• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

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

I never stated that the government forced her to shut down, but she did have to retain an attorney when the allegations were brought against her. The actions of the people, which Portland has a large gay community, was less than tolerant and played the biggest role in her shutting her doors. Even thoughOregon does not recognize same sex marriage and their state constitution recognizes a person to have the right to moral conscience.


So businesses owners on Oregon can simply claim that their moral conscience means they shouldn't treat blacks (or Jews, or Mexicans, or women, or the elderly, or the mentally handicapped, or women) and they can function outside the law?


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

So businesses owners on Oregon can simply claim that their moral conscience means they shouldn't treat blacks (or Jews, or Mexicans, or women, or the elderly, or the mentally handicapped, or women) and they can function outside the law?>>>>

The marketplace can determine whether people are discriminatory, as it did in the other case mentioned. There is no need for the courts to get involved.

This going to court business has just become too silly, though it is interesting to see the leftists getting all excited about being tough on criminals.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

1.) factually not true, she was not forced it was here choice.

2.) link? proof?
weird how would anybody know a cross and bible would mean that bakery would break the law, commit crimes and be bigoted towards gays? millions of people with bibles dont discriminate against gays

3.) yes we do which this is not.

4.) yes they can and if done right they can avoid being criminals

5.) meaningless to this discussion, church doesnt make laws nor does it trump rights outside its doors

6.) 100% correct

7.) yep and they should be double ashamed of themselves for displaying such hypocritical bigotry BUT that has nothing to do with the topic here. Some blacks were also agaisnt interracial marriage thats a totally silly and failed strawman. You were asked a question and you dodged it. Feel free to answer the question.

would you support discrimination based on religion, gender, race and disabilities?

What part don't you get, it goes against their religious beliefs ! To force them is to violate their religious freedoms this country affords all its citizens. You don't have a problem with forcing someone to do something against their moral conscience, wtf happened to their rights? They don't deny their goods to gays, if they did that would be bigotry, but when it comes to marriage they believe it to be only recognized between a man and a woman. But like I stated earlier, if they have strong moral convictions against offering wedding cakes to gays, they simply don't have to do so in public. They can seek out the business of others who share their beliefs through private organizations. Special orders.....not offered to the public. The bakery could offer all occasion cakes or any other pastry they wish to sell to ALL people. This way they protect their business and do not have to succumb to legal battles or violate their moral conscience just to make a living.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

What part don't you get, it goes against their religious beliefs ! To force them is to violate their religious freedoms this country affords all its citizens. You don't have a problem with forcing someone to do something against their moral conscience, wtf happened to their rights? They don't deny their goods to gays, if they did that would be bigotry, but when it comes to marriage they believe it to be only recognized between a man and a woman. But like I stated earlier, if they have strong moral convictions against offering wedding cakes to gays, they simply don't have to do so in public. They can seek out the business of others who share their beliefs through private organizations. Special orders.....not offered to the public. The bakery could offer all occasion cakes or any other pastry they wish to sell to ALL people. This way they protect their business and do not have to succumb to legal battles or violate their moral conscience just to make a living.

The moral conscience of Christians tends to be out of favor with many. Would they object as strongly and go to court if the baker was a Muslim? I rather doubt it.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

So businesses owners on Oregon can simply claim that their moral conscience means they shouldn't treat blacks (or Jews, or Mexicans, or women, or the elderly, or the mentally handicapped, or women) and they can function outside the law?


>>>>

Your hyperbole is over the top.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

The marketplace can determine whether people are discriminatory, as it did in the other case mentioned. There is no need for the courts to get involved.

This going to court business has just become too silly, though it is interesting to see the leftists getting all excited about being tough on criminals.


I agree, I support the repeal of all Public Accommodation laws as they apply to private business. The only Public Accommodation laws, IMHO, that should remain in place are those applicable to government entities. Government entities should not have the prerogative of discriminating against citizens and they should be restricted from entering into legal contracts with private entities that discriminate. Private businesses on the other hand should be able to refuse service for any reason.

But see that's what most people can't stomach. Repeal of Public Accommodation law on race, religion, sex, national origin - nope - see those are OK. But the "gays", they shouldn't be included - nope not the gays. There needs to be special dispensation to discriminate against them.

However, discussing what I think the laws should be and discussing what the laws actually are are two different things.


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

Your hyperbole is over the top.

Not really.

If I can claim a moral conscience exception for the gays, why wouldn't that count for other types of moral conscience claims?

Or do moral conscience exceptions only apply to the gheys?


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

The marketplace can determine whether people are discriminatory, as it did in the other case mentioned. There is no need for the courts to get involved.

This going to court business has just become too silly, though it is interesting to see the leftists getting all excited about being tough on criminals.

