Private Companies Cannot Refuse Service

[Angry Irishman]

Someone please explain how his religious freedoms aren't being shat on....

 

[mrjminer]

Someone please explain how his religious freedoms aren't being shat on....

I think it's both religious freedoms and rights of business owners that are getting shat on. The latter always gets shafted under the guise of being "open to the public." The former is the more disconcerting part, even to me and I'm not religious.

 

[cuafpr]

time to go truly private and charge a 1.00 membership fee to order a cake and not be open to the general public for special events.

 

[Vic]

Someone please explain how his religious freedoms aren't being shat on....

Where in the bible does it say you can't bake a cake for a gay wedding? Chapter and verse please.

 

[Vic]

I think it's both religious freedoms and rights of business owners that are getting shat on. The latter always gets shafted under the guise of being "open to the public." The former is the more disconcerting part, even to me and I'm not religious.

Business owners are just as free to turn away paying business on an individual basis as they have always been. What they can't do is say, We don't serve YOUR KIND here. Which they haven't been able to do anyway since 1964. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_of_Atlanta_Motel_v._United_States

 

[Cozarkian]

I'm curious. I have absolutely no baking skill. Let's pretend I purchased this bakery and took over the business management, while hiring this guy as the baker to actually make the goods. If a same sex couple comes in and asks for a wedding cake, I take the order, hand it to my employee, and he refuses based on grounds of religious belief. What happens?

I don't want to discriminate, but I'm incapable of providing the requested service. I can't afford to hire a second baker, and if I try to fire and replace my employee, I'll get sued for employment discrimination based on religion.

 

[Vic]

I'm curious. I have absolutely no baking skill. Let's pretend I purchased this bakery and took over the business management, while hiring this guy as the baker to actually make the goods. If a same sex couple comes in and asks for a wedding cake, I take the order, hand it to my employee, and he refuses based on grounds of religious belief. What happens?

I don't want to discriminate, but I'm incapable of providing the requested service. I can't afford to hire a second baker, and if I try to fire and replace my employee, I'll get sued for employment discrimination based on religion.

What chapter and verse is that in the bible again?

 

[cuafpr]

I wonder what would happen if he just said no... and never said why. Just kept saying no. Then if asked to prove it just said he was to busy with other orders.... /shrug.

 

[nehalem256]

LOL it's funny that you think that your little scenario doesn't make you the clear dumb ass when the courts prove your wrong time and time again. Even judges that hate gays would rule you are the dumbass. The only thing you show is that you are both a misogynist and a misandrist who is proven wrong way too often. You hate women, you hate gay men, what do you like? Straight men and gay women? I'd watch that with no qualms. :whiste:

Sorry but not in this context it isn't. Both protected classes you cannot discriminate against. What the court is trying to tell knuckle heads is that you can't discriminate against a gay person any more than you can someone of a different color. Not really that difficult once you read their rulings every time one of these cases comes up. It's actually pretty cut and dry for those who don't disagree with the laws. Some laws I don't agree with either but I sometimes I chose to follow them so that I don't get end up in jail, sued, or both.

Its funny that you think my little scenario is absurd yet you cannot actually respond with anything other than the "courts would say so!!!!".

Probably because service obviously was not refused on the basis of protected class

You are correct. The courts proved him right by upholding the equal protection clause and siding against his bigotry! Your next quandary, yes, every time Roe V Wade is upheld. Next.. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down Section 3 of DOMA on equal protection grounds. Not so confusing.

So if the courts say something it must automatically be right?

So then by your logic you should have no problem with:

(1) The courts in Sudan okaying the execution of a Christian woman for denouncing her Islamic faith

(2) Pakistani courts handing down lenient sentences for honor killings

Because hey the courts said it was fine so therefore we must unquestioningly accept it no matter how stupid and unjust.

 

[nehalem256]

Business owners are just as free to turn away paying business on an individual basis as they have always been. What they can't do is say, We don't serve YOUR KIND here. Which they haven't been able to do anyway since 1964. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_of_Atlanta_Motel_v._United_States

And if you read the article you would clearly see that wasn't the case here.

