Gay Colorado couple sues bakery for allegedly refusing them wedding cake

Originally posted by frost47
Let me see if I understand this:

1. The gay couple has the right to refuse doing business with the bakery owner. For any reason whatsoever.
2. The bakery owner does not have the right to refuse business from the gay couple because they are gay.

Why is it that consumers have the right to refuse to do business under any circumstance, whereas producers can only refuse business in certain cases, and even then, can become subject to scrutiny and legal action?

I will almost choke on these words, because I find the idea of our current system(s) of taxation to be repulsive.....but here is the way the theory goes:

If you are granted a license for taxation (sales tax, mixed beverage tax, etc, etc), you are essentially being given the privelege of doing business. That privilege has certain obligations.

reply to post by Darth_Prime

i'm not privy to why they would instruct children on Beastiality, maybe because it can found on the internet and children are far more technology savvy?

Oh exactly, because some children may be tech savvy and find stuff on the Net therefore we have to institutionally thrust porn and deviant behavior on all children.... that is if you are Obama and you think the State is all Supreme and parents are evil abusers.

That is just bs of all bs. What sorry justification for sexualizing children when they should be focusing on real math, science, and language arts.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus



but you can say the same about Religion institutionalizing indoctrination and brainwashing, i don't see how us gays are attempting to brainwash anyone? by wanting to be accepted as Human, as i have stated not all gays are perfect and correct, likewise there is not one 'Gay thought process' this has been discussed multiple times

the main topic is Discrimination, why the avoidance of it?

So if I own a business I am dictated by those who want to impose their views but I cannot have my own? Hmmm....does not sound like a free nation to me and you are promoting it.

Let me guess...Ron Paul... or better yet..Rosanne Barr...

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Originally posted by frost47
Let me see if I understand this:

1. The gay couple has the right to refuse doing business with the bakery owner. For any reason whatsoever.
2. The bakery owner does not have the right to refuse business from the gay couple because they are gay.

Why is it that consumers have the right to refuse to do business under any circumstance, whereas producers can only refuse business in certain cases, and even then, can become subject to scrutiny and legal action?

I will almost choke on these words, because I find the idea of our current system(s) of taxation to be repulsive.....but here is the way the theory goes:

If you are granted a license for taxation (sales tax, mixed beverage tax, etc, etc), you are essentially being given the privelege of doing business. That privilege has certain obligations.

"the privilege of doing business"... so providing for your family is a privilege?

reply to post by Darth_Prime


Gays are accepted as human. If you are gay and do not think that you need someone to give you a hug and tell you it is ok. Being gay is not hidden anymore. It is in movies, TV, music, MSM, gay proms.gay after school clubs...everywhere. How can you honestly say that being gay is not accepted?

Originally posted by esdad71
So if I own a business I am dictated by those who want to impose their views but I cannot have my own? Hmmm....does not sound like a free nation to me and you are promoting it.

Let me guess...Ron Paul...

Replace the Ron with Ru and you got my vote!

no one said you couldn't have your view, at no point did that enter the conversation, it's about discrimination,

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

I mean, what is there to accept? As if kids would see homosexuality as wrong were it not for bigoted parents indoctrinating them to being with.

Obviously you see nothing wrong with institutionalizing indoctrination and brainwashing so long as it fits your particular pet needs. This is exactly what I have talked about on these forums and why I say that Totalitarianism is preferred by those who think they have a right to tell everyone else what to do. You champion having the almighty State dictate these things because you personally don't like having parents teach their own children.

I see exactly where you are coming from. As long as it's your pet thing eh.....

edit on 10-6-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

Just how do you tell all of that? Is this the Writers Forum?

Obviously I see nothing wrong with teaching my kids to live and let live. I am 100% against all institutionalized education. Public education is the bane to intelligent society. I mentioned Charlotte Iserbyte. If you haven't heard of her, look her up. Read what I am saying before you go making up a bunch of nonsense. Just the act of me supporting Iserbyte would have made your entire prior post baseless.

I have a very long posting history here. If you can find a single instance of me supporting a state power dictating things. To be honest, I would rather see pure anarchy and let human nature balance itself out. Painful? Possibly....but getting back to natural law would be a benefit to humanity.

Jesus. I feel lke I am talking to a teenager who learned forum discussion on some political forum somewhere. Do you not see the lunacy in declaring that you want people to be free, meanwhile you seem to support a social system that discriminates against people who have sexual habits you don't like.

Originally posted by frost47

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Originally posted by frost47
Let me see if I understand this:

1. The gay couple has the right to refuse doing business with the bakery owner. For any reason whatsoever.
2. The bakery owner does not have the right to refuse business from the gay couple because they are gay.

Why is it that consumers have the right to refuse to do business under any circumstance, whereas producers can only refuse business in certain cases, and even then, can become subject to scrutiny and legal action?

I will almost choke on these words, because I find the idea of our current system(s) of taxation to be repulsive.....but here is the way the theory goes:

If you are granted a license for taxation (sales tax, mixed beverage tax, etc, etc), you are essentially being given the privelege of doing business. That privilege has certain obligations.