Oh yea, like that marketplace in Selma Alabama? You know, the one where black people got lynched for getting uppity and demanding the same rights as white people? Yea, right.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Repeal of Public Accommodation law on race, religion, sex, national origin - nope - see those are OK. But the "gays", they shouldn't be included - nope not the gays. There needs to be special dispensation to discriminate against them.>>>>
Has that been your experience, or that of your friends? I don't see this happening at all, which is why it is news.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Oh yea, like that marketplace in Selma Alabama? You know, the one where black people got lynched for getting uppity and demanding the same rights as white people? Yea, right.

The moment anyone starts talking of lynching Gays, you let me know, okay?
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

1.)So the business is no longer open
2.)largely because of the community response, right?
3.) So what does the government need to do again?

1.) it is open the store front isnt open
2.) wrong because she broke the law
3.) continue to enforce laws and protect rights
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Not really.

If I can claim a moral conscience exception for the gays, why wouldn't that count for other types of moral conscience claims?

Or do moral conscience exceptions only apply to the gheys?>>>>

You don't seem to get it. You can have your moral conscience but don't expect it to carry it into the marketplace because your business will be dramatically effected. People just won't buy your goods. If you are prejudiced against any group of people you should consider this properly before you even open your doors.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Btw, I love how statist believe society and governance are the same thing. It's laughable really.








Laugh all you want while history is being made and you and the rest of the Libertarians are watching from the sidelines.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Has that been your experience, or that of your friends? I don't see this happening at all, which is why it is news.


It's been my observation.

When was the last time you say a thread on Public Accommodation laws arguing for giving a special "moral conscience" exemption for anything other then being allowed to discriminate against gay people.

Why is a claim of a personal "moral conscience" any more valid for same-sex couples any more valid then for moral conscience positions against interracial or inter-faith couples.

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

1.)What part don't you get, it goes against their religious beliefs !
2.) To force them is to violate their religious freedoms this country affords all its citizens.
3.) You don't have a problem with forcing someone to do something against their moral conscience, wtf happened to their rights?
4.) They don't deny their goods to gays, if they did that would be bigotry, but when it comes to marriage they believe it to be only recognized between a man and a woman.
5.) But like I stated earlier, if they have strong moral convictions against offering wedding cakes to gays, they simply don't have to do so in public. They can seek out the business of others who share their beliefs through private organizations. Special orders.....not offered to the public. The bakery could offer all occasion cakes or any other pastry they wish to sell to ALL people.
6.) This way they protect their business and do not have to succumb to legal battles or violate their moral conscience just to make a living.

1.) yes im aware thats what thier claim is.
2.) false nobody is forcing them, they must play by the same rules as us all, not getr special treatment they dont get to break the law or infringe on others rights. If they do that they will be CHOOSING to do that, they wont be forced.
3.) well since thats factually not happening their rights are completely intact
4.) they are still free to BELIEVE that nothing changed
5.) 100% correct
6.) no this way they dont break the law and infringe on rights, thats how they will be protecting their business lol

but you hit the nail right on the head

as a christian myself i would have to be a completely uneducated mentally retarded moron to open a businesses, get a license and think the law doesnt apply to me, that i get to break it, commit crimes and nothing is going to happen. I know what the rules and laws are that we ALL have to play by and if i break them thats MY FAULT and MY CHOICE and id have to face the consequence just like everybody else, i dont get special treatment.

If i want to protect my business i simply dont break the law and commit crimes, basic common sense. :shrug:
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

So businesses owners on Oregon can simply claim that their moral conscience means they shouldn't treat blacks (or Jews, or Mexicans, or women, or the elderly, or the mentally handicapped, or women) and they can function outside the law?


>>>>

yep seems some people support this type of bigotry and discrimination and equal rights doesnt mean anything
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

The moral conscience of Christians tends to be out of favor with many. Would they object as strongly and go to court if the baker was a Muslim? I rather doubt it.

wouldnt matter who it is, if the law is broken then you pay. Anti-discrimination laws protect us all.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Your hyperbole is over the top.

translation: you dont want to answer the question
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

It's been my observation.

When was the last time you say a thread on Public Accommodation laws arguing for giving a special "moral conscience" exemption for anything other then being allowed to discriminate against gay people.

Why is a claim of a personal "moral conscience" any more valid for same-sex couples any more valid then for moral conscience positions against interracial or inter-faith couples.

>>>>

Where was this observation made? Do you know any Gay people?
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Laugh all you want while history is being made and you and the rest of the Libertarians are watching from the sidelines.

If society is anything it is you and me and everyone else in this world. That is the society of men if such a thing exists, but government? It is nothing but a problem that plagues us and keeps us from self governance. It is almost exclusively based on a logical fallacy that we have been raised to believe and yet have little reason to. The strange thing about government all the same, is that everyone knows in their heart something is wrong with the idea, and it truly sits well with no one, and yet almost everyone accepts it. I find myself growing uneasy with the compromise I made years ago when I considered it.
 
Last edited:
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Where was this observation made?

Well I've lived in Guam, California, Tennessee, New York and Florida at various times over the last 50 years. I've also been stationed in Japan and visited Hong Kong, Singapore, Thailand, Australia, the Philippines, Diego Garcia, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain - but those are irrelevant to US laws.

I've also been on message boards since 2004, so almost a decade, of watching.

Do you know any Gay people?

As a matter of fact I do. What does that have to do with those claiming a "moral conscience" to discriminate against gays but who - in general - support Public Accommodation laws for other factors and only don't want them to apply to "the gheys"? I don't make the claim that such a position is 100%, but by personal observation it is the vast majority that want such special dispensation and have it apply to the gays.


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

1.) yes im aware thats what thier claim is.
2.) false nobody is forcing them, they must play by the same rules as us all, not getr special treatment they dont get to break the law or infringe on others rights. If they do that they will be CHOOSING to do that, they wont be forced.
3.) well since thats factually not happening their rights are completely intact
4.) they are still free to BELIEVE that nothing changed
5.) 100% correct
6.) no this way they dont break the law and infringe on rights, thats how they will be protecting their business lol

but you hit the nail right on the head

as a christian myself i would have to be a completely uneducated mentally retarded moron to open a businesses, get a license and think the law doesnt apply to me, that i get to break it, commit crimes and nothing is going to happen. I know what the rules and laws are that we ALL have to play by and if i break them thats MY FAULT and MY CHOICE and id have to face the consequence just like everybody else, i dont get special treatment.

If i want to protect my business i simply dont break the law and commit crimes, basic common sense. :shrug:

How would they be breaking any laws by not offering wedding cakes to the public? They wouldn't! And if they want to cater to private organizations the service of wedding cakes, that isn't against the law either. You state they need to play by the same rules? Well if they aren't going to offer wedding cakes to the public anymore, how are they not following the rules? And at the same time they do not violate their moral conscience. As authoritarian, liberal fascism is rising in this country, I wonder how long it will be before we start seeing ministers, priests, rabbis arrested for hate speech for teaching the traditional teachings in their religious texts that claims homosexuality is a sin.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

1.)How would they be breaking any laws by not offering wedding cakes to the public? They wouldn't! And if they want to cater to private organizations the service of wedding cakes, that isn't against the law either.

2.)You state they need to play by the same rules? Well if they aren't going to offer wedding cakes to the public anymore, how are they not following the rules? And at the same time they do not violate their moral conscience.

3.) As authoritarian, liberal fascism is rising in this country

4.), I wonder how long it will be before we start seeing ministers, priests, rabbis arrested for hate speech for teaching the traditional teachings in their religious texts that claims homosexuality is a sin.


1.)uhm? i didnt say they would maybe you should reread lol
in fact i agreed with you, notice the part that says "100% correct"

2.) correct again since i never made this claim the mistake is yours

3.) protecting equal rights has nothing and stooping illegal discrimination has nothing to do with what you just said.

4.) as long as it took for them to be arrested for saying minorities and women being lessers or denying people marriage based on race, religion or just cause they fell like it.

oh wait thats never happened because they are allowed to we have a constitution that protects them, their rights arent in any danger and i support their rights.
 
Last edited:
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

1.)uhm? i didnt say they would maybe you should reread lol
in fact i agreed with you, notice the part that says "100% correct"

2.) correct again since i never made this claim the mistake is yours

3.) protecting equal rights has nothing and stooping illegal discrimination has nothing to do with what you just said.

4.) as long as it took for them to be arrested for saying minorities and women being leasers or denying people marriage based on race, religion or just cause they fell like it.

oh wait thats never happened because they are allowed to we have a constitution that protects them, their rights arent in any danger and i support their rights.

Oh the Constitution, yes, First Amendment and all that jazz. Well if you don't support the religious rights of others to say no to a wedding cake because it violates their moral conscience, then what makes you think the rights for the ministers, priests, and rabbis whose teachings are at the heart of the moral consciences of many, will remain protected?
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Oh the Constitution, yes, First Amendment and all that jazz.

1.) Well if you don't support the religious rights of others to say no to a wedding cake because it violates their moral conscience

2.) then what makes you think the rights for the ministers, priests, and rabbis whose teachings are at the heart of the moral consciences of many, will remain protected?

1.) maybe because they are factually different and they dont have that right lol they factually do not have that right.
i support religious freedom 100% as much as i do equal rights

one is a clear infringement on others rights, illegal discrimination and denying equal rights to people so no religious rights are being infringed on.

2.) again they are already protected by the constitution and they are in no danger especially by equal right. they were in no danger when slavery ended, when woman and minorities gained equal rights protections and when interracial marriage was protected and they are in no danger now unless you know of a plan (that actually has a chance) to amended the constitution?

sorry that strawman fails
 
Back
Top Bottom