Let's Play "Spot the Irony!"

[mikeford]

So tolerate now means make someone do something they don't want to do?

Sounds like two idiots to me;

One who won't bake a silly cake. I'd even add a few extra free ingredients.

And one who wants to force a shop that doesn't want to bake their wedding cake to do it anyway.

 

[tynopik]

They were buying a cake for a lesbian wedding, and the small context we are provided suggests that they were denied service because of their orientation.

Incorrect.

If they had asked for a birthday cake, they would have been served.

Therefore they were not denied service because of their orientation.

 

[Perknose]

Incorrect.

If they had asked for a birthday cake, they would have been served.

Therefore they were not denied service because of their orientation.

They wanted to get married and they wanted a wedding cake that would signify THEIR union, just like anyone and everyone else would. They were denied service because of their orientation.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

What if there was no bakery across the street? What if the other bakery was run by bigoted asshats as well and refused service?

What if a black woman has a business of making cakes. A Klan leader comes in and wants a festive dozen cakes with the KKK logo and lynchings on each of their cakes. Should the owner/Cake maker not be able to refuse that?

I get the relation of not being able to refuse service going back to the racist times of not allowing/refusing service to blacks in restaurants, but again - this isn't refusing the product. They can buy a cake/cookie from the baker, it's the CUSTOMIZED product they are asking for that the owners have a problem with.

 

[tynopik]

They wanted to get married and they wanted a wedding cake that would signify THEIR union, just like anyone and everyone else would. They were denied service because of their orientation.

Incorrect

When you say they were denied service because of their orientation, you are talking about identity.

Like saying 'No Blacks allowed.'

Being black is part of your identity and you are being denied service because of who you are.

This is not the same. They were clearly not being denied because of who they were.

They were being denied because they were engaging in an activity the owner disagreed with. There is a tremendous difference between someone refusing to engage in an activity they disagree with and refusing to serve someone because of who they are.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

In all seriousness, if you don't want to serve someone why should you be forced to? I think this is pathetic on both sides of the aisle. Go across the street to another cake owner that isn't a dumbass.

So any business has the right to refuse service to any class of people they deem undesirable? You can keep out blacks, Jews, women or rednecks on a whim?

 

[brianmanahan]

So any business has the right to refuse service to any class of people they deem undesirable? You can keep out blacks, Jews, women or rednecks on a whim?

it seems more like not making juneteenth cakes, or bar mitzvah cakes, or baby shower cakes, or NASCAR cakes.

 

[Jeff7]

Are there no other bakeries in the town from which to purchase a cake?

Why would you want someone you yourself don't like to bake your wedding cake?

Seriously, this whole scenario is fucking stupid. Should LGBTQ be allowed to marry each other? Yes. Should a bakery be allowed to bake a cake made of whatever they want and sell it for whatever they want? Yes. Should the two be forced to do business with each other? No.

Because that worked out so well the last time we did it.

 

[Ruptga]

it seems more like not making juneteenth cakes, or bar mitzvah cakes, or baby shower cakes, or NASCAR cakes.

Sorry but it's against my religion to do business with Christians, their entire philosophy and pretty much everything they do is abhorrent in the eyes of my god, and I will not surrender my religious freedumbs.

 

[WelshBloke]

What if a black woman has a business of making cakes. A Klan leader comes in and wants a festive dozen cakes with the KKK logo and lynchings on each of their cakes. Should the owner/Cake maker not be able to refuse that?.

Does the black woman make a living out of selling lynching cakes to other folks?

 

[brianmanahan]

Sorry but it's against my religion to do business with Christians, their entire philosophy and pretty much everything they do is abhorrent in the eyes of my god, and I will not surrender my religious freedumbs.

k

k is too short : (

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

So any business has the right to refuse service to any class of people they deem undesirable? You can keep out blacks, Jews, women or rednecks on a whim?

What if a black woman has a business of making cakes. A Klan leader comes in and wants a festive dozen cakes with the KKK logo and lynchings on each of their cakes. Should the owner/Cake maker not be able to refuse that?.

 

[CPA]

Go! Go! Go!

Pro tip: There's a huge hint in the formatting!

And you know this irony goes both ways.

 

[KeithP]

Let's Play "Spot the Irony!"

I got it! Posting in the wrong forum.

-KeithP

 

[WelshBloke]

What if a black woman has a business of making cakes. A Klan leader comes in and wants a festive dozen cakes with the KKK logo and lynchings on each of their cakes. Should the owner/Cake maker not be able to refuse that?.

Does the black woman make a living out of selling lynching cakes to other folks?

 

[SlitheryDee]

No. That's Pretzel Logic.


Surely you're smarter than to believe that hash you just slung?

What's wrong with what I said? I'm a supporter of same sex marriage and have spent quite a bit of time here defending it. That doesn't mean that I automatically take the side of the homosexuals involved in every conflict surrounding it. There is the possibility that they can do things that I consider reprehensible even while they believe they are fighting intolerance. People are going to want to divide this into extremes, with the poor little LGBTs who can do nothing wrong because they're oppressed vs. the evil bigots who deserve what they got no matter how extreme it turns out to be. It ain't so.

