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.

 

Gay Colorado couple sues bakery for allegedly refusing them wedding cake

page: 10
18
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
My point about the Kosher deli also went over all of your heads.



No...your point went over your own head as usual.

At no point does a Kosher deli have to sell anything un-Kosher. But a bakery who sells wedding cakes MUST sell a wedding cake to the populous at large.

Simple for those without simple minds. IMO.

edit on 7-6-2013 by HandyDandy because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 10:29 PM
link   
Businesses reserve the right to refuse anyone service. Thats why you see sings that say "No shirt, no shoes, no service". Theyre targetting people who do not dress to their requirements. It's the same principle. If said busines refuses to sell someone a wedding cake because they do not want to violate their relgiious beliefs by promoting homosexuality then that is their right.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


So, you would just buck up and move along when someone discriminates against you because you're the bigger man right?

So, the Christians should just buck up and move along when the atheists want the manger scene gone.

ok.......



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by HandyDandy

Originally posted by esdad71
My point about the Kosher deli also went over all of your heads.



No...your point went over your own head as usual.

At no point does a Kosher deli have to sell anything un-Kosher. But a bakery who sells wedding cakes MUST sell a wedding cake to the populous at large.

Simple for those without simple minds. IMO.

edit on 7-6-2013 by HandyDandy because: (no reason given)


Why? Both reasons not to sell are based on religious beliefs. Freedom of religion was, at one time, protected in the US and now it is not. That was the point. No need to insult. I said over some heads, not simple minded or you idiots do not get it. You need to use a little critical thinking though.

As usual is also a nice touch to make it real personal by calling me simple minded. Thanks for being a fan.

edit on 7-6-2013 by esdad71 because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-6-2013 by esdad71 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 10:43 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 


No it is not the same thing. If you go into a Kosher Deli you are expecting to get Kosher food period. If you are going to a cake shop you are not expecting a side of religious zealotry with the cake you are ordering. If you do not happen to carry a same sex cake top that is one thing, no one is going to make you carry it in your product line but you better be prepared to put Adam and Steve on that cake if it is ordered that way.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by HandyDandy
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


So, you would just buck up and move along when someone discriminates against you because you're the bigger man right?

So, the Christians should just buck up and move along when the atheists want the manger scene gone.

ok.......


Its a business. No exhange of money, then no service is rendered. You can't just walk into a business and force someone to take your money.

Personally, i don't care about the manger scene. However, again you are violating someone's religious beliefs and religious freedoms of expression. If you dont want to see a manger scene, don't look at it. A real atheist wouldn't give a tinker's damn about a manger scene, but then again there is no such a thing as atheism. Atheism prides itself on logic and thats where it falls apart, for it is illogical to disbelieve in something you cannot prove does not exist. Then they can only rightly be classified as agnostic, but thats a conversation for another time and i do not wish to further distract from the OP.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 10:52 PM
link   
sounds to me like the ACLU is running out of objectionables to rally against.
business owners retain the right to refuse service to ANYONE, just as they always have.

if the business owner/representative expressly denied service BASED on discriminatory practices, then the ACLU might have a case, otherwise, they are just looking for headlines ... as we haven't heard much from them for awhile now.

good luck demanding a public store like Sweetbay or Publix or Piggy Wiggly prepare a birthday cake with some porn depiction as a decoration. like it or not, it's all the same.

porn isn't illegal yet, however, i can almost guarantee that no public store would prepare such for ANY price for ANY customer. it is their right to refuse, period.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


No you see no shirt, no shoes, no service because if the health inspector sees you in the store not wearing those articles they get cited. It has nothing to do with some imagined dress code. But go ahead open up a store and put no blacks on the window and see how fast you get told that is against the law.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by KeliOnyx
 


Sorry, it is. In both of these cases they went into a Bakery where it was known he would not make same sex marriage cakes.

