SuzukiSavage.com - Print Page

SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl
General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Baker Baker
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1519861324

Message started by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/28/18 at 15:42:04

Title: Baker Baker
Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/28/18 at 15:42:04

The baker discriminated against a protected class of person and he got what he deserved for it. That's the law, and yes, it's being/or has been in the courts and figured out that way, idk, I don't care, obviously.

but it is a valid question, which is more important, someone's personal "religious" belief ( I put religious belief in quotes because quite frankly, there's nothing in the bible that would stop a Christian from providing for a sinner of any kind, Jesus SERVED prostitutes, tax collectors and all kinds of sinners in his time, I think His example is clear, but somehow some "fundamentalists" just can't love apparently)

anyway, the right of someone to be treated EQUALLY under the law, or the right of someone to exercise their personal "religious" belief. that's what's the debate is about,

I'm not in favor of religion dictating law so I tend to favor the everyone being treated equally side, but I understand how someone could feel that this is a slippery slope forcing someone to go against their beliefs.

I just see the bakery as a business, and businesses, well, in my opinion, can't hold personal religious beliefs, they aren't people. But with a sole Proprietorship business like I"m assuming the bakery is, those lines do cross and I think this a valid thing for the courts to decide

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by T And T Garage on 02/28/18 at 15:55:07

If this baker is allowed to "morally object" - then what's to stop someone from morally objecting to an interracial wedding cake? Or a non-christian wedding cake? Or a bar mitzvah cake?

Where do you draw the line? Discrimination is just discrimination - it knows no bounds.

Slippery slope indeed.

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/28/18 at 16:01:14

A Nazi demands a Jewish carpenter to build his swastika.
Yes?

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by Serowbot on 02/28/18 at 16:11:17

6B747275686F5E6E5E66747833010 wrote:

A Nazi demands a Jewish carpenter to build his swastika.
Yes?

This is an excellent retort... but...
The gist here is asking for special permission on religious grounds to discriminate unlawfully...
That just don't seem like what religion should be about, and it sure ain't what Jesus was about.
... and it sure ain't Constitutional...
We separate church and state.

745D405F57405E4B7E5D41467340465B4146320 wrote:

...anyway, the right of someone to be treated EQUALLY under the law, or the right of someone to exercise their personal "religious" belief. that's what's the debate is about,

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/28/18 at 16:13:14

It's about ones
Conscience.

And property rights.
I really wish you understood the libertarian ideas.

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by Serowbot on 02/28/18 at 16:15:11

Does discrimination ease your conscience?...

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/28/18 at 16:17:02

736C6A6D70774676467E6C602B190 wrote:

It's about ones
Conscience.

well, they can quit. they can turn themselves into a cupcake shop, they can stop offering customized cakes completely. they have options to preserve their conscience and not discriminate.

Title: Re: Baker Bakery
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/28/18 at 16:28:09

YOU discriminate.

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by MnSpring on 02/28/18 at 16:31:16

4D535C5D504D564B390 wrote:

If this baker is allowed to "morally object" - then what's to stop someone from morally objecting to an interracial wedding cake? Or a non-christian wedding cake? Or a bar mitzvah cake? Where do you draw the line? Discrimination is just - it knows no bounds.

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/28/18 at 16:37:04

How is it you can demand the baker do what is wanted, but not demand everyone hire him?
The CUSTOMER gets to choose who to hire
But
The CONTRACTOR doesn't get to Choose who he works for?

And I'M the tyrant?

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by MnSpring on 02/28/18 at 16:58:59

322C23222F322934460 wrote:

If this baker is allowed to "morally object" - then what's to stop someone from morally objecting to an interracial wedding cake? Or a non-christian wedding cake? Or a bar mitzvah cake? Where do you draw the line? Discrimination is just discrimination - it knows no bounds. Slippery slope indeed.

Another Take.
Exactly what is WRONG,
with a baker not, baking a,
"interracial wedding cake? Or a non-christian wedding cake? Or a bar mitzvah cake?"

It is the BAKERS CHOICE.
NOT YOURS !

It is the same as walking walking into a Gun shop,
for a box of 7.62x55R ammo.
And being told they do not sell that,
I have to go someplace else.

What, I am to SUE them,
because out of 100 kinds of ammo,
they don't have the one I want. ????????

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by T And T Garage on 03/01/18 at 05:56:58

I see that bat$hit crazy people just don't get it...

No surprise.

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by verslagen1 on 03/01/18 at 08:22:04

What you bat$hit crazy people don't get is they went to someone that doesn't do gay wedding cakes and said I want a gay wedding cake.
Could've just as easily said give me a cake and did what they wanted to do afterwards... put 2 guys on top, whatever it's their cake.
And he did offer them a plain wedding cake.

It's like suing a lesbian prostitute for not servicing you.

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 03/01/18 at 08:23:43

05261B383A21262F480 wrote:

[quote author=4D535C5D504D564B390 link=1519861324/0#1 date=1519862107]If this baker is allowed to "morally object" - then what's to stop someone from morally objecting to an interracial wedding cake? Or a non-christian wedding cake? Or a bar mitzvah cake? Where do you draw the line? Discrimination is just - it knows no bounds.

Well then, by golly gee, got to fin me a Muslim Shop,
and order a Pork Sandwich !!!
After all, It is 'SAID', it is, 'discrimination', against me,
caus that dare Musilum, said, he/she don't sell Pork,
caus da, "morally object", on a conta dare relegion.
[/quote]

the difference is, the muslim doesn't sell pork to ANYONE, that's equality. the baker is choosing to discriminate the services they offer based on their whimsy.

do they have the right to do that, probably, but doesn't mean it's still an @sshole move and the other party has every right to sue over it, as they are a protected class under the law.

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 03/01/18 at 08:26:58

455641405F5254565D02330 wrote:

no, they said we want a wedding cake, we happen to be gay, we'd like the cake to reflect who we are as a couple, like you do for every other couple

does the baker have the right to discriminate, maybe, but I'm glad it's going to court

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by Serowbot on 03/01/18 at 08:34:22

This explains the legal justification...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/27/opinion/gay-wedding-cake.html

Quote:

The problem with this retort is that “gay wedding cakes” are not a thing. Same-sex couples order their cakes from the same catalogs as everyone else, with the same options for size, shape, icing, filling, and so on. Although Phillips’s cakes are undeniably quite artistic, he did not reject a particular design option, such as a topper with two grooms — in which case, his First Amendment argument would be more compelling. Instead, he flatly told Craig and Mullins that he would not sell them a wedding cake.

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by Trippah on 03/01/18 at 08:56:35

and yet Quakers are not required to tote a gun, though for the present, they can volunteer for non-fighting jobs in our all volunteer military...so some religious basis for some.... :D

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 03/01/18 at 09:00:10

6771667B63767B60140 wrote:

This explains the legal justification...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/27/opinion/gay-wedding-cake.html

Quote:

+1

I was literally just going to post that same part from the article.

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by Serowbot on 03/01/18 at 09:02:37

51776C7575646D050 wrote:

and yet Quakers are not required to tote a gun, though for the present, they can volunteer for non-fighting jobs in our all volunteer military...so some religious basis for some.... :D

Don't the military allow the same for conscientious objectors on a non-religious ground?...

Quote:

A conscientious objector is an "individual who has claimed the right to refuse to perform military service" on the grounds of freedom of thought, conscience, or religion.

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/01/18 at 09:54:34

One more time

Being forced to Do what is in conflict with your
Conscience
Is wrong.

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 03/01/18 at 10:10:54

233C3A3D20271626162E3C307B490 wrote:

One more time

Being forced to Do what is in conflict with your
Conscience
Is wrong.

well, he has options

1. quit offering wedding cakes, he doesn't offer halloween or "demon" themed cakes to anyone, just quit offering wedding cakes

2. make his bakery private, or even only offer wedding cakes to those who belong to a private club within the bakery

I"m sure there are other ways too.

there are ways around the state’s public accommodations law if he really wanted to go that route, if he thinks his conscience is that important to him.

is it the gay couples fault that he apparently didn't understand the law before he started business?

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by Serowbot on 03/01/18 at 10:21:01

6E7177706D6A5B6B5B63717D36040 wrote:

One more time

Being forced to Do what is in conflict with your
Conscience
Is wrong.

Are you OK with an EMT refusing to transport you because you're a Trump supporter?...

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/01/18 at 10:25:27

For all I know he was there before the law changes.

IMO, it's His business. If his behavior runs the customers off, he will fail.
That's what property rights do.

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 03/01/18 at 10:27:01

534C4A4D50576656665E4C400B390 wrote:

For all I know he was there before the law changes.

IMO, it's His business. If his behavior runs the customers off, he will fail.
That's what property rights do.

it's still his duty to understand the law and how it affects his business

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by JOEL2014 on 03/01/18 at 10:40:38

Can we look at the other side of it for a moment. Why did the couple who wanted the Cake raise such a stink about it when they didn't get it? If that had been me than I would have just said oh rats thanks for your time and went to a shop who would make a cake for me. If the couple thought that the shop didn't deserve their business they should have went to another shop and not raised such a fuss about it. The whole Court thing seems over-the-top and causing too much harm over something as stupid as a little cake.

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by T And T Garage on 03/01/18 at 10:50:25

61646E676A656F6C676A6F72780B0 wrote:

I totally get your point - and honestly, if that was me on the receiving end of a jerk-of-a-baker, I'd just walk out and spread the word that he's an idiot.

However, back to my original reaction - "Where do you draw the line? Discrimination is just discrimination - it knows no bounds."

I'm certain there are nuances that we aren't seeing in this case, but this is a slippery slope. I think it's good that it's being addressed.

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/01/18 at 10:50:57

There you go..
Why cause a stink?
I would never want a product from someone who had a problem with me.

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 03/01/18 at 10:57:54

74717B727F707A79727F7A676D1E0 wrote:

sure, that's mostly fair.

this bakery, though, did have a history of discrimination, aka breaking the law

and apparently, neither the bakery nor the couple think the cake is "little" both think it's highly symbolic and an important centerpiece to the wedding

but yeah, they are probably activists fighting against discrimination of LBGQT people

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/01/18 at 11:28:09

6177607D65707D66120 wrote:

[quote author=6E7177706D6A5B6B5B63717D36040 link=1519861324/15#19 date=1519926874]One more time

Being forced to Do what is in conflict with your
Conscience
Is wrong.

Are you OK with an EMT refusing to transport you because you're a Trump supporter?...[/quote]

Seriously?
The matters of Conscience I'm talking about refer to biblical principles, not political affiliation.

Are you suggesting that the left so despises Trump supporters that they would see them Die rather than help them?
Sure looks like it.

Title: Re: Baker Baker
Post by MnSpring on 03/01/18 at 11:43:31

435D52535E435845370 wrote:

I see that bat$hit crazy people just don't get it... No surprise.

I do, ‘get it’.
I get, that, YOU,
do NOT want ANYONE,
to have a Choice,
unless it is Also, YOUR Choice.

And if, YOU, buy a 7.00 cup of coffee, with a ’smiley face’.
and I buy 7.00 worth of grounds, to make 150 cups of coffee.
“I Get It”, YOU, then say, “Bat $hit Crazy”.
And expound on how much BETTER, YOUR, cup of coffee is.

(And of course, YOU can NOT respond to Anything,
unless YOU are TOLD to)