Indianapolis Bakery Refuses To Bake Gay Cupcakes

reply to post by hotbakedtater


In your opinion..............it started out with cup cakes..............kinda like mme goiing to firestone and asking for a steak...............they don't do it. The store was set up, and so the homosexual agenda is yet again furthered, admit it and move on. Funny betweeen you and Annee, you're probably more riled up than those actually involved, I guess being on a forum like this brings out the tiger in some bigots....eh?

reply to post by hotbakedtater


please delete this post.

Originally posted by hotbakedtater

Originally posted by mnemeth1
The business owners have the right to refuse service for any reason they chose.

If they don't want the business, they don't have to take it.

Using violent aggression against business owners that have harmed no one is wrong.

Who suggsted violence?

I agree wholeheartedly, however in this case the owners signed a lease in which rules gainst discrimination came into play. They signed it voluntarily, so in this case they waived that right.

And besides that - - - those who were discriminated against have as much right to be vocal as those who refused service because of religious belief.

Those who support the owners rights - - - don't seem to be very supportive about supporting the right of those discriminated against having a voice.

Originally posted by adifferentbreed
reply to post by hotbakedtater

 

In your opinion..............it started out with cup cakes..............kinda like mme goiing to firestone and asking for a steak...............they don't do it. The store was set up, and so the homosexual agenda is yet again furthered, admit it and move on. Funny betweeen you and Annee, you're probably more riled up than those actually involved, I guess being on a forum like this brings out the tiger in some bigots....eh?

Enough with the setup. Enough with the homosexual agenda.

I could copy any of your posts and re-post them in a different subject thread and they'd fit - - - cuz they're all the same.

reply to post by Annee

Aha, and now enough of repeating myself................I have to.....it's in response to the same things you keep spoouting over and over.....................and yes it was a set up, and there was and is definitely an agenda by the homosexuals at work here.

Wow still on the gay cupcakes thing? I can see the agenda being pushed by the gays, otherwise this wouldn't be a news story.... Any rational person would have said ok you don't want to fill my order I guess I'll go to another bakery and that should be the end of it, but nooooo they wanna raise a big stink over nothing and get their 15 minutes of fame... That's the problem though they don't want to be part of normal society, they want special rights and go above and beyond to make that apparently clear to everyone......

reply to post by adifferentbreed


Huh?

reply to post by jheated5


Um why wouldnt we still be on the cupcake thing? This is the thread for it.

Reply to hotbakedtater
Update:
When I started this post today, I was truly hoping we could weed out the facts vs fiction or here-say because there is a hell of a lot of assumptions and labels being carelessly and ignorantly used.
The biased opinions interpretting the facts are what has resulted in this thread being emotionally charged, further burying the few facts that are out there, until we can hear more from the officials.
So I edited this somewhat so as to only respond to your post to me since realizing the extent of the hypocrisy.


On this thread you state

Christians are the only group I know of who try to hide behind their religion as an excuse to do such things

here is proof it isn't only Christians...
Judge allows Muslim husband to hide behind religion for repeatedly beating and raping his wife

In S.D. v. M.J.R., the plaintiff, a Moroccan Muslim woman, lived with her Moroccan Muslim husband in New Jersey. She was repeatedly beaten and raped by her husband over the course of several weeks.

that the husband told his wife, “You must do whatever I tell you to do. I want to hurt your flesh” and “this is according to our religion

Then you begin substituting "Christian" for the word "Xian", also carelessly and intentionally, over-using the word BIGOTS. You begin your OP

Wow, what bigots

then many times throughout this thread, just as others like to over-use the "N" word. Your excuse for over-using "bigot" is no different than the hypocrites using and over-using the "N' word.
Do you think just maybe, possibly, by chance, there are other people in religious groups who hide behind their religion too?
40 Organized Religions and Faith Based Groups, ...want more Religious Groups?There's more!

This is in your reply to me:

I did not call for a boycott.

Oh, ok, you're right, you did not call for a boycott of a small family owned business that is still under investigation OK.

In your words...

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

In the same post you go on to add your take of their injustice.

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.

I think this American entrepreneur just learned a valuable lesson in National Inquirer journalism 101! Guilty before proven Guilty

I can not stomach quoting you anymore at this time, but if I have to, I will later.

The "all" ignorant mentality has already been addressed here on ATS and out there in the real world when people were claiming all Muslims are terrorists or all Muslims adhere to Sharia Law. Either some of the people posting on here missed it or they are intentionally hating against "Christians".