Lakewood is minutes outside Denver. You really think this is the only one or they are so good they had to have it from there. No...a targeted attack by gays.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by KeliOnyx
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


No you see no shirt, no shoes, no service because if the health inspector sees you in the store not wearing those articles they get cited. It has nothing to do with some imagined dress code. But go ahead open up a store and put no blacks on the window and see how fast you get told that is against the law.
wrong again, plenty of stores here, beach-side, promote both ... dress-code and not ... without any "health violations" whatsoever. try again.

No speak English, no service, same applies.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by KeliOnyx
 


Even been to a beach bar...it is not about health inspectors, it is about the right to refuse service. The law in CO is bunk and is violating the rights of the business owners.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 10:59 PM
link   
"But a bakery who sells wedding cakes MUST sell a wedding cake to the populous at large"


Is this Communist Russia? I Must Sell? Say again?



edit on 7-6-2013 by Foreshadow because: quotes



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 11:21 PM
link   
Here is My question, How did the Baker know they were a gay couple?

How was this information reveled, if it was at his workplace could he (the baker) not counter sue for sexual harassment?? I know I would. I don't need to know your sexual orientation to bake you a cake, nor can one gleen such from just looking at a person.
Did the folks suing the baker revel they were gay and if so, why? what does that have to to with baking a cake??

I do not care what a persons sexual preference is, but I do not walk around and tell folks I am hetrosexual either. If you are striving for equality, then why set yourself apart by announcing your differences??



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Foreshadow
"But a bakery who sells wedding cakes MUST sell a wedding cake to the populous at large"


Is this Communist Russia? I Must Sell? Say again?



edit on 7-6-2013 by Foreshadow because: quotes


Try to refuse service to a black couple (for just being black) and see how far you get.



edit on 7-6-2013 by HandyDandy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 11:31 PM
link   
reply to post by thedigirati
 


Good point. Why should the reason for the cake be any of the owner's concern in the first place? He didn't need to know.


edit on 7-6-2013 by EllaMarina because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedigirati
I do not care what a persons sexual preference is, but I do not walk around and tell folks I am hetrosexual either.


Do you walk around in public with your spouse? Then yes....yes you do.... By default.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by HandyDandy
 


The hetero couple could be relatives or friends for all anyone knows.


edit on 8-6-2013 by EllaMarina because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2013 @ 12:57 AM
link   
a) This is Murica. You can sue for pretty much anything, I don't see the uproar when a somewhat unreasonable law suit, which may have a valid legal argument, arises. Is it because it involves a gay couple? I don't understand why this same attention is given to the dozens of other unreasonable law suits.

b) Do not treat a court proceeding as final. Firstly, no ruling has yet to occur and there is no clear expression that a ruling will be held against the defendant's. It seems as if the persuasive legal argument surrounding this case will be difficult to establish - and even if it is, there is an appeal process.

Murica. Speak (or type) first, think later.



posted on Jun, 8 2013 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Why didn't they just send in the wedding planner and not give details? Did they really want that bakers cake that desperately? No other bakeries in the area? If they really wanted the cheesy gay topper they probably could have ordered it online. Not classy anyhow.
edit on 8-6-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2013 @ 01:14 AM
link   
I think TheRedneck presented the difficulties involved very well in his post back on page 2. I would suggest reviewing it.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I believe that it is probably against the law for the baker to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, but the baker is not refusing service in general to gay people, indeed he has said that he serves gay customers, he just objects to being forced to take part in a ceremony against his religion.

As TheRedneck points out, during the gay marriage debate it was often said that churches would never be required to perform same-sex marriages, it violated separation of Church and State. But the baker is being told he must perform his part in the ceremony, provide the cake. If that same rule applied to every business that supplied portions of the church service, the only item that would be exempt would be the priest. The programs and announcements would have to be sold, the decorations (in rainbow colors) declaring "Happy Wedding, Steve and Tim" would have to be sold. No one could refuse to participate, even the church building is open to the public, it would have to be made available. Only the priest could say "no," that is, under current laws. Who knows what will happen?

The other huge point made by gay marriage advocates was "My gay marriage won't affect you." Well, we see that it does. Were the advocates unaware of this? Or, did they know and then lie about it?



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join