• 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:113:123:292:647

dolphinocean said:
FYI, wedding cake isn't an individual or a group, disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, or ancestry. So, your argument is absurd.

If a customer walks into a muslim bakery and demand to have a cake frosted with a caricature of the prophet mohammad with a bomb sitting on his head using whatever are in stock, would that be ok for the judge to compel the muslim baker to bake the customer a terrorist depicting mohammad caricature cake?

And like I said, the ruling cuts both ways.
Click to expand...

Another bad analogy. Now if the gay couple wanted a wedding cake with naked men on it with erect penises....your analogy might fit. But that isn't the case here. Again, nobody was asking the Baker to produce anything other than that which he normally produced in the course of business.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

Ikari said:
And nobody is entitled to what that baker bakes.
Click to expand...

Of course, Ikari...we all know that you believe that the big bad government is going to storm the bakery with their guns drawn and place it to the bakers head....lol.....
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

disneydude said:
Of course, Ikari...we all know that you believe that the big bad government is going to storm the bakery with their guns drawn and place it to the bakers head....lol.....
Click to expand...

They certainly will fine, jail, arrest, them if they should resist. All government force is ultimately backed by the gun. Try not complying, let me know what happens (of course you won't, because you know what happens, you just don't want to admit what your argument endorses).
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

disneydude said:
Another bad analogy. Now if the gay couple wanted a wedding cake with naked men on it with erect penises....your analogy might fit. But that isn't the case here. Again, nobody was asking the Baker to produce anything other than that which he normally produced in the course of business.
Click to expand...
It's not bad analogy. If I as a professional or artist wished to take pictures of women's bodies, whether naked or not it is my right to serve only the ladies and not the men gay or straight naked or not.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

Ikari said:
Why do you people keep thinking this is some secret catch.

Private is private, a private business can deny its business to anyone, you have no right to another man's property or labor. Instead of government force, you need to employ intelligent consumerism to elicit the necessary changes in local business.
Click to expand...

Then you think that it is wrong that restaurants have to serve people that they may not want to... likes black people in the South.
A business owner of a restaurant should be able to discriminate... that is what you are saying?
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

Bodhisattva said:
Then you think that it is wrong that restaurants have to serve people that they may not want to... likes black people in the South.
A business owner of a restaurant should be able to discriminate... that is what you are saying?
Click to expand...

It's spelled out for you in that post you quoted. It can be made no clearer than that.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

disneydude said:
No it isn't at all. It would be more akin to a muslim caterer refusing service of a product that he normally produces every day to a non-muslim custom, simply because they aren't muslim. Your analogy is completely off-base. Nobody is asking this baker to bake anything other than that which he normally produces in the course of business.
Click to expand...
Asking a baker to frost an image of mohammed is no difference to asking him to bake an image of Santa Claus or anything. There's no law that says others. You are just being contra.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

dolphinocean said:
No, I did not change the argument. You refused to concede the point.

Where did I even state about NOT "to serve the ANY FEMALE customer that wants your service of taking or painting portraits of beautiful bodies of gorgeous young ladies be she white, black or lesbian"?

And where did I state that the muslim baker only baked religious cakes?

You said, the muslim baker is "required to make one of Mohammed". Do you know what this is going to cause world wide? Isamic bloodbath.
Click to expand...

You didn't make a point since you are setting up terrible, illogical analogies.

The baker in Colorado baked "Wedding Cakes... not penis's. Your photographer took pictures of "lovely females"... not naked people. The analogy has to be equal on both sides. If the baker bakes wedding cakes he must bake wedding cakes to whomever wants one. If a lesbian wants her picture taken your photographer must take her picture within the same context as the non-lesbian ones. If she wants to be naked the photographer can legally say no, of course.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

dolphinocean said:
Asking a baker to frost an image of mohammed is no difference to asking him to bake an image of Santa Claus or anything. There's no law that says others. You are just being contra.
Click to expand...

