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.

 

Colorado's Masterpiece Cakeshop Must Serve Gay Couples Despite Owner's Religious Beliefs, Judge Ru

page: 14
22
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 08:49 AM
link   

macman
So again, the rights of the Gay couple trump the rights of a business owner.

He is forced to service someone he doesn't agree with.

Sounds very.......1940s European'ish.



You're just twisting it to fit all the time.
It's very simple.

He runs a business
By law he cannot discriminate, at least not openly
Gay rights aren't trumping religious rights, Equality is being ensured, that is all.


It's really that simple.

He doesn't have to socialise with them, or watch them in the act or even be around their "gayness"
He just has to provide the service that he provides everyone else.

If he decided to not serve a black or interracial couple, would that be OK by you too?




posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Benevolent Heretic

I didn't say he was pushing his beliefs onto someone else. I said he is imposing them on others. Look up "impose".

So, he was 'imposing' what again on the gay couple??
Seems to be the only 'imposing' was on the business owner.


Benevolent Heretic

No, he can believe what he wants to believe, regardless what ANYONE thinks. Belief and action are two different things. You can believe that black people shouldn't be allowed in restaurants, but if you take action on that, you are breaking the law, just as this baker did.

No, as he clearly can't.
His belief is that Gay Marriage is wrong. He did not want to be involved with it. Yet, he was/is forced to be involved because it is deemed as not fair.
So....again. The business owner's rights are trumped by those rights of others.
He is forced to provide services to someone he disagrees with.



Benevolent Heretic

That's freedom of religion. It doesn't extend beyond that.

Yes, actually is isn't just about religious freedom.
It has to do with the Govt forcing someone to provide services to someone else.


Benevolent Heretic

Wrong. The gay couple DO HAVE THE RIGHT to be serviced at this business.

No, no they don't. The only Law this stems from is the state business law, which goes against an individuals rights.
Colorado seems to be the pillar of certain groups rights trumping others lately. So, this is to be expected.


Benevolent Heretic

The owner DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to discriminate. It's easy to understand. I'm not sure why you're not getting it...

If working from what Freedoms and Rights are afforded by the Constitution and BoR, yes you do.
How this is not understood is beyond me.
I have the right to not allow certain people in my home. If I own a business, I am afforded the same right.
Is it wrong to discriminant? Sure.
Does the Govt have any business in making new laws, going against the above mentioned? No.


Benevolent Heretic

He willingly AGREED to service people he doesn't agree with when he got his business license. He is not being forced, he agreed to it.

So, let me get this straight.
Just because you want to do business in CO, you have to agree to serve any and all, regardless?

I would not be doing business in CO. Signing away rights is wrong.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 10:52 AM
link   

blupblup


You're just twisting it to fit all the time.
It's very simple.

It is simple. The Govt is forcing, yet again, someone to do something they are against.


blupblup
He runs a business
By law he cannot discriminate, at least not openly
Gay rights aren't trumping religious rights, Equality is being ensured, that is all.

No, equality is not being ensured, as the business owner's beliefs are trampled for others.



blupblup
He doesn't have to socialise with them, or watch them in the act or even be around their "gayness"
He just has to provide the service that he provides everyone else.

He just has to provide them a service, by force.


blupblup
If he decided to not serve a black or interracial couple, would that be OK by you too?

Yes, yes I would. And in reverse as well.
If a business run, say by a black guy, doesn't want to provide service to white people, good for him. I have no problem with that.

It is bullcrap to think people should be forced to do something against their will or beliefs.
If I went to a business that wouldn't serve Veterans, or white guys, I would find somewhere else to give my money to. I wouldn't complain about it, and then sue them. I will leave that up to Progressives and the whining groups.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 10:58 AM
link   
If they refused service because the couple was christian, or black, or muslim, or the color of their shirt, or how tall they were etc. Would that be acceptable to you?

I'm all for the rights of bussiness owners but its not right to deny service for these type of things.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 11:29 AM
link   

macman
So, he was 'imposing' what again on the gay couple??


His religious beliefs. He was enforcing his religious beliefs using the couple.



His belief is that Gay Marriage is wrong.


And he probably still holds that belief. His belief is intact. You can't logically argue that he can't believe as he does. He still believes that way. If he was not permitted to believe that way, he wouldn't. The law cannot tell ANYONE what to believe. Do you know the difference between belief and action?



He did not want to be involved with it.


The only thing he was involved with is making a wedding cake, which he does all the time.



He is forced to provide services to someone he disagrees with.


He AGREED to provide services to those with whom he disagrees. He freely agreed to. That's not force.