 

[nehalem256]

Where in the bible does it say you can't bake a cake for a gay wedding? Chapter and verse please.

http://biblehub.com/leviticus/18-22.htm

would seem to cover it. A wedding is a event to signal social approval of a relationship. To bake a gay wedding cake is therefore to implicitly approve of a relationship the bible condemns as an abomination.

 

[mrjminer]

Business owners are just as free to turn away paying business on an individual basis as they have always been. What they can't do is say, We don't serve YOUR KIND here. Which they haven't been able to do anyway since 1964. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_of_Atlanta_Motel_v._United_States

I'm a proponent of the free market and believe businesses should be able to do anything an individual is able to do; I don't believe laws should exist that restrict business rights to those lower than an individual's rights. Businesses can already circumvent these laws anyways, making them mostly symbolic, and the free market pretty much rules already, so it may be a moot point. I do agree, though, that the law is required for government, public property, charitable organizations, and other entities that don't pay taxes.

Like I said, though, the real issue is the religious aspect. Freedom of religion is one of the last bastions of freedom people have, and now the government is stepping in and telling people, effectively, that they can't practice their religious freedom if they are operating a business. I suppose the solution would be the same way businesses can circumvent the Civil Rights laws: by closing their business to the public and making it "members only" -- then they could just deny membership to all gays. If the effect is the same, it makes it pretty much pointless; yet again, the free market is going to take care of it how the people see fit. Still, though, there is a difference between a religious belief and an individual's belief, and I don't think the government should be forcing people to violate their religious beliefs, or at least if they aren't doing it universally.

 

[shortylickens]

In general, I think private businesses should be allowed to do as they please, even if it means being incredibly stupid and costing themselves money and driving themselves into the ground.

Having said that, if the only reason you have is pure prejudice, then you don't actually have a reason.
Maybe you should not be running a private business. Those are for people who want to be a part of society.
Maybe you should be sitting in front of your TV with a microwave dinner calling up Rush Limbaugh and telling him how awesome he is. Or Glenn Beck. Whichever is popular right now.

 

[himkhan]

actually not what it's called at all professor. his business increased by 75% thru support for his religious convictions.

actually I think it's exactly what it's called gilligan. sure his business increased by 75%. jesus always with pride for feigned religious convictions :whiste:

 

[Victorian Gray]

http://biblehub.com/leviticus/18-22.htm

would seem to cover it. A wedding is a event to signal social approval of a relationship. To bake a gay wedding cake is therefore to implicitly approve of a relationship the bible condemns as an abomination.

