetliberty

Yes this is an online forum NOT a tool to call small business owners "bigots" or to call for boycotting the said business simply because someone ASSUMES they are bigots long before they have been found GUILTY.

The man did not deny saying that he has "two impressionable daughters" when asked for a batch of rainbow cupcakes. What more proof do we need? He's clearly trying to spread his uneducated morals that fight against human rights around by using his business. This is illegal. Tough.

People are committing suicide due to the internet being abused

People are also killing themselves because they can't go to a bakery and order muffins without someone segregating them from society based on a theory on morals that someone else told them to believe because it was written in a book that they never read.