No, no they don't.


The gay couple DO HAVE THE RIGHT to be serviced at this business. Have you read the law? Just because you THINK it should be different, doesn't mean it's the way you think it should be.



I have the right to not allow certain people in my home.


Irrelevant. A business and a home are two different things.



If I own a business, I am afforded the same right.


No, you are not. Not legally. You're misinformed.



So, let me get this straight.
Just because you want to do business in CO, you have to agree to serve any and all, regardless?


Not exactly, but you DO agree not to discriminate based on race, color, creed, national origin, ancestry, religion, sex, persons with a physical or mental disability, marital status or sexual orientation. The baker admittedly discriminated based on sexual orientation. In Colorado, that's the same as refusing to serve someone because they're black or Christian. Read and inform yourself:

www.cu.edu...
www.transgenderlaw.org...

He CAN refuse to service someone who doesn't have shoes or a shirt on, for example.



I would not be doing business in CO. Signing away rights is wrong.


You're entitled to your opinion, but the folks of Colorado feel differently. It's a state right. Don't you support those? Or is it only when you agree with the law that states rights is a good thing?



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 11:31 AM
link   

macman
If I went to a business that wouldn't serve Veterans, or white guys, I would find somewhere else to give my money to.


And if the business was the only business within 500 miles that provided that service, you'd drive 1000 miles round trip to pick up a wrench?

Bah!



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by XTexan
 


Yes.

Is it right??? No.
Do I think the Govt has the right to force someone to deal with someone else? No.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


he is forced to abide by the laws that are in place as a business owner and that is non-discrimination.

he is not being forced to agree with Gay marriage, and Gays are not imposing on him, only that as a business owner he cannot discriminate against anyone based on Sexuality, Race, Religion, Gender etc and he violated that.

he has every right to believe what he wants, but not to let religious belief trump the rights we have of equality



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Benevolent Heretic
]

His religious beliefs. He was enforcing his religious beliefs using the couple.

Oh, so he tried to convert them?? Or was he forcing his views on them??
Noooooo.
No he did not. He did not want to do business with them.
so, the opposite actually happened.


Benevolent Heretic

And he probably still holds that belief. His belief is intact. You can't logically argue that he can't believe as he does. He still believes that way. If he was not permitted to believe that way, he wouldn't. The law cannot tell ANYONE what to believe. Do you know the difference between belief and action?

Oh, so it just forces someone to go against their beliefs. I got it now.



Benevolent Heretic

The only thing he was involved with is making a wedding cake, which he does all the time.

And he chose not to want to make one for these people.
In all reality, he should have just kept his mouth shut, and told them he didn't have time.
But, he wanted to be honest and told them the reason behind his decision.
Only in these times, are people punished for being upfront and honest.



Benevolent Heretic

He AGREED to provide services to those with whom he disagrees. He freely agreed to. That's not force.

So, he could do business without accepting that??


Benevolent Heretic
The gay couple DO HAVE THE RIGHT to be serviced at this business. Have you read the law? Just because you THINK it should be different, doesn't mean it's the way you think it should be.

Yes, i read the law and it is wrong.
Forcing someone to do that is Unconstitutional.


Benevolent Heretic

Irrelevant. A business and a home are two different things.

What about a home based business?
So, because I open a business, I give away rights???
That is maddening.



Benevolent Heretic

No, you are not. Not legally. You're misinformed.

So again, I give up rights to open a business. So much for those "inalienable" things.



Benevolent Heretic

Not exactly, but you DO agree not to discriminate based on race, color, creed, national origin, ancestry, religion, sex, persons with a physical or mental disability, marital status or sexual orientation. The baker admittedly discriminated based on sexual orientation. In Colorado, that's the same as refusing to serve someone because they're black or Christian. Read and inform yourself:

www.cu.edu...
www.transgenderlaw.org...

He CAN refuse to service someone who doesn't have shoes or a shirt on, for example.

But not wearing a shirt is part of my religion. Now he has to provide me service.



Benevolent Heretic

You're entitled to your opinion, but the folks of Colorado feel differently. It's a state right. Don't you support those? Or is it only when you agree with the law that states rights is a good thing?

it is not a State's right. State law(s) can't supersede the Law of the Land. This law clearly has.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


And that is your choice to live in that area.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Darth_Prime
 


Oh good hell. Yes, I well aware of the Unconstitutional State Law.
Thank you for chiming in with that.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


What is Unconstitutional about that?

funny you bring up the Constitution, all men created equal in their pursuit of happiness and all that..

just not us gays...



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Darth_Prime
 


And what about the owner not wanting to provide service went against the rights of the Gay couple??

They were not forced to do business with him.

Their pursuit of happiness was not thwarted, as there are many other means/avenues to their happiness in this situation.

If all men are created equal, then the rights of the Gay couple to get service, would not trump the rights of the business owner not to provide service.

If all men are created equal, the Gay couple, or anyone for that matter, would have the ability to procure services elsewhere, as they did and do.

If all men are created equal, the business owner would not be FORCED to provide services to someone, because the Gay couple were not FORCED to deal with the business owner.


It all comes down to freedom of choice.
Does the business owner have the freedom of choice in this situation? No
Does the Gay couple have the freedom of choice in this situation? Yes.

It is one sided, in favor of the rights of someone, trumping that of others.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Darth_Prime


just not us gays...


Why is that relevant?



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 



because you are saying it's okay to discriminate because we are gay and if a business owner is told by his religious faith not to "believe" in us it is okay to discriminate based on that


why would anyone defend discrimination? if you don't believe in a person based on their Sexuality,Race,Gender, Religion Etc what does that have to do with a business transaction?

just like the supposed separation between Church and State



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 01:41 PM
link   
This is funny as hell, these people trying to defend the baker who is a... let the label slide.

The Business Owner discriminated.

It ends there.

He should have put a label outside the shop saying "gays are not served here". Might as well add anything that does not follow his believes.. like "families of former slaves are not served here"...or "people of non-christian religion are not served here"...


Oh for those that are using outlandish comparison like gays = pedophilia. Eat this!


I refuse to let anyone who is not blond or blue eyed live that is my belief. - Hitler.

Oh well, i guess we should not worry about the actions because Hitler was protecting his right.

So according to defenders of Cake Baker, Genocides are justified!



Well it seems anyone can compare two different things!





edit on 12/18/2013 by luciddream because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 01:44 PM
link   

macman
Yes, yes I would. And in reverse as well.
If a business run, say by a black guy, doesn't want to provide service to white people, good for him. I have no problem with that.

It is bullcrap to think people should be forced to do something against their will or beliefs.
If I went to a business that wouldn't serve Veterans, or white guys, I would find somewhere else to give my money to. I wouldn't complain about it, and then sue them. I will leave that up to Progressives and the whining groups.




Thought so, that's all I needed to know.
Had a few with your mentality on the other thread.

You wont get your way... Equality is here to stay.




posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Darth_Prime


because you are saying it's okay to discriminate because we are gay and if a business owner is told by his religious faith not to "believe" in us it is okay to discriminate based on that

I am not focusing on the religious aspect.
Do we have the right, as a person, to discriminate? Yes we do.
I don't have to accept anyone or anything. I have the right not to. Yet somewhere along the way, it was decided that a business can't.
I get that in certain times, say the 50s and so on, it helped further the civil rights movement to get rid of Jim Crow laws.
Those laws were wrong, as they were the Govt doing the discrimination.


Darth_Prime
why would anyone defend discrimination?

The same reason why I defend a persons right to burn the American Flag, or disagree with me.
I have the right to not accept anyone's way of life. But it is not awarded in reverse.




Darth_Prime
if you don't believe in a person based on their Sexuality,Race,Gender, Religion Etc what does that have to do with a business transaction?

Because if I own the business, it is my right to do so.
Is it wrong morally???? Yes. Your money spends the same as mine.
Are there certain people I will not do business with?? Yes. Will I tell them out right? Nope, not these days.



Darth_Prime
just like the supposed separation between Church and State

There is none.

There is a law that states the Govt will not create a religion.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 02:37 PM
link   

blupblup

Thought so, that's all I needed to know.
Had a few with your mentality on the other thread.

Should this offend me? Or make me upset?


blupblup
You wont get your way... Equality is here to stay.


Yep, equality for some, but not others.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 



as i have written many times before i am the first to defend everyone's right and freedom to speech, thought, belief etc even if it is against me or my thoughts. but that doesn't have to translate into discrimination, do you have the right as a person to discriminate? yeah you do, but we should be looking at this from a bigger perspective, everyone gets caught up in the "Gay" and we have an agenda, and we are asking for special rights. but the bigger picture is if we allow discrimination for one person it will be for everyone, so it factors into Race, and Gender etc. the same thing you said the laws were for back in the 50's for Civil rights, this is also for civil rights.

serving someone in a business you own that is for serving the public has nothing to do with your personal belief, no one is saying they should be forced to "accept" another human being that is Gay, but that if you offer a service to people, it is for everyone.

they can believe whatever they want



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join