1. Burning any yeast or honey in offerings to God (2:11)
2. Failing to include salt in offerings to God (2:13)
3. Eating fat (3:17)
4. Eating blood (3:17)
5. Failing to testify against any wrongdoing you’ve witnessed (5:1)
6. Failing to testify against any wrongdoing you’ve been told about (5:1)
7. Touching an unclean animal (5:2)
8. Carelessly making an oath (5:4)
9. Deceiving a neighbour about something trusted to them (6:2)
10. Finding lost property and lying about it (6:3)
11. Bringing unauthorised fire before God (10:1)
12. Letting your hair become unkempt (10:6)
13. Tearing your clothes (10:6)
14. Drinking alcohol in holy places (bit of a problem for Catholics, this ‘un) (10:9)
15. Eating an animal which doesn’t both chew cud and has a divided hoof (cf: camel, rabbit, pig) (11:4-7)
16. Touching the carcass of any of the above (problems here for rugby) (11:8)
17. Eating – or touching the carcass of – any seafood without fins or scales (11:10-12)
18. Eating – or touching the carcass of - eagle, the vulture, the black vulture, the red kite, any kind of black kite, any kind of raven, the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk, the little owl, the cormorant, the great owl, the white owl, the desert owl, the osprey, the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat. (11:13-19)
19. Eating – or touching the carcass of – flying insects with four legs, unless those legs are jointed (11:20-22)
20. Eating any animal which walks on all four and has paws (good news for cats) (11:27)
21. Eating – or touching the carcass of – the weasel, the rat, any kind of great lizard, the gecko, the monitor lizard, the wall lizard, the skink and the chameleon (11:29)
22. Eating – or touching the carcass of – any creature which crawls on many legs, or its belly (11:41-42)
23. Going to church within 33 days after giving birth to a boy (12:4)
24. Going to church within 66 days after giving birth to a girl (12:5)
25. Having sex with your mother (18:7)
26. Having sex with your father’s wife (18:8)
27. Having sex with your sister (18:9)
28. Having sex with your granddaughter (18:10)
29. Having sex with your half-sister (18:11)
30. Having sex with your biological aunt (18:12-13)
31. Having sex with your uncle’s wife (18:14)
32. Having sex with your daughter-in-law (18:15)
33. Having sex with your sister-in-law (18:16)
34. Having sex with a woman and also having sex with her daughter or granddaughter (bad news for Alan Clark) (18:17)
35. Marrying your wife’s sister while your wife still lives (18:18)
36. Having sex with a woman during her period (18:19)
37. Having sex with your neighbour’s wife (18:20)
38. Giving your children to be sacrificed to Molek (18:21)
39. Having sex with a man “as one does with a woman” (18:22)
40. Having sex with an animal (18:23)
41. Making idols or “metal gods” (19:4)
42. Reaping to the very edges of a field (19:9)
43. Picking up grapes that have fallen in your vineyard (19:10)
44. Stealing (19:11)
45. Lying (19:11)
46. Swearing falsely on God’s name (19:12)
47. Defrauding your neighbour (19:13)
48. Holding back the wages of an employee overnight (not well observed these days) (19:13)
49. Cursing the deaf or abusing the blind (19:14)
50. Perverting justice, showing partiality to either the poor or the rich (19:15)
51. Spreading slander (19:16)
52. Doing anything to endanger a neighbour’s life (19:16)
53. Seeking revenge or bearing a grudge (19:18)
54. Mixing fabrics in clothing (19:19)
55. Cross-breeding animals (19:19)
56. Planting different seeds in the same field (19:19)
57. Sleeping with another man’s slave (19:20)
58. Eating fruit from a tree within four years of planting it (19:23)
59. Practising divination or seeking omens (tut, tut astrology) (19:26)
60. Trimming your beard (19:27)
61. Cutting your hair at the sides (19:27)
62. Getting tattoos (19:28)
63. Making your daughter prostitute herself (19:29)
64. Turning to mediums or spiritualists (19:31)
65. Not standing in the presence of the elderly (19:32)
66. Mistreating foreigners – “the foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born” (19:33-34)
67. Using dishonest weights and scales (19:35-36)
68. Cursing your father or mother (punishable by death) (20:9)
69. Marrying a prostitute, divorcee or widow if you are a priest (21:7,13)
70. Entering a place where there’s a dead body as a priest (21:11)
71. Slaughtering a cow/sheep and its young on the same day (22:28)
72. Working on the Sabbath (23:3)
73. Blasphemy (punishable by stoning to death) (24:14)
74. Inflicting an injury; killing someone else’s animal; killing a person must be punished in kind (24:17-22)
75. Selling land permanently (25:23)
76. Selling an Israelite as a slave (foreigners are fine) (25:42)

 

[himkhan]

Its funny that you think my little scenario is absurd yet you cannot actually respond with anything other than the "courts would say so!!!!".

Probably because service obviously was not refused on the basis of protected class



So if the courts say something it must automatically be right?

So then by your logic you should have no problem with:

(1) The courts in Sudan okaying the execution of a Christian woman for denouncing her Islamic faith

(2) Pakistani courts handing down lenient sentences for honor killings

Because hey the courts said it was fine so therefore we must unquestioningly accept it no matter how stupid and unjust.

You spend far too much time trying to be obtuse. I think you forgot (3) The courts in the North Pole saying it was OK for Santa to have kids sit on his lap much to the chagrin of Mrs Claus, damn activist judges. Just stop already. Businesses will not be able to hide behind the Bible or the guise of "private business" against gay people just like they can't against colored people. You can accept it or make an even sillier reply citing Martian court proceedings. This subject is closed until the next time the rage junkies need another fix.

 

[Vic]

http://biblehub.com/leviticus/18-22.htm

would seem to cover it. A wedding is a event to signal social approval of a relationship. To bake a gay wedding cake is therefore to implicitly approve of a relationship the bible condemns as an abomination.