"the privilege of doing business"... so providing for your family is a privilege?

"providing for your family" is not a synonym for "owning your own business".

I run businesses for a living on an executive level. i am not bllowing smoke here. If you don't like my answers, call your congressman.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Originally posted by frost47

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Originally posted by frost47
Let me see if I understand this:

1. The gay couple has the right to refuse doing business with the bakery owner. For any reason whatsoever.
2. The bakery owner does not have the right to refuse business from the gay couple because they are gay.

Why is it that consumers have the right to refuse to do business under any circumstance, whereas producers can only refuse business in certain cases, and even then, can become subject to scrutiny and legal action?

I will almost choke on these words, because I find the idea of our current system(s) of taxation to be repulsive.....but here is the way the theory goes:

If you are granted a license for taxation (sales tax, mixed beverage tax, etc, etc), you are essentially being given the privelege of doing business. That privilege has certain obligations.

"the privilege of doing business"... so providing for your family is a privilege?

"providing for your family" is not a synonym for "owning your own business".

I run businesses for a living on an executive level. i am not bllowing smoke here. If you don't like my answers, call your congressman.

I see now from reading your other posts that you are not some rabid statist that believes in that tax crap as was my original conception. Apologies.

And you're right, it's not a synonym, but it is one of the most effective ways to do so. At least for me.

I would call my congressmen, but they are too busy trying to destroy what little freedoms I have left to care about such a trivial issue.

Originally posted by Darth_Prime
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

but you can say the same about Religion institutionalizing indoctrination and brainwashing, i don't see how us gays are attempting to brainwash anyone? by wanting to be accepted as Human, as i have stated not all gays are perfect and correct, likewise there is not one 'Gay thought process' this has been discussed multiple times

the main topic is Discrimination, why the avoidance of it?

The Progressives literally bashed, name-called, harassed, invaded the privacy of Sarah Palin and hacked her email, bashed her family, forced her out of office with petty complaints, lied about her, viciously ridiculed and condemned her for daring to not abort her handicapped unborn, and mocked her on tv shows like Saturday Night Live, and bill Maher was one of the worst, and you are lecturing me about discrimination and tolerance?

Bah, it's all hypocrisy.

Why can't we all just discriminate based on whatever our personal biases may be?

As long as the government is prohibited from discriminating, it should all even out.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by Darth_Prime
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

but you can say the same about Religion institutionalizing indoctrination and brainwashing, i don't see how us gays are attempting to brainwash anyone? by wanting to be accepted as Human, as i have stated not all gays are perfect and correct, likewise there is not one 'Gay thought process' this has been discussed multiple times

the main topic is Discrimination, why the avoidance of it?

The Progressives literally bashed, name-called, harassed, invaded the privacy of Sarah Palin and hacked her email, bashed her family, forced her out of office with petty complaints, lied about her, viciously ridiculed and condemned her for daring to not abort her handicapped unborn, and mocked her on tv shows like Saturday Night Live, and bill Maher was one of the worst, and you are lecturing me about discrimination and tolerance?

Bah, it's all hypocrisy.

Sarah Palin was no angel, she has done her fair share of discriminating comments and actions,

no two wrongs never make a right, and i shall reiterate again so my words don't get twisted, no discrimination should be tolerated

reply to post by frost47


I would likely enjoy pouring a pint with you.

Originally posted by frost47
Why can't we all just discriminate based on whatever our personal biases may be?

As long as the government is prohibited from discriminating, it should all even out.

Because there are emotional answers to logical quandries, and we end up in this boat.

I like individual justice, honestly. One mans renegade is another mans savior.

reply to post by Darth_Prime


Progressives obviously believed she deserved it for dissenting from their wisdom.

So ok you say that she was no angel(sounds like a justification for the Left to me) but then comes the disclaimer that you don't think discrimination of any kind should be tolerated.

Here's a true sampling of just how(not) tolerant and civil the Left is

www.mrc.org...

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Originally posted by frost47
Why can't we all just discriminate based on whatever our personal biases may be?

As long as the government is prohibited from discriminating, it should all even out.

Because there are emotional answers to logical quandries, and we end up in this boat.

I like individual justice, honestly. One mans renegade is another mans savior.

I've been a libertarian for a long time. Honestly, I'm not sure anymore if it is even remotely possible to create a legal framework that comes close to guaranteeing individual justice. But I guess you meant individual justice vs state administered justice. Better everyone be a renegade than everyone be subjugated by the state.

In the case described in this thread: everyone should just go and do what they believe is right. Most of you will probably go and try to force other people to do what you believe is right.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Girl you seem too angry,

you assume people are 'Progressive' just to attack 'progressive',

it's not 'left justification' i'm saying it's hypocritical to utilize Sarah Palin as an example when she served discriminatory realness herself

Cold someone show me what is the difference between a normal wedding cake and a gay one....I'm confused, not about my sexuality, but from a gay cake point of view...