Page 121 of 173 FirstFirst ... 2171111119120121122123131171 ... LastLast
Results 1,201 to 1,210 of 1723

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

  1. #1201
    Professor
    Phil_Osophy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    11-11-14 @ 02:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,450

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter King View Post
    Three-Fifths Compromise - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The Three-Fifths Compromise was a compromise between Southern and Northern states reached during the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 in which three-fifths of the enumerated population of slaves would be counted for representation purposes regarding both the distribution of taxes and the apportionment of the members of the United States House of Representatives. It was proposed by delegates James Wilson and Roger Sherman.

    Delegates opposed to slavery generally wished to count only the free inhabitants of each state, but delegates supportive of slavery, on the other hand, generally wanted to count slaves in their actual numbers. Since slaves could not vote, slaveholders would thus have the benefit of increased representation in the House and the Electoral College. The final compromise of counting "all other persons" as only three-fifths of their actual numbers reduced the power of the slave states relative to the original proposals, but increased it over the northern position
    The three fifths thing had nothing to do with black people. It didnt even mention black people. The only racial group it mentioned were native americans. The democrats of the south twisted the words so that they could count their slaves.

  2. #1202
    Sage
    Peter King's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,029

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

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    I am 100% for gay marriage, bigotry against gays/lesbians is ridiculous and I think this bakery owner is probably an ignorant pig.

    BUT

    I think any private business should be able to not sell to anyone they want, for any reason.

    Hey, if the public don't like it, don't buy from them and put them out of business.

    I know I would never buy from a shop that discriminated in this way.
    But that is not a helpful way of solving things. Things only got better for blacks when the laws where changed and this kind of bigotry became unlawful.

    As long as people think it is the right of businesses to refuse customers based on race, religion, gender or sexual preference normal service than this should be illegal.

    And I am talking about normal services and not special requests, no baker should be forced to make a cake with 2 men or 2 women on the top. They do not sell those and cannot be forced to carry them in their bakery. Also outlandish requests can be refused on artistic grounds or again on not being in the normal things the bakery makes/sells (so no nazi-cake or insulting cakes, disgusting shape cases like swastika's or human reproductive organs, etc.).

    But if someone orders a regular wedding cake with no couple on top or things that are put on there referring to gay issues (even if it is a rainbow flag), than there should be no reason to refuse service.
    Former military man (and now babysitter of Donald Trump) John Kelly, is a big loud lying empty barrel!

  3. #1203
    Sage
    Peter King's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,029

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Why couldn't it be? We can make you have to service whoever we wanted. Why don't you accept that? You seemed to accept it for other kinds of property, right? Why is my proposal not fair? We can put it in a contract to practice your rights. What about that? If you don't like it all you have to do is not sign the contract.
    Why couldn't it be? Because I am not a company and the law forbids companies to discriminate. You are trying to have a discussion that makes no sense whatsoever just to try and make the point that discriminating gays should be allowed if a company/business feels like it. Well, the law forbids it and all the supposing and what if things you come up with does not change that fact.

    Just like you cannot drink and drive (when you choose to drive after having had alcohol), the law forbids discrimination. Simple isn't it. The law is not open for discussion on drink driving and it is not open to the anti-discrimination laws.
    Former military man (and now babysitter of Donald Trump) John Kelly, is a big loud lying empty barrel!

  4. #1204
    Sage

    vesper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,902

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Mustachio View Post
    This country was founded on the notion that all people are born as equal, no matter what they believe or who they look like. Discrimination is an act that stems from the notion that some are more worthy than others, based solely on who they are. So... how is this law far from what this country was founded on? Doesn't it uphold the most central idea in our constitution? Sorry, bro, it does. And laws like this, namely the civil rights act, made this country much more able to claim that our policies reinforce the idea that all men are created equal. Maybe you haven't read your history books. I'd give them a look if I were you, because you seem very confused about what is and isn't "American."

    And others have said it, but this conversation has everything to do with race AND gender AND sexual orientation. Do you think people here are vigorously arguing about a cake? No, and claiming so reduces the argument to absurdity. This debate is 100% about discrimination laws and the central notion that all of us are equal. You are (one of) the one(s) arguing that businesses have a right to treat people as subhuman. Doesn't sound very American to most of us. You're in a small, extreme minority, and while I cannot change your point of view, I hope that you understand why your viewpoint is so disgusting to the vast majority of Americans who have heard of the struggle for civil rights. Trust me, this information is readily available should you choose to educate yourself on what this country used to be like for minorities.
    Our country was founded on Inalienable rights to all citizens such as life, liberty, and property. By virtually being alive one possess these rights and NO MAN has the power to take them away from an individual.

    “The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for, among old parchments, or musty records. They are written, as with a sun beam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.”--Alexander Hamilton

    Civil rights however, stem from society such as the freedom of the press, the right to vote, or the right to a trial by jury......are rights granted by governments to allow citizens the proper enjoyment of their natural rights. For example, you cannot enjoy your natural right to liberty if the government denies you the right to vote nor can you enjoy your right to property if the government takes it from you to give to another. It doesn't take a constitutional law professor to point out how our natural rights would be jeopardized if civil rights were infringed. Nor is it hard to grasp to see that a state law has the potential to violate the constitutional rights of others and through the courts can be challenged.

    The First Amendment contains two clauses about the Freedom of Religion. The first part is known as the Establishment Clause, and the second as the Free Exercise Clause.
    The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from passing laws that will establish an official religion or preferring one religion over another. The courts have interpreted the establishment clause to accomplish the separation of church and state. The Free Exercise Clause prohibits the government from interfering with a person’s practice of his or her religion. However, religious rituals can be limited by civil and federal laws. Religious freedom is an absolute right, and includes the right to practice any religion of one’s choice, or no religion at all, and to do this without government control.

    In the case of the baker in Colorado, the judge denied the baker his constitutional rights in regard to property and the Free Exercise clause which prohibits the government from interfering with a person's practice of his or her religion. Discrimination laws are important but when one violates the constitutional rights of another they are unlawful. If you are going to talk equality sir, then you must also apply it to all having equal treatment under the law. The First Amendment clearly comes into play in this case raising the question of whether an artist or craftsman can be compelled by the government to create objects against his or her wishes. The saddest part of this case is the judge's ruling citing "hurt feelings to others" as a reason to trump a business owner's right to property and right to practice his religious beliefs. Sir, there is a reason why legal experts agree these types of cases are headed to the Supreme Court because when a discrimination law results in discrimination of others it's bad law.
    Last edited by vesper; 12-10-13 at 11:21 AM.

  5. #1205
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter King View Post
    But that is not a helpful way of solving things. Things only got better for blacks when the laws where changed and this kind of bigotry became unlawful.

    As long as people think it is the right of businesses to refuse customers based on race, religion, gender or sexual preference normal service than this should be illegal.

    And I am talking about normal services and not special requests, no baker should be forced to make a cake with 2 men or 2 women on the top. They do not sell those and cannot be forced to carry them in their bakery. Also outlandish requests can be refused on artistic grounds or again on not being in the normal things the bakery makes/sells (so no nazi-cake or insulting cakes, disgusting shape cases like swastika's or human reproductive organs, etc.).

    But if someone orders a regular wedding cake with no couple on top or things that are put on there referring to gay issues (even if it is a rainbow flag), than there should be no reason to refuse service.
    Things got better for 'blacks' when the public started growing up and realizing that more or less melanin in one's skin has nothing to do with equality...not when the government did this or that.
    Government's don't change people's minds - people are supposed to change government's minds.

    IMO, the government has NO business forcing private companies to sell to people they don't want to sell to. That is just fundamentally wrong to me.

    The only instance I would allow for if it was a potential life and death situation...but buying cakes is DEFINITELY not that.

  6. #1206
    Sage
    Peter King's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,029

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

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    Things got better for 'blacks' when the public started growing up and realizing that more or less melanin in one's skin has nothing to do with equality...not when the government did this or that.
    Government's don't change people's minds - people are supposed to change government's minds.

    IMO, the government has NO business forcing private companies to sell to people they don't want to sell to. That is just fundamentally wrong to me.

    The only instance I would allow for if it was a potential life and death situation...but buying cakes is DEFINITELY not that.
    That is your opinion, I think most blacks thank these laws for making their lives much much better.

    The government has every business forcing companies to not discriminate IMHO.
    Former military man (and now babysitter of Donald Trump) John Kelly, is a big loud lying empty barrel!

  7. #1207
    Sage
    AliHajiSheik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,386

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

    A simple example of: "If I knew you were coming, I wouldn't have baked a cake."

  8. #1208
    Assassin
    Verax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    9,530

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

    Quote Originally Posted by vesper View Post
    ...
    In other words religion gives people the right to discriminate, how noble.

  9. #1209
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

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

    Quote Originally Posted by vesper View Post
    Our country was founded on Inalienable rights to all citizens such as life, liberty, and property. By virtually being alive one possess these rights and NO MAN has the power to take them away from an individual.

    “The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for, among old parchments, or musty records. They are written, as with a sun beam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.”--Alexander Hamilton

    Civil rights however, stem from society such as the freedom of the press, the right to vote, or the right to a trial by jury......are rights granted by governments to allow citizens the proper enjoyment of their natural rights. For example, you cannot enjoy your natural right to liberty if the government denies you the right to vote nor can you enjoy your right to property if the government takes it from you to give to another. It doesn't take a constitutional law professor to point out how our natural rights would be jeopardized if civil rights were infringed. Nor is it hard to grasp to see that a state law has the potential to violate the constitutional rights of others and through the courts can be challenged.

    The First Amendment contains two clauses about the Freedom of Religion. The first part is known as the Establishment Clause, and the second as the Free Exercise Clause.
    The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from passing laws that will establish an official religion or preferring one religion over another. The courts have interpreted the establishment clause to accomplish the separation of church and state. The Free Exercise Clause prohibits the government from interfering with a person’s practice of his or her religion. However, religious rituals can be limited by civil and federal laws. Religious freedom is an absolute right, and includes the right to practice any religion of one’s choice, or no religion at all, and to do this without government control.

    In the case of the baker in Colorado, the judge denied the baker his constitutional rights in regard to property and the Free Exercise clause which prohibits the government from interfering with a person's practice of his or her religion. Discrimination laws are important but when one violates the constitutional rights of another they are unlawful. If you are going to talk equality sir, then you must also apply it to all having equal treatment under the law. The First Amendment clearly comes into play in this case raising the question of whether an artist or craftsman can be compelled by the government to create objects against his or her wishes. The saddest part of this case is the judge's ruling citing "hurt feelings to others" as a reason to trump a business owner's right to property and right to practice his religious beliefs. Sir, there is a reason why legal experts agree these types of cases are headed to the Supreme Court because when a discrimination law results in discrimination of others it's bad law.


    Yeah....good luck with that one...LOL. There is zero chance that the Supreme Court will rule that businesses have a "natural right" to discriminate. Sorry....ain't gonna happen.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  10. #1210
    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 Lursa View Post
    "Porn" is not a protected class and there are no discrimination laws that apply to it (that I'm aware of).
    The one and only thing that keeps it from being so, is that some hot and sweaty judge in a black robe hasn't said so yet. They've already ruled that libraries must provide access to online porn. Of course one will eventually make Porn a protected class of expression.
    Quod scripsi, scripsi

Posting Permissions

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