Page 12 of 173 FirstFirst ... 210111213142262112 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 1723

Thread: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647]

  1. #111
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,822

    re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    all the owner had to do is not break the law, he choose to break the law so now he pays some type of penalty, its that simple
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  2. #112
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,822

    re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    1.)The only facts of the case I've seen are in various articles and some of those articles have said that he did, in fact, offer to make them any other kind of cake. If you have information showing that's not part of the facts I'd like to see it.

    2.)As far as the obscene cakes...what I was getting at is that rulings like this set a precedent for other things to be considered "discrimination".

    3.) As far as "equal rights", well, if I can legally be discriminated against because I'm not a member of a "protected class" then that isn't very "equal", is it?

    i see you keep dodging my questions

    1.) meaningless to your statments

    here is the judges ruling hence precedence:

    "In a ruling issued Friday, an administrative law judge in Denver, Robert Spencer, ruled that by rebuffing the couple's attempt to buy a cake, Masterpiece Cakeshop violated a state law banning discrimination in a public place on grounds of sexual orientation."

    this is the ruling and precedence so you cant just make one up

    this is about discrimination of sexual orientation (homosexual orientation)

    this fact cant be changed im not sure what you dont get

    2.) see #1 thats false, the precedence goes no further than illegal discrimination and equal rights.

    3.) weird you don't have have sexual orientation? you dont have a race? a gender? seems you are protected to me.

    so yes its equal, just as a gay baker couldnt deny service to straights based on thier straight wedding

    so back to the facts

    illegal discrimination and or violation of equal rights has NOTHING to do with swastikas and obscene cakes
    there is NO precedence here set that would relate to swastikas and obscene cakes only to one cant illegal discrimination and or infringe on equal rights.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  3. #113
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,759

    re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaugingcatenate View Post
    No, it simply mean get a clue... simple.
    Moderator's Warning:
    Colorado Judge:  Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647]And this means stop the personal attacks. Simple.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  4. #114
    Sage
    Oftencold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    A small village in Alaska
    Last Seen
    05-09-14 @ 12:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    5,044

    re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by shrubnose View Post
    As others have said on this forum: Bigotry in the name of religion is still bigotry and if it violates the 1964 Civil Rights Act it's not going to continue in the USA.




    "Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself.' ~ Robert green Ingersoll
    Basically, you're making a religion out of the 1964 Civil Rights. Bigotry is a free choice. You might mistakenly believe that attempting to control how people express their bigotry somehow magically makes it go away, but it does not.

    But here, try this experiment. See if you can get your elected officials to denounce the Islamic dictates which command a war of extermination against Jews and pagans, and the subjugation or death of everyone else who isn't a Muslim. Or better still, why not make up an adorable little placard with such a denunciation and parade up and down in front of your local Mosque some Friday afternoon, then report on how the police and government supported you right to do that. *snicker*

    The lesson for those who don't want to be compelled by the State to support perversions such as same same "marriage," is to defy them, the way we used to with bullies in general.
    Last edited by Oftencold; 12-07-13 at 03:42 AM.
    Quod scripsi, scripsi

  5. #115
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,812

    re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    My understanding of this case is that the baker offered to make the couple any other kind of cake that they wanted but refused to do a wedding cake because he considers marriage to be a matter of religion. It isn't homosexuals that he's refusing service to, it's ceremonies that violate his religious beliefs. From what I understand he also refuses to make Halloween themed items for the same reason.
    I personally do not think it's right, but, unfortunately, if the baker is making wedding cakes, he is also legally obligated to make wedding cakes for gays. It's discriminatory and a violation of rights not too.

    I am quite libertarian in that regard, though, and believe the government should allow a business to do as they please and refuse any business they do not want to engage in.

  6. #116
    Sage
    Lutherf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:03 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    24,697

    re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by buck View Post
    I personally do not think it's right, but, unfortunately, if the baker is making wedding cakes, he is also legally obligated to make wedding cakes for gays. It's discriminatory and a violation of rights not too.

    I am quite libertarian in that regard, though, and believe the government should allow a business to do as they please and refuse any business they do not want to engage in.
    I think that people acquiesce too easily when it comes to this stuff. The state already excludes churches from any requirement to perform gay marriages so, for all practical purposes, that precedent has already been set. Religious convictions are protected in that case but not when it comes to "public accommodations". Well, why not? Why does the church, protected by the same amendment as the baker, get a pass while the baker doesn't? Why is the baker no longer free to exercise his religious practices once he steps into the public domain? Furthermore, where is the harm caused to this couple? Was this the only bakery available to them? Were they prohibited from making their own cake because of the actions of this baker? If they were I don't see how.