Now truly seeing why this thread couldn't stay focused. I ask you, who are the people truly trying to deny ignorance? The owners of "Just Cookies" and the proper officials who are getting to the bottom of this, and I'm quite sure there hasn't been any name calling! OR us!
Conclusion:
This thread failed.
sl

reply to post by sweetliberty


Preach it....................
funny, only those that disagree with cetain members agendas on here are bigots...............
I guess it takes all types to make the world go round, at least I know what's important to some, unless they are that ignorant to gain attention, I have my suspicions. Small businesses have enough problems in todays economy, they shouldn't have to worry about being set up to further others political agendas in an election year............I wonder how many on the city council took this ride for a few votes. Ah well, live and learn, until the next travesty, I'm outa here..........good for you though, calling like you see it, only problem is you used facts, it might take some time for a rebuttle on this one.

Its very clear what a Bigot is. Its in black & white in the dictionary.

It is not an opinion. It is a fact.

reply to post by sweetliberty


Stating my belief that boycotts are an excellent way to show disapproval in a civil situation is not the same as calling for a boycott. Don't accuse me of sensationalism when you do it too.

Thank you for pointing out that other organized religions are just an odious in their bigotry as Xians. I appreiate it.

As far as switching to Xians, it is shorthand, I am not athiest, and since I was typing the word a lot I used the shortened version. Big deal, and it still does not change the FACTS in this case that I have been debating, in particular the father's own statement. If he had kept his mouth shut, none of us would even be here in this thread.

Interesting tidbit on free speech, I dont know if you were here back then but a few years go I made a thread titled I got fired for my bumperstickers.

Anyway, I thought it would be illegal for one to be fired for their bumperstickers, but it is perfectly legal.

HOWEVER.

The lady who fired me (and the bumpersticker in question had the word gay and pedophile in it) was quoted in a local newspapaer as saying she did not want people like that working for her.

Now, I consulted with an attorney who said BECAUSE of what she was quoted as saying, I had a fairly strong case of discriminatory firing. Yet as a broke American, I could not afford to hire an attorney to pursue it, and several thousand dollars would have been required upfront.

In that case the busines sowner absolutely had a right to fire me, for what ever reason. When she stated her reason, was when she got in trouble or muddy legal waters so to speak.

I learned a valuable lesson from that experience, about the right to free speech and employment rights.

I am sure my past experiences culminate to mold the views I hold today.

reply to post by Annee


Annee, that's not a good term to use for this.

I see two bigots. The father for his statement, and the gay community for demanding acceptance.

Bigotry is a two way street.

You want acceptance, than lead by example and accept others, flaws and all.

Edit to add:
Definition of bigot:
a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

Both parties are fitting this definition pretty well right now.

I demand that the Jewish and Muslim Butcher let my guide dog in and hack me up some bacon.

No?

Oh.

reply to post by peck420


In THIS case, how is the entire gay community bigots? They did not call Just Cookies for acceptance they tried to place an order and enter into a business transaction with JC.

I would like to know where the bigotry is coming into play regarding the Gay Community.

Asking for aceptance =bigotry?

reply to post by hotbakedtater


No, asking for acceptance is not.

Demanding acceptance with threats of boycott is.

Do you see the difference?

Both parties are being intolerent of the other sides beliefs. It's pretty simple.

I've found it very humourous that most "tolerence" groups act as bigots by the very actions they use to promote tolerence...tolerate us or else.

You can dislike my actions or my beliefs and you can call me a bigot for them, but the second you demand change you have also becom a bigot. Hence, why I don't like the term.

Is he intolerant? Yup.
Assinine? Yup.

Many better terms than bigot.

Edit to add: Thought the community was boycotting from all the refrences to boycots in the posts....are they actually boycotting?


Edit to answer my own question, yes they are active calls for boycotts from the gay and rights communities.

Originally posted by peck420
reply to post by Annee

 

Annee, that's not a good term to use for this.

I see two bigots. The father for his statement, and the gay community for demanding acceptance.

Bigotry is a two way street.

You want acceptance, than lead by example and accept others, flaws and all.

I do not see it that way in this case. That is not saying a person who is gay can't be a Bigot.

Who exactly is demanding acceptance?

Expressing how you feel about being discriminated against - - - isn't demanding anything.

It is the City Government - - that is investigating.

Originally posted by Aeons
I demand that the Jewish and Muslim Butcher let my guide dog in and hack me up some bacon.

No?

Oh.

Jewish or Muslim Butcher won't sell you bacon?
No problem.
Jewish or Muslim Butcher won't let you and your guide dog in?
Problem.
Laws that prevent the blind person and their dog from being discriminated against trump the religious rights of the butchers. Doesn't make the blind guy a bigot.

reply to post by Annee


All of the 2,470 entries that came up in google when searching for just cookies boycott to start.

Any of the users on here calling for boycotts.

Take your pick.

The second we "demand" someone or something to change, we have become intolerant of their views just as much as they are intolerant of ours.

Might be why there is such a hard time ending intolerence.

reply to post by peck420


Well if I feel I am wronged by a business I boycott it. It is a nonviolent passive form of protest.

It is not illegal, it is preferred over other methods in which humans show their displeasure.