You seem to have no concept of what a logical analogy is... no offence intended.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

Ikari said:
It's spelled out for you in that post you quoted. It can be made no clearer than that.
Click to expand...

Just trying to be crystal clear... well, then you are 100% wrong. Nothing more to discuss really.

You are for discrimination.

That is truly sad to hear.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

Bodhisattva said:
Just trying to be crystal clear... well, then you are 100% wrong. Nothing more to discuss really.

You are for discrimination.

That is truly sad to hear.
Click to expand...

I am not for discrimination. Never claimed I would support it, in fact several times in this thread I specifically stated I would not.

You have any other nuggets of dishonest argument you want to make to try to deflect from an actual debate?
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

dolphinocean said:
Asking a baker to frost an image of mohammed is no difference to asking him to bake an image of Santa Claus or anything. There's no law that says others. You are just being contra.
Click to expand...

You are completely missing the point, which is why your analogies are so bad and completely off point. No one in this case is asking the baker to bake a product that they don't otherwise bake in the course of their business. The issue isn't asking him to bake something different, the issue is whether he has a right to refuse service of a product that he otherwise normally provides, to customers that he doesn't like. The Court said no.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

Ikari said:
I am not for discrimination. Never claimed I would support it, in fact several times in this thread I specifically stated I would not.

You have any other nuggets of dishonest argument you want to make to try to deflect from an actual debate?
Click to expand...

You have specifically stated in this thread numerous times that you do support a business's right to discriminate. WTF are you talking about! :lol:

If you are for a business's right to discriminate against people then you are for discrimination. There really is no way around that fact. Throw out all the disclaimers you like.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

disneydude said:
You are completely missing the point, which is why your analogies are so bad and completely off point. No one in this case is asking the baker to bake a product that they don't otherwise bake in the course of their business. The issue isn't asking him to bake something different, the issue is whether he has a right to refuse service of a product that he otherwise normally provides, to customers that he doesn't like. The Court said no.
Click to expand...

He doesn't get analogies... as you and I are both finding out.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

Bodhisattva said:
You have specifically stated in this thread numerous times that you do support a business's right to discriminate. WTF are you talking about! :lol:

If you are for a business's right to discriminate against people then you are for discrimination. There really is no way around that fact. Throw out all the disclaimers you like.
Click to expand...

No, that's not true in the least. That is not fact. Quit making idiotic arguments. I am against the use of government force against the individuals' property and labor, I have most certainly argued for consumer force instead. Saying that government force is inappropriate against an act is not endorsement of the act. And this is where you fail.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

disneydude said:
No it isn't at all. It would be more akin to a muslim caterer refusing service of a product that he normally produces every day to a non-muslim custom, simply because they aren't muslim. Your analogy is completely off-base. Nobody is asking this baker to bake anything other than that which he normally produces in the course of business.
Click to expand...
Another point I wanted to address but had to leave for a while, you said: "Nobody is asking this baker to bake anything other than that which he normally produces in the course of business."

But, the gay customers and the judge did. What the baker in question normally produces in the course of business is wedding cakes for heterosexual weddings and not gay weddings.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

Ikari said:
No, that's not true in the least. That is not fact. Quit making idiotic arguments. I am against the use of government force against the individuals' property and labor, I have most certainly argued for consumer force instead. Saying that government force is inappropriate against an act is not endorsement of the act. And this is where you fail.
Click to expand...

All that does is ignore discrimination and say, "hey, I don't support it. If others don't shut the business down with their wallets then at least I tried". There are areas where people will be discriminated against. I then guess you expect people to move away? All the minority blacks in the South are screwed? No, this is where your logic fails.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

Bodhisattva said:
All that does is ignore discrimination and say, "hey, I don't support it. If others don't shut the business down with their wallets then at least I tried". There are areas where people will be discriminated against. I then guess you expect people to move away? All the minority blacks in the South are screwed? No, this is where your logic fails.
Click to expand...

It in fact does not ignore discrimination. I can't force other people to spend their money in ways I feel fit, but I can certainly assemble, protest, and boycott; raise awareness and consumer action. The fact is that without these laws, even in the south, race specific businesses would be exceptionally limited.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

dolphinocean said:
Another point I wanted to address but had to leave for a while, you said: "Nobody is asking this baker to bake anything other than that which he normally produces in the course of business."

But, the gay customers and the judge did. What the baker in question normally produces in the course of business is wedding cake for heterosexual couples and not gay wedding.
Click to expand...

So if a black couple came in and the baker had never made a wedding cake for blacks because none lived in the are you feel it is perfectly acceptable for the baker to say, "hey, I only bake "wedding cakes for white people"?
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

Ikari said:
It in fact does not ignore discrimination. I can't force other people to spend their money in ways I feel fit, but I can certainly assemble, protest, and boycott; raise awareness and consumer action. The fact is that without these laws, even in the south, race specific businesses would be exceptionally limited.
Click to expand...

Before the laws? Rampant discrimination and no consequences.
After the laws? Extremely low levels of discrimination with pretty severe consequences.

No... it really does ignore discrimination.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

disneydude said:
You are completely missing the point, which is why your analogies are so bad and completely off point. No one in this case is asking the baker to bake a product that they don't otherwise bake in the course of their business. The issue isn't asking him to bake something different, the issue is whether he has a right to refuse service of a product that he otherwise normally provides, to customers that he doesn't like. The Court said no.
Click to expand...
But you're making an argument based on false premise.

The baker clearly stated to the court that he was willing to bake birthday cakes, baby shower cakes for the gay couples, just not their wedding which was against his religious belief. Therefore, it has nothing to do with his like or dislike of the customers.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

Bodhisattva said:
So if a black couple came in and the baker had never made a wedding cake for blacks because none lived in the are you feel it is perfectly acceptable for the baker to say, "hey, I only bake "wedding cakes for white people"?
Click to expand...
But there is no religious ground or any other basis for the refusal other than their skin color. The baker in this case has a legitimate religious basis.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

dolphinocean said:
Another point I wanted to address but had to leave for a while, you said: "Nobody is asking this baker to bake anything other than that which he normally produces in the course of business."

But, the gay customers and the judge did. What the baker in question normally produces in the course of business is wedding cakes for heterosexual weddings and not gay weddings.
Click to expand...

No. The product that the baker normally produces is a wedding cake, period. He wanted to be able to discriminate on only sell them to heterosexuals. Understand now? You are misconstruing the product with the business practice.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

Bodhisattva said:
You didn't make a point since you are setting up terrible, illogical analogies.

The baker in Colorado baked "Wedding Cakes... not penis's. Your photographer took pictures of "lovely females"... not naked people. The analogy has to be equal on both sides. If the baker bakes wedding cakes he must bake wedding cakes to whomever wants one. If a lesbian wants her picture taken your photographer must take her picture within the same context as the non-lesbian ones. If she wants to be naked the photographer can legally say no, of course.
Click to expand...
I said bodies of the beautiful ladies. Other the other side of the coin would be about male bodies. I didn't say anything about genitals so why would you talk about penises?
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647

Bodhisattva said:
Before the laws? Rampant discrimination and no consequences.
After the laws? Extremely low levels of discrimination with pretty severe consequences.

No... it really does ignore discrimination.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. It just puts the responsibility unto the People. Government acts to prevent violations of right, and there was plenty of discrimination prior that violated rights. Government force may rightfully be used in those situations to remove the discrimination. But in this case it's cake. In this case we're talking individual business and you don't have a right to another man's property and labor. Ergo, government force is not appropriate. It thus falls upon our shoulders to uphold the morality of society and we must execute informed and intelligent consumerism along with social activism to push for change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom