If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Think Progress)   Bakery that refused to sell wedding cake to lesbian couple found to have discriminated, its owner saying it's part of 'God's plan'. Sure, if God's plan for you is a jury trial   (thinkprogress.org) divider line 676
    More: Followup, lesbian couples, public accommodations  
•       •       •

5453 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Jan 2014 at 1:11 PM (31 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



676 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-21 02:29:05 PM

SpectroBoy: CivicMindedFive: Fark is a weird place where Christians are the ultimate trump card.

Contrast this to the douchey-hipster article who wants government to prevent his neighbors from chopping down trees on their property because he likes those trees.  The Fark brigade is almost universally against the hipster douche siding with private property rights.

Then there's this case, where a lesbian couple wants government to force a baker to participate in a gay wedding, and because the baker is Christian, the same people are ready to feed him to the dogs.

If there's ever a case where cops beat the snot out of anti-abortion demonstrators, the whole universe might divide by zero following the cognitive dissonance coming from fark.

The bakery is a PUBLIC accommodation. It is not a private property issue once you cross that line.

They could have created a private bakery and discriminated against all the icky gheys they want. But they didn't. They opened a public business and in doing so agreed to be bound by the law governing such a business.

Try to understand.


You try to understand.  When you can walk into a bakery and buy a wedding cake off the shelf, it would be a public accommodation.  Forcing a baker to participate in something he disagrees with is not.

These lesbians and their supporters as well as douchy-hipster-tree-lover both want to use the heavy boot of government to smash the face of those who don't agree with their views.
 
2014-01-21 02:29:06 PM

darth_badger: Blues_X: HoustonNick: Libtard Creed - You must believe like I believe or be punished.  No other beliefs will be accepted.

This is so disgusting.


Next up: "but we don't want to serve black people."


[4.bp.blogspot.com image 480x640]

[cdn.cakecentral.com image 850x637]


[halfsteppin.com image 850x1275]

[fc03.deviantart.net image 850x637]


Very creative and disgusting. That does not look like food.
 
2014-01-21 02:29:18 PM

insertsnarkyusername: lennavan:

Hi I'd like a cake, I'm straight.  $100?  Sweet.
Hi I'd like a cake, I'm gay.  $130?  Sweet.

What world do you live in that a wedding cake costs 100 dollars?


One where I felt like larger numbers would have been too difficult for you to understand.  Considering your reply focused on the number rather than the very clear illustration as to how it would be exceedingly simple to prove, I was right, wasn't I?
 
2014-01-21 02:29:41 PM

frepnog: A christian baker should be able to say no to a homosexual customer. the homosexual lifestyle is in direct contradiction to what the religion preaches.

they just should be able to.


Up until the 1970s, Mormons believed that all black people were sinners. Should they have been able to refuse service to black people?
 
2014-01-21 02:30:37 PM
TrotlineDesigns:
Never owned anything have ya? Well, that you worked for I mean

I owned your mother last night but you are right, I didn't have to work for it.
 
2014-01-21 02:31:10 PM
I think that guy from Philipsburg should sue the shoprite for discrimination for refusing to put "happy birthday Adolf Hitler" on his sons cake.
 
2014-01-21 02:31:37 PM

susler: If god was really on everyone's side who claims it, we wouldn't have gay marriage anywhere, the 10 commandments would be on every courthouse wall and storekeepers would be shot for saying "happy holidays"

Suck it, everyone who wears their religion and/or their politics on their sleeve.


Don't forget their gayness.
 
2014-01-21 02:32:03 PM
Witty_Retort:

DubtodaIll: Witty_Retort: DubtodaIll: There's a line between being genuinely discriminated against in a way that is malicious and systematic and being a professional victim.  Not being served your wedding cake is not a systematic discrimination.  You've already gotten your legal rights for marriage, why make an example out of a solitary business and screw over the cakemakers?

When one of the bakery owners, Aaron Klein, discovered the cake was for a same-sex marriage, he called the couple "abominations unto the Lord" and made other comments that reduced the fiancée to tears, according to the complaint.

Feelings are inconsequential.

But the law is not.

The couple is not suing the bakery. He insulted them enough that they filed a complaint with the AG. The AG investigated and found they had been wronged.



Yeah the laws the law and should be paid attention to at all times.  It just doesn't seem just to punish someone who would otherwise be successful and harmless unless the "victim" hadn't been offended and that law exist to protect people from being offended.  I don't think either side is in the right here but the law does prefer the lesbian couple in this situation.  While I doubt feelings can ever by removed from the justice process as long as humans are administering the law, I can't see how feelings, which are impossible to verify or prove in any philosophical or scientific way, are able to be proven and acted upon by the law.
 
2014-01-21 02:32:21 PM

CivicMindedFive: When you can walk into a bakery and buy a wedding cake off the shelf, it would be a public accommodation.  Forcing a baker to participate in something he disagrees with is not.


Know how I know you don't know what the definition of a public accommodation is?
Allow me to help:
Colorado 24-34-601: Discrimination in places of public accommodation
(1) As used in this part 6, "place of public accommodation" means any place of business engaged in any sales to the public and any place offering services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations to the public, including but not limited to any business offering wholesale or retail sales to the public; any place to eat, drink, sleep, or rest, or any combination thereof; any sporting or recreational area and facility; any public transportation facility; a barber shop, bathhouse, swimming pool, bath, steam or massage parlor, gymnasium, or other establishment conducted to serve the health, appearance, or physical condition of a person; a campsite or trailer camp; a dispensary, clinic, hospital, convalescent home, or other institution for the sick, ailing, aged, or infirm; a mortuary, undertaking parlor, or cemetery; an educational institution; or any public building, park, arena, theater, hall, auditorium, museum, library, exhibit, or public facility of any kind whether indoor or outdoor. "Place of public accommodation" shall not include a church, synagogue, mosque, or other place that is principally used for religious purposes.
 
2014-01-21 02:33:18 PM

Guelph35: I believe a private business has the right to make the decisions that they feel are correct for their business (including the right to refuse service) unless they are breaking the law.



frepnog: DubtodaIll: There's a line between being genuinely discriminated against in a way that is malicious and systematic and being a professional victim.  Not being served your wedding cake is not a systematic discrimination.  You've already gotten your legal rights for marriage, why make an example out of a solitary business and screw over the cakemakers?

while I feel that suing the cakemaker was ridiculous (sorry gheys, it IS ridiculous to sue a cakemaker because they don't want to make you a cake) honestly we need these types of ridiculous lawsuits.

because the next dumbass bigot might just think twice.


Are you now contending people may grow out of ignorant, destructive phases of their life?
 
2014-01-21 02:33:21 PM

ValisIV: Yep, if lesbian bakers said something like "We don't make cakes for breeders", then they would be breaking the law, by discriminating based upon sexual preference.


and yet no suits would be filed, and if they were they would get no traction.

i guarantee you there is at least one black owned bakery out there that wouldn't make a cake for a white person even at gun point.  because racism is real.

and still no suit would get traction.
 
2014-01-21 02:33:34 PM

stpauler: karnal: stpauler: MyRandomName: stpauler: HoustonNick: Libtard Creed - You must believe like I believe or be punished.  No other beliefs will be accepted.

This is so disgusting.

The only real comeback for this is "fark you, you disgusting sad piece of flapping ass shiat".

You realize that you liberals are acting exactly the same towards religious people, right? Liberals always want respect but never respect the religious views of others. The irony is thick.

Are there really zero other wedding cake designers? This is about liberals trying to fark a religious person over. No more, no less.

My boyfriend is a church-going Catholic. So, no, it's not about religion, it's about bigotry. So fark you and the bigotry you come flying in on.

Are you two engaging in pre-martital sex?  If so, then he is not a good Catholic boy and your opinoin is moot.

Actually, if you need shiat about Catholicism, you would also know the stance on freedom of conscience
The Catholic Church has always held to the primacy of conscience and taught that individuals must follow their consciences even when they are wrong. (Vatican II, On Religious Liberty (1965), §2)
 This means, my retarded little poster, that Catholics can and are obliged to dissent from the Church when their conscience disagrees with it. Now who is moot?



And who is without a wedding cake because I damn sure won't be making one for you fornicating sinners....unless, of course, the government tells me to.


and the Catholic church says:
Pre-marital sex is selfish
Pre-marital sex is unloving
 and
Pre-marital sex is a misuse of our sexuality
 
2014-01-21 02:33:53 PM

Phinn: DubtodaIll: Oh the "you didn't build that" argument. We all pay taxes, we all pay for public infrastructure. Therefore we've already attributed our right to free use of infrastructure in that we have already paid for it. There is nothing owed beyond that point, especially not changing one's stance on debatable issues to reflect the popular flow of the time.

Isn't self-referential rationalization just spectacular to behold?

Let's see -- the government forces everyone to pay for roads, and it controls the entire road-building and city-planning business, thereby requiring everyone to use the government's roads just to live, and then points to people's use of government roads to JUSTIFY expanding the government's control over every other aspect of people's lives.

Brilliant.

It's like stealing someone's food, and then when you give it back to him, claiming that he owes you his life in perpetuity for feeding him.


Well it all must have worked pretty good if we are down to arguing about lesbians not getting a cake made for them.
 
2014-01-21 02:34:00 PM
How smart is it to force someone who doesn't want to make you something to eat to make you something to eat?

/Something to eat. You. Force.
 
2014-01-21 02:34:56 PM

DubtodaIll: I can't see how feelings, which are impossible to verify or prove in any philosophical or scientific way, are able to be proven and acted upon by the law.


They don't need to, nor are feelings part of the law: this is purely objective. The baker found out they were gay and refused service on those grounds. Their level of offense is irrelevant, as all that matters is the baker operates a public business, and the baker refused service for a reason that's illegal.
 
2014-01-21 02:35:05 PM
One would think that a man wearing earrings would be a little more tolerant of diversity.

Guess not, in this case.
 
2014-01-21 02:35:42 PM

lennavan: insertsnarkyusername: lennavan:

Hi I'd like a cake, I'm straight.  $100?  Sweet.
Hi I'd like a cake, I'm gay.  $130?  Sweet.

What world do you live in that a wedding cake costs 100 dollars?

One where I felt like larger numbers would have been too difficult for you to understand.  Considering your reply focused on the number rather than the very clear illustration as to how it would be exceedingly simple to prove, I was right, wasn't I?


It's not simple to prove. You've obviously never once worked in this industry. Say I own a bakery and you come in and say you are having a wedding. I say ok, you tell me the number of guests, the size of portions, the design, what kind of cake you want, what kind of icing you want and if you want the cake to be one type or multiple types. Then I do a mental calculation on ingredients, labor, use of kitchen space and then add on profit. Then I give you a number. That's how it works.

Two of my friends are getting married, big gay wedding except one of them is a bit of a groomzilla which is why I go with them to meet caterers and bakers. Just having an idea of how much things cost to produce and average profit margins will save you money. I also know caterer's who only do weddings because they can charge 20 percent more for the same service as a party.
 
2014-01-21 02:35:56 PM

Theaetetus: frepnog: A christian baker should be able to say no to a homosexual customer. the homosexual lifestyle is in direct contradiction to what the religion preaches.

they just should be able to.

Up until the 1970s, Mormons believed that all black people were sinners. Should they have been able to refuse service to black people?


yes.  is it right?  no.  but freedom of religion is what it is, either we have it or we do not, and freedom of religion should trump your hurt feelings.

or just say fark it, religion means nothing, tax them same as any other business and get on with it.
 
2014-01-21 02:36:03 PM

Weatherkiss: Billygoat Gruff: Some friends and I werent allowed in a club in Germany one night. When we asked the door man why he said "You are Americans and you steal all the women." So I too, have known the sting of bigotry. We just laughed it off and went to the bar next door and spent our money there. But none of us were looking to be victims we just wanted to get drunk and chase women.

That's unfortunate, I thought Germany had a high reputation for being open and tolerant of other nationalities.



You would be surprised. I was stationed there for 5 years. They biatch about their immigration problem the same way we do here, well that is to say the people I met did, and a lot of them were young people, bu they werent all Nazi-ish either. Assholes are everywhere dude, America hasn't cornered the market on it. Things are tough all over at ground level. But as with any country who values tourist dollars your going to get something slick and shiney and not exactly truthful.But overall my experience in Germany was amazing it was just that one night that sticks out only because it makes me laugh. How many of you havent been allowed in a bar because you were too good with the ladies?
 
2014-01-21 02:36:19 PM

barneyfifesbullet: It's just another day in Your Gay Indoctrination.

Only a liberal would want the government to force someone to bake them a cake.


At this point, I personally would prefer that he did not bake them a cake. But rather that he pay them substantial damages for his evil choice to subject moral persons conducting themselves lawfully to dehumanizing discrimination in the provision of public services.

Earlier I asked for this baker's apologists to produce any Bible passage requiring Jehovah religionists to discriminate in the provision of public services against homosexuals. No such passage has been produced.

This man is not acting according to any religious compulsion. He is acting solely on his desire to treat a hated class of persons as second class citizens. He is of bad moral character, and because of his actions, he deserves to be punished. And he will be.
 
2014-01-21 02:37:08 PM

barneyfifesbullet: It's just another day in Your Gay Indoctrination.

Only a liberal would want the government to force someone to bake them a cake.



It's not about the cake.  No one wants a cake made by someone who dislikes him.  Obvi.

The medium is the message.  The superficial message from the government here is: YOU MUST BAKE CAKES FOR THE GAYS.

But the superficial message is unimportant.  It's the import of the communication that matters, the subtext.  Here, the real, unspoken message is: WE CONTROL YOUR BUSINESS.

Arbitrary compliance with fake-rules is what Drill Instructors do to recruits, or what fraternities do to pledges.  The government could make a rule that says, "No baking blue cakes on Thursdays."  Or "You MUST bake blue cakes on Thursdays."  Kind of how it goes from mandating racial discrimination one week, to prohibiting it the next.

The point is not the presence or absence of blue cakes.  The content of the rule doesn't matter.  The EXISTENCE of the rule is what matters, because having a rule is what defines the role of the "governed" as one of submission to authority.

In fact, the more trivial the rule is, the better it is for its use as a tool of symbolic submission.
 
2014-01-21 02:37:26 PM
Can you imagine the collective support on the right for the baker who refuses to bake a religious themed cake?  I'm sure the right would support their freedom.
 
2014-01-21 02:37:56 PM

insertsnarkyusername: It's not simple to prove. You've obviously never once worked in this industry. Say I own a bakery and you come in and say you are having a wedding. I say ok, you tell me the number of guests, the size of portions, the design, what kind of cake you want, what kind of icing you want and if you want the cake to be one type or multiple types. Then I do a mental calculation on ingredients, labor, use of kitchen space and then add on profit. Then I give you a number.


A number such as $100.  Now guess what I'm gonna suggest happens next in order to prove you charge gay customers more?
 
2014-01-21 02:38:11 PM

frepnog: Theaetetus: frepnog: A christian baker should be able to say no to a homosexual customer. the homosexual lifestyle is in direct contradiction to what the religion preaches.

they just should be able to.

Up until the 1970s, Mormons believed that all black people were sinners. Should they have been able to refuse service to black people?

yes.  is it right?  no.  but freedom of religion is what it is, either we have it or we do not, and freedom of religion should trump your hurt feelings.

or just say fark it, religion means nothing, tax them same as any other business and get on with it.


... you do realize that we're talking about a baker, not a church, right? They  are taxed the same as any other bakery.

And no, selling cakes is not part of their religion. They are absolutely free to go home and worship however they want in absolute freedom. They are not free to engage in a public business in a discriminatory manner, and then claim that they were really performing a religious service so that they don't have to obey the law.
 
2014-01-21 02:38:28 PM
Tolerance does not equal Acceptance

It is more than a bit disingenuous to claim moral superiority because you accept or approve of something. "Oh yeah, I think the things that I like are just nifty, and that makes me a good person", as it were.

The real moral winner is the fellow who does not approve, who does not accept, yet still tolerates the things that he does not approve or accept.

But the majority of the posters here would seem to demand that nothing short of full acceptance and approval of homosexuality will do. The amusing thing is that these posters don't view themselves as bigots -- they consider themselves quite open-minded.
 
2014-01-21 02:39:26 PM
It'd be best if people are free to act like a dickwad and face the court of public opinion, which can be BRUTAL. But that's only a solution when there's already a large degree of acceptance out there, so you can be assured that Tumblr-activists will rally behind you.

Racial discrimination these days is definitely a matter of "Fark you, I'm going across the street and kiss your yelp rating goodbye." Racial discrimination 80 years ago was a VERY different thing, and that's why the law is on the books now. You can't have a law that's only enforced when it's really bad and turns into a slap on the wrist when it's rare.

There is a little bit of unnecessary vengeance in the gals suing for discrimination, especially when they knew they'd have no trouble stirring up an internet hornet's nest.
 
2014-01-21 02:41:12 PM

Syrrh: Racial discrimination 80 years ago was a VERY different thing, and that's why the law is on the books now.



Racial discrimination 80 years ago WAS THE LAW.  IT WAS REQUIRED.
 
2014-01-21 02:41:21 PM

letrole: The real moral winner is the fellow who does not approve, who does not accept, yet still tolerates the things that he does not approve or accept.


Okay.

letrole: But the majority of the posters here would seem to demand that nothing short of full acceptance and approval of homosexuality will do. The amusing thing is that these posters don't view themselves as bigots -- they consider themselves quite open-minded.


And you won't tolerate it!
 
2014-01-21 02:41:51 PM

Billygoat Gruff: Weatherkiss: Billygoat Gruff: Some friends and I werent allowed in a club in Germany one night. When we asked the door man why he said "You are Americans and you steal all the women." So I too, have known the sting of bigotry. We just laughed it off and went to the bar next door and spent our money there. But none of us were looking to be victims we just wanted to get drunk and chase women.

That's unfortunate, I thought Germany had a high reputation for being open and tolerant of other nationalities.


You would be surprised. I was stationed there for 5 years. They biatch about their immigration problem the same way we do here, well that is to say the people I met did, and a lot of them were young people, bu they werent all Nazi-ish either. Assholes are everywhere dude, America hasn't cornered the market on it. Things are tough all over at ground level. But as with any country who values tourist dollars your going to get something slick and shiney and not exactly truthful.But overall my experience in Germany was amazing it was just that one night that sticks out only because it makes me laugh. How many of you havent been allowed in a bar because you were too good with the ladies?


I was stationed there also and there is a big difference between tourists and American servicemen...there were many a night downtown Bitburg when we deserved their scorn.  Arrogant Americans is what they called us.....and that is what we were, most of the time.
 
2014-01-21 02:41:51 PM

iheartscotch: quickdraw: iheartscotch: I'm all for any business to refuse service; but, these guys did it the wrong way. Should have said that they were booked solid and couldn't possibly make another cake.

But that would have been lying and lying is a sin.

Hey, it's a fib! Fibs are different!

/ I've got fibs to the left,
Fibs to the right,
And, their the only cake shop in town!

// yes, that is a Jimmy Buffet reference


You spelled Buffett wrong. Some Parrothead you are.
 
2014-01-21 02:42:19 PM

SisterMaryElephant: Can you imagine the collective support on the right for the baker who refuses to bake a religious themed cake?  I'm sure the right would support their freedom.


I would.
 
2014-01-21 02:42:21 PM

Baz744: Earlier I asked for this baker's apologists to produce any Bible passage requiring Jehovah religionists to discriminate in the provision of public services against homosexuals. No such passage has been produced.


Actually you said "Can someone please direct me to the Bible passage which requires Jehovah religionists to discriminate against homosexuals in provision of public services?"

And I, not thinking you were asking the bakers apologists to do it, gave a few answers conditioned by the need to believe all the other stuff of course. I don't have a dog in this race. But I had some info that you asked for, kind of.
 
2014-01-21 02:42:30 PM

Syrrh: There is a little bit of unnecessary vengeance in the gals suing for discrimination, especially when they knew they'd have no trouble stirring up an internet hornet's nest didn't actually sue.


FTFY. You're right, it's a terrible thing, that thing they didn't do.
 
2014-01-21 02:43:08 PM

Phinn: Syrrh: Racial discrimination 80 years ago was a VERY different thing, and that's why the law is on the books now.

Racial discrimination 80 years ago WAS THE LAW.  IT WAS REQUIRED.


And now the law is different, same with laws regarding abusing animals... society evolves.
 
2014-01-21 02:43:17 PM

DubtodaIll: Yeah the laws the law and should be paid attention to at all times. It just doesn't seem just to punish someone who would otherwise be successful and harmless unless the "victim" hadn't been offended and that law exist to protect people from being offended. I don't think either side is in the right here but the law does prefer the lesbian couple in this situation. While I doubt feelings can ever by removed from the justice process as long as humans are administering the law, I can't see how feelings, which are impossible to verify or prove in any philosophical or scientific way, are able to be proven and acted upon by the law.


Their feelings are not even admissible at trail. The bakery broke the law when they said 'No `cause Bibble'. That's it. That's illegal in Oregon.

They may have sought out the complaint to the AG's office because he insulted them. The insult is not the illegal action, just a possible motivation on why they sought the complaint.

reubendaley: How smart is it to force someone who doesn't want to make you something to eat to make you something to eat?

/Something to eat. You. Force.


That's not what is happening here.
RTFA and linked articles.
 
2014-01-21 02:45:02 PM

lennavan: insertsnarkyusername: It's not simple to prove. You've obviously never once worked in this industry. Say I own a bakery and you come in and say you are having a wedding. I say ok, you tell me the number of guests, the size of portions, the design, what kind of cake you want, what kind of icing you want and if you want the cake to be one type or multiple types. Then I do a mental calculation on ingredients, labor, use of kitchen space and then add on profit. Then I give you a number.

A number such as $100.  Now guess what I'm gonna suggest happens next in order to prove you charge gay customers more?


Even in the very unlikely event that the next person orders the completely same cake (which I've never seen happen). And the person running the bakery is stupid enough to give a different quote. At the time you were  totally booked up and have since had a cancellation so you don't need to charge a premium to pay your people over time.
 
2014-01-21 02:45:12 PM

hardinparamedic: mongbiohazard: HIS. It's funny how they get to just say whatever they want is god's plan, but god himself apparently doesn't get to tell us. Not only that, they can't actually show us the letter or email or whatever that god sent to them to tell them what he wanted from this whole situation. Being that he's supposedly a being of ultimate power and wisdom this must by definition be what he wanted - for them to be prosecuted for being dicks to people trying to patronize their business.

Something I've learned in my 28 years of existence is that God's will is strangely ALWAYS the same as what the person telling me what it is wants from me.


i107.photobucket.com
 
2014-01-21 02:46:19 PM

SisterMaryElephant: Can you imagine the collective support on the right for the baker who refuses to bake a religious themed cake?  I'm sure the right would support their freedom.


It wouldn't be a story.  Built in to most religions is the idea that every member of that religion is always going to be persecuted by non-members.  Therefore whenever a person of faith encounters discrimination their first reaction will tend to be "well I'm be persecuted, I shall tender my faith and continue to move forward knowing I'm in the right anyway and that poor soul is going to get it in the end without my biatching to the authorities that I've been persecuted"  Of course this isn't always the case but I'd give it a 70/30 chance of it being likely.
 
2014-01-21 02:46:20 PM

karnal: stpauler: karnal: stpauler: MyRandomName: stpauler: HoustonNick: Libtard Creed - You must believe like I believe or be punished.  No other beliefs will be accepted.

This is so disgusting.

The only real comeback for this is "fark you, you disgusting sad piece of flapping ass shiat".

You realize that you liberals are acting exactly the same towards religious people, right? Liberals always want respect but never respect the religious views of others. The irony is thick.

Are there really zero other wedding cake designers? This is about liberals trying to fark a religious person over. No more, no less.

My boyfriend is a church-going Catholic. So, no, it's not about religion, it's about bigotry. So fark you and the bigotry you come flying in on.

Are you two engaging in pre-martital sex?  If so, then he is not a good Catholic boy and your opinoin is moot.

Actually, if you need shiat about Catholicism, you would also know the stance on freedom of conscience
The Catholic Church has always held to the primacy of conscience and taught that individuals must follow their consciences even when they are wrong. (Vatican II, On Religious Liberty (1965), §2)
 This means, my retarded little poster, that Catholics can and are obliged to dissent from the Church when their conscience disagrees with it. Now who is moot?


And who is without a wedding cake because I damn sure won't be making one for you fornicating sinners....unless, of course, the government tells me to.


and the Catholic church says:
Pre-marital sex is selfish
Pre-marital sex is unloving and
Pre-marital sex is a misuse of our sexuality


I'd love to see where the Catholic Church actually and literally says that. Please cite catechism as I have done before (as opposed to where a pope/bishop/cleric/et al said it-UNLESS the pope was speaking ex cathedra)

I'll give you a hint. Here's where you would find it if it existed. http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm"> http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm
But it's not there. Because you're dumb.
 
2014-01-21 02:46:53 PM

insertsnarkyusername: lennavan: insertsnarkyusername: It's not simple to prove. You've obviously never once worked in this industry. Say I own a bakery and you come in and say you are having a wedding. I say ok, you tell me the number of guests, the size of portions, the design, what kind of cake you want, what kind of icing you want and if you want the cake to be one type or multiple types. Then I do a mental calculation on ingredients, labor, use of kitchen space and then add on profit. Then I give you a number.

A number such as $100.  Now guess what I'm gonna suggest happens next in order to prove you charge gay customers more?

Even in the very unlikely event that the next person orders the completely same cake (which I've never seen happen). And the person running the bakery is stupid enough to give a different quote. At the time you were  totally booked up and have since had a cancellation so you don't need to charge a premium to pay your people over time.


Sure.  Also, one single anecdote doesn't prove an actual trend.  Now guess what I'm gonna suggest happens next in order to prove you charge gay customers more?
 
2014-01-21 02:47:11 PM

Phinn: barneyfifesbullet: It's just another day in Your Gay Indoctrination.

Only a liberal would want the government to force someone to bake them a cake.

It's not about the cake.  No one wants a cake made by someone who dislikes him.  Obvi.

The medium is the message.  The superficial message from the government here is: YOU MUST BAKE CAKES FOR THE GAYS.

But the superficial message is unimportant.  It's the import of the communication that matters, the subtext.  Here, the real, unspoken message is: WE CONTROL YOUR BUSINESS.

Arbitrary compliance with fake-rules is what Drill Instructors do to recruits, or what fraternities do to pledges.  The government could make a rule that says, "No baking blue cakes on Thursdays."  Or "You MUST bake blue cakes on Thursdays."  Kind of how it goes from mandating racial discrimination one week, to prohibiting it the next.

The point is not the presence or absence of blue cakes.  The content of the rule doesn't matter.  The EXISTENCE of the rule is what matters, because having a rule is what defines the role of the "governed" as one of submission to authority.

In fact, the more trivial the rule is, the better it is for its use as a tool of symbolic submission.


This is what Randroid libertarians actually believe folks. Step right up and get your tickets to this mesmerizing display of carnival freak crazy!

Scorn him not for his derangements, my friends. He cannot help it. He was not born like you and I.

Carson Wells:
"Do you have any idea how crazy you are?"

Anton Chiguhr:
"You mean the nature of this conversation?"

Carson Wells:
"I mean the nature of you."

~~No Country for Old Men
 
2014-01-21 02:47:21 PM

HoustonNick: Libtard Creed - You must believe like I believe or be punished.  No other beliefs will be accepted.

This is so disgusting.


This. Done in one.
 
2014-01-21 02:47:55 PM

Phinn: Let's see -- the government forces everyone to pay for roads, and it controls the entire road-building and city-planning business, thereby requiring everyone to use the government's roads just to live, and then points to people's use of government roads to JUSTIFY expanding the government's control over every other aspect of people's lives.


More like, "If the government's gonna force us ALL to pay for roads, etc, then we should ALL have the same access to them." Meaning a state-licensed business cannot refuse service to someone for reasons the state deems invalid. If you're going to exercise a power granted by the state, you exercise it according to state rules.

Does that help?

That way, if you're a private club (which specifically doesn't get a license, and is free to deny service to the darkies for their Curse of Ham, and the homos for the Curse of Ken Ham) (not really, but the rules are more relaxed), the state isn't supporting you and you're free to Christ it up with the other Church Ladies (and Satan) as much as you want.
 
2014-01-21 02:50:45 PM

lennavan: insertsnarkyusername: It's not simple to prove. You've obviously never once worked in this industry. Say I own a bakery and you come in and say you are having a wedding. I say ok, you tell me the number of guests, the size of portions, the design, what kind of cake you want, what kind of icing you want and if you want the cake to be one type or multiple types. Then I do a mental calculation on ingredients, labor, use of kitchen space and then add on profit. Then I give you a number.

A number such as $100.  Now guess what I'm gonna suggest happens next in order to prove you charge gay customers more?


There is no set profit margin you have to run as a baker or a caterer. That profit margin will very from job to job depending on a few factors. If for some reason you don't want a job it's a common practice to bid high rather than refuse. You've never worked in this industry, and you know nothing about it. I was never in favor of this practice if used to discriminate, I was just pointing out that it'd be the standard and much easier way of getting rid of a client you don't want. Now I don't think I'll get this through your thick skull unless you decide to actually work in the industry but I might as well try.
 
2014-01-21 02:51:04 PM

Theaetetus: frepnog: Theaetetus: frepnog: A christian baker should be able to say no to a homosexual customer. the homosexual lifestyle is in direct contradiction to what the religion preaches.

they just should be able to.

Up until the 1970s, Mormons believed that all black people were sinners. Should they have been able to refuse service to black people?

yes.  is it right?  no.  but freedom of religion is what it is, either we have it or we do not, and freedom of religion should trump your hurt feelings.

or just say fark it, religion means nothing, tax them same as any other business and get on with it.

... you do realize that we're talking about a baker, not a church, right? They  are taxed the same as any other bakery.

And no, selling cakes is not part of their religion. They are absolutely free to go home and worship however they want in absolute freedom. They are not free to engage in a public business in a discriminatory manner, and then claim that they were really performing a religious service so that they don't have to obey the law.


don't get me wrong.  i think the baker should have shut up and made the damn cake.  and yes i realize that selling cakes is not a religion.  i also think this lawsuit is needed.  i said so earlier.

however if they have made it known that they run  their business on christian values, then they should be expected to do just that.  homosexuality is wrong in the eyes of christians (well, lots of christians).  if you are gay and a christian tells you that they think you are wrong in the eyes of god, well, what did you expect?  but yeah you don't gotta be a dick about it.

and yes....  for lots of people, a wedding is very much a religious event, and the cake no less a religious trapping.

even if you don't think so.

but if they ran afoul of the law, then that is their own lookout.

in this case however, the law is being used technically correctly, the best kind of correctly, but morally incorrectly.

it is morally wrong to force someone to do business with someone that they don't want to do business with.

and that is part of living in a free society.
 
2014-01-21 02:51:10 PM
teh ghey iz a race
 
2014-01-21 02:51:49 PM

farkmedown: One would think that a man wearing earrings would be a little more tolerant of diversity.

Guess not, in this case.


1 Peter 3:3-4

Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as elaborate hairstyles and the wearing of gold jewelry or fine clothes. Rather, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight.


Exodus 32:2-4

So Aaron said to them, "Take off the rings of gold that are in the ears of your wives, your sons, and your daughters, and bring them to me." So all the people took off the rings of gold that were in their ears and brought them to Aaron. And he received the gold from their hand and fashioned it with a graving tool and made a golden calf. And they said, "These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!"

Romans 12:10

Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor.

Acts 10:34

Then Peter began to speak: "I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism

I can play cherry-picked bible passages as well, in order to fit my narrative. And my narrative clearly shows this douchebag baker isn't religious, therefore this isn't religious discrimination.
 
2014-01-21 02:54:05 PM

insertsnarkyusername: There is no set profit margin you have to run as a baker or a caterer. That profit margin will very from job to job depending on a few factors.


And it is amazingly simple to determine whether or not one of the factors is whether or not someone is gay.

Science motherfarker, how does it work?
 
2014-01-21 02:54:18 PM
Yes, the laws that ban you discriminating against groups you hate are restricting your freedoms.

Society has deemed the restrictions of these laws are acceptable in order to enable equal treatment of all citizens. Which is, of course, the very cornerstone of a democratic republic.

Hate on your own time bigots.
 
2014-01-21 02:54:41 PM

mongbiohazard: hardinparamedic: mongbiohazard: HIS. It's funny how they get to just say whatever they want is god's plan, but god himself apparently doesn't get to tell us. Not only that, they can't actually show us the letter or email or whatever that god sent to them to tell them what he wanted from this whole situation. Being that he's supposedly a being of ultimate power and wisdom this must by definition be what he wanted - for them to be prosecuted for being dicks to people trying to patronize their business.

Something I've learned in my 28 years of existence is that God's will is strangely ALWAYS the same as what the person telling me what it is wants from me.

[i107.photobucket.com image 720x624]


 Im surprised the feminists havent forced us to use her coin more often
 
Displayed 50 of 676 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report