As Leviticus 18:22 is one of the 613 commandments of the Torah, how is your interpretation not in conflict with Matthew 22:39 for a Christian?

 

[himkhan]

http://biblehub.com/leviticus/18-22.htm

would seem to cover it. A wedding is a event to signal social approval of a relationship. To bake a gay wedding cake is therefore to implicitly approve of a relationship the bible condemns as an abomination.

While you are busy up there in the Leviticus tree, I think you dropped a few cherries down in the grass:

Round Haircuts (Leviticus 19:27): “You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard.”

Football (Leviticus 11:8) “You shall not eat of their flesh nor touch their carcasses; they are unclean to you.” (discussing pigs)

Fortune Telling (Leviticus 19:31) “Do not turn to mediums or spiritists; do not seek them out to be defiled by them. I am the Lord your God.”

Tattoos (Leviticus 19:28) “You shall not make any cuts in your body for the dead nor make any tattoo marks on yourselves: I am the Lord.”

Polyester, or other blends of fabric (Leviticus 19:19) “You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together.”

Shellfish (Leviticus 11:10) “But whatever is in the seas and in the rivers that does not have fins and scales among all the teeming life of the water, and among all the living creatures that are in the water, they are detestable things to you.”

Why am I not surprised some people who pick and chose which parts of the constitution they wish to trumpet and which to ignore also do the same with the Bible. :whiste:

 

[Vic]

Reminds me of when the Sweet Cakes by Melissa debacle hit the news here in Oregon. I see the owners talking on the local news and Melissa's husband (co-owner) is ranting about how homosexuality is an abomination in the bible whilst covered in tattoos and piercings.

 

[jpeyton]

This isn't shocking or anything new. Florists, bakers, and other businesses who refuse to serve homosexuals because they love Jeebus are going to find themselves on the wrong side of the law.

Get with the times or pound sand.

 

[Moonbeam]

His lawyer said this about the reporting:



Certainly the christian guy doesn't care for being indoctrinated and taught how to think.

You stupid fuck. That is exactly why he thinks like he does. He is in love with his brainwashed Christian fanaticism.

 

[alzan]

Even my 3 year-old niece has reading comprehension skills developed enough to understand the context of that statement.

I see yours are still in their earliest developmental stages.

Still with the insults, wouldn't Jesus be proud.

 

[Angry Irishman]

Where in the bible does it say you can't bake a cake for a gay wedding? Chapter and verse please.

I have no fucking idea and it's a dumb question. The constitution doesn't require proof from a bible but does cover religious freedoms. Do you think all religious beliefs are in the bible rule book and all have the same interpretation? In fact, I don't even agree with not serving a gay couple but that really doesn't matter because it's their religious conviction. It's not my religious beliefs being trumped. It's their belief it's their business....period. Find another bakery.

The PC in this country is beyond hope and is slowly going to be our demise.

 

[nehalem256]

While you are busy up there in the Leviticus tree, I think you dropped a few cherries down in the grass:

Round Haircuts (Leviticus 19:27): “You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard.”

Football (Leviticus 11:8) “You shall not eat of their flesh nor touch their carcasses; they are unclean to you.” (discussing pigs)

Fortune Telling (Leviticus 19:31) “Do not turn to mediums or spiritists; do not seek them out to be defiled by them. I am the Lord your God.”

Tattoos (Leviticus 19:28) “You shall not make any cuts in your body for the dead nor make any tattoo marks on yourselves: I am the Lord.”

Polyester, or other blends of fabric (Leviticus 19:19) “You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together.”

Shellfish (Leviticus 11:10) “But whatever is in the seas and in the rivers that does not have fins and scales among all the teeming life of the water, and among all the living creatures that are in the water, they are detestable things to you.”

Why am I not surprised some people who pick and chose which parts of the constitution they wish to trumpet and which to ignore also do the same with the Bible. :whiste:

(1) What does any of that have to do with same-sex wedding cakes?

(2) What part of the constitution is he ignoring? I don't recall any part of the constitution saying you have the right to a same-sex wedding cake.

 

[Angry Irishman]

You stupid fuck. That is exactly why he thinks like he does. He is in love with his brainwashed Christian fanaticism.

And.....that's the real story here. It's people like this who follow the religion of hating religion.