I thought it was funny that the thread was about the irony of the situation created by the refusal of service and the wife's statement about tolerance. Funny because what tolerance really means is to allow something, not necessarily to approve of it. One can be tolerant while refusing service so long as one takes no other action. Her statement could possibly have been completely accurate for the situation. They may not have approved of SSM, but they at least tolerated it. What intolerance is then, is the opposite. It is to take action to end something. The LGBT community, who champion tolerance practically as a way of life are the ones who are being intolerant by definition in this case because they were the only ones taking action to end anything. Coincidentally, a state of affairs that runs contrary to what would be expected is also the definition of irony. Irony within irony.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Does the black woman make a living out of selling lynching cakes to other folks?

Not sure I understand your question.

it also depends -

The person doing the cake customizing makes the same thing regardless of what she works with. $10/hour. She makes $10/hour if she makes klan cakes, or if she makes simple birthday cakes.

The owner does make a living off the cakes and the amount sold. Your question is still retarded, and doesn't answer the simple question of if she has the right to refuse such a service.

It's like someone paying you to run around naked. Are you allowed to refuse service? Under your retardation, simply because they paid you means it's A-Okay and a "must do" or else it is offensive.

 

[Ns1]

is there a source link that isn't religion or lgbt related?

 

[WelshBloke]

Not sure I understand your question.

it also depends -

The person doing the cake customizing makes the same thing regardless of what she works with. $10/hour. She makes $10/hour if she makes klan cakes, or if she makes simple birthday cakes.

The owner does make a living off the cakes and the amount sold. Your question is still retarded, and doesn't answer the simple question of if she has the right to refuse such a service.

It's like someone paying you to run around naked. Are you allowed to refuse service? Under your retardation, simply because they paid you means it's A-Okay and a "must do" or else it is offensive.

What?

Person 'A' is selling product 'X' to the public. They can't refuse to sell that product to people because they are gay, or black, etc..

Product 'X' is the same product for everyone, a wedding cake. They could refuse to sell product 'WTF', your lynching cake, because they don't sell lynching cakes.

 

[Regs]

Bakers would obviously make poor politicians.

 

[dank69]

Incorrect

When you say they were denied service because of their orientation, you are talking about identity.

Like saying 'No Blacks allowed.'

Being black is part of your identity and you are being denied service because of who you are.

This is not the same. They were clearly not being denied because of who they were.

They were being denied because they were engaging in an activity the owner disagreed with. There is a tremendous difference between someone refusing to engage in an activity they disagree with and refusing to serve someone because of who they are.

The activity the shop owners were refusing to engage in WAS the activity of serving someone despite who they were.

 

[MarkXIX]

Are there no other bakeries in the town from which to purchase a cake?

Why would you want someone you yourself don't like to bake your wedding cake?

Seriously, this whole scenario is fucking stupid. Should LGBTQ be allowed to marry each other? Yes. Should a bakery be allowed to bake a cake made of whatever they want and sell it for whatever they want? Yes. Should the two be forced to do business with each other? No.

When your customer base seems to disagree with your decision on how to treat a segment of the population, well, you failed as a business owner in your decision.

So, unless there were militant LGBTQ people outside the business prohibiting customers from going in, her decision on how to treat her customers and her subsequent downfall are her own making.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

I get the relation of not being able to refuse service going back to the racist times of not allowing/refusing service to blacks in restaurants, but again - this isn't refusing the product. They can buy a cake/cookie from the baker, it's the CUSTOMIZED product they are asking for that the owners have a problem with.

So if the owner refused to sell cakes to an interracial couple who was getting married, that's OK? I mean, it's not racist, it's the customized product the owner doesn't want to produce. Actually, you can take pretty much any argument against gay marriage and use an analogue of mixed race marriage, because the exact same arguments were being made on that front 50 years ago. And if it wouldn't fly with one (the Supreme Court won't allow bakers to refuse to make cakes for mixed race weddings, personal feelings be damned), why should it fly with the other? Your personal feelings take a back seat to serving the ENTIRE public when you operate a business in the public space. That's public accommodations 101 and being non-discriminatory has been a key part of it for 50 years. We're just occasionally updating the list with new groups you can't discriminate against (and in reference to your earlier question, since membership in the KKK isn't on the list, you can feel free to discriminate against them and refuse to bake a hate cake).

 

[Kadarin]

i play music at weddings and wouldn't do it at a gay wedding, but i wouldn't say why. i'd just tell them i am too busy. much easier that way.

Of course it's easier that way. It's always easier to hide behind excuses than to admit bigotry and intolerance.

I'm sure Jesus would approve.

 

[brianmanahan]

Of course it's easier that way. It's always easier to hide behind excuses than to admit bigotry and intolerance.

I'm sure Jesus would approve.

he would probably just say "go and sin no more".

but i aint gonna do that, cuz judge not.