  7. #117
    Sage
    Oftencold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    A small village in Alaska
    Last Seen
    05-09-14 @ 12:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    5,044

    re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by buck View Post
    I personally do not think it's right, but, unfortunately, if the baker is making wedding cakes, he is also legally obligated to make wedding cakes for gays. It's discriminatory and a violation of rights not too.

    I am quite libertarian in that regard, though, and believe the government should allow a business to do as they please and refuse any business they do not want to engage in.
    So what if some freak came in and demanded a pornographically themed wedding cake. Porn is legal. Are going for force the baker to decorate the cake with frosting dildos?

    It seems that by this reasoning we must.
    Quod scripsi, scripsi

  8. #118
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,812

    re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    I think that people acquiesce too easily when it comes to this stuff. The state already excludes churches from any requirement to perform gay marriages so, for all practical purposes, that precedent has already been set. Religious convictions are protected in that case but not when it comes to "public accommodations". Well, why not? Why does the church, protected by the same amendment as the baker, get a pass while the baker doesn't? Why is the baker no longer free to exercise his religious practices once he steps into the public domain? Furthermore, where is the harm caused to this couple? Was this the only bakery available to them? Were they prohibited from making their own cake because of the actions of this baker? If they were I don't see how.
    I agree with you. But the courts do not and I just don't see that being changed. I would vote for people that would try, though.

  9. #119
    controlled chaos
    Gaugingcatenate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Formerly of the Southern USA, now permanently in the mountains of Panama
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,159

    re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    1. I don't live in Colorado so I have no voice in the matter.

    2. The law that was violated by the baker was the Colorado Anti Discrimination Act, not a law that I made or proposed in any shape, way, or form.

    3. The baker chose to obtain a business license in Colorado and run his business in Colorado under that state's laws. I did not make that choice for that baker.

    4. The baker chose to deny ONLY gay customers of a wedding cake and to base his decision on religious sensibilities. I was not that customer.

    5. The court decided that the baker violated the state law. I was not the judge.

    So how am I involved? What exactly did I do?

    I certainly want to protect religious beliefs. But do I want to do so to the expense of others? Did you ask at any point what the religious beliefs of the customers were? Did you care? Or because the baker's religious views aligned with your own did you feel his discrimination was justified?


    All those personal attacks revealed a lot about your psychology and paranoia. You, you, you! I find it sad when people resort to assumptions about what people intend. The moment you jump into pretending you know another man's intentions, you lose any credibility you have in a discussion and embarrass the hell out of yourself. It is childish, immature, and self effacing.
    1. Dude, you are the one arguing the case from that side, not me... so either stick to your side or cave if you are unwilling to stand by your arguments.

    2. I posit that the Colorado law is unconstitutional in this instance... I am in no manner required to trust in what some liberal Colorado judge decides, especially when it goes directly in contradiction to one of our original and guaranteed rights. If those in Colorado want to amend the US Constitution... well, they will just have to go about it in the prescribed manners. Until then their laws in this area are total bunkum.

    3. See 2 above

    4. See 2 above

    5. See 2 above.

    Listen, don't know if you have really thought this out at all, but whether you like it or not this is going to be at the expense of one side or the other. There is no win win... and it appears you want gay rights to win over all others. Religious rights trump, sorry, they just do. Now, if this were the only baker in Colorado, maybe we could have an actual debate over the matter... but to sue to force these folks to go against their stated religious principles is a complete travesty and, I would suspect, an agenda driven move to intimidate others.

    Did I ever ask the "religious beliefs of the customers"? What would be the relevance of that, exactly? They can pick and choose who they want to based on whatever their criteria might be... as long as who they choose accepts their commission to bake this special cake. If their religious beliefs don't match, they go someplace else. They would not in any way be forced to get their cake from that bakery or any other. Right? Apples and oranges.

    Listen, I hope you don't charge for your consults, because you would owe me at this point...and perhaps have a malpractice suit. What it should have revealed is that I, as have others, have had just about enough with government telling me what I they think I MUST believe, by force of law. Your pop psychology assessment, tho, does tell us a lot about you. In the end, I think I would say take your juvenile pablum, that you might actually be able to persuade others as mimicking actual intelligence, elsewhere please... I am in no need such libertarian pseudo-psychological analysis.

    What a laugh there guy, do you actually read what you write?

    .
    "...But resist we much, we must and we will much, about that be committed..." --- the right Reverend Alfred Charles "Al" Shaprton, Jr.

  10. #120
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,812

    re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by Oftencold View Post
    So what if some freak came in and demanded a pornographically themed wedding cake. Porn is legal. Are going for force the baker to decorate the cake with frosting dildos?

    It seems that by this reasoning we must.
    I would say that if a bakery does not make porn cakes, they could not be forced to... but if they do make porn cakes for some, they wouldn't be able to deny a porn cake to a different customer.

    MMM... Porn cake sounds delicious, btw.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •