Page 201 of 214 FirstFirst ... 101151191199200201202203211 ... LastLast
Results 2,001 to 2,010 of 2133

Thread: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed[W:1581]

  1. #2001
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:21 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,578

    Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    If it is for the direct benefit of someone else.
    So if you're forced to bake a cake for a gay wedding that doesn't want your cake, it's no longer servitude?

  2. #2002
    Temp Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    58,111

    Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    The other side of the coin is that there must be a compelling state interest before religious freedoms can be abridged. Negation of religious freedom is not a given.
    There is no such thing as a compelling state interest. The state does not have interests of its own and these so called interests are not protected by the constitution. In fact, they are not even mentioned.

  3. #2003
    Temp Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    58,111

    Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    So if you're forced to bake a cake for a gay wedding that doesn't want your cake, it's no longer servitude?
    What? If I'm forced to make a cake for your benefit I'm an involuntary servant.

  4. #2004
    Temp Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    58,111

    Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

    Quote Originally Posted by Paperview View Post
    More, from a rude pundit on that case, and the Scalia majority ruling (which has a direct line to today's RFRA's):

    <snip>
    "And that's because it was designed to undo the ****ery of the Supreme Court in a couple of cases, most specifically the 1990 decision in Employment Division v Smith. In the 6-3 majority's decision, the Court held that the state of Oregon could deny unemployment benefits to two drug counselors who had been fired because they had taken peyote as part of a Native American religious ceremony.

    The Court especially had issue with the idea that the state might not have a "compelling interest" in using drug laws against the two men. Said the Court, "If the 'compelling interest' test is to be applied at all, then, it must be applied across the board, to all actions thought to be religiously commanded.

    Moreover, if 'compelling interest' really means what it says (and watering it down here would subvert its rigor in the other fields where it is applied), many laws will not meet the test.

    Any society adopting such a system would be courting anarchy, but that danger increases in direct proportion to the society's diversity of religious beliefs, and its determination to coerce or suppress none of them. Precisely because 'we are a cosmopolitan nation made up of people of almost every conceivable religious preference'...

    and precisely because we value and protect that religious divergence, we cannot afford the luxury of deeming presumptively invalid, as applied to the religious objector, every regulation of conduct that does not protect an interest of the highest order. The rule respondents favor would open the prospect of constitutionally required religious exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind."


    The decision goes on to list these obligations, like "compulsory military service," "health and safety regulation such as manslaughter and child neglect laws" even minimum wage laws. In some ways, the decision makes a great deal of sense. It's just in the case of the Smith defendants, the overreach is kind of stunning.

    By the way, you know who wrote this decision that smacked down religion as a reason to violate laws? Antonin Scalia."

    The Rude Pundit: History Lesson for Assholes: Bill Clinton Is Not Your Religious "Freedom" Tool
    The court defending itself with an argument that has no constitutional basis is pretty pathetic. So can any of these judges tell me where the constitution mentions the existence of a compelling state interest? No, because they made it up.

  5. #2005
    Sage
    Paperview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    The Road Less Travelled
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,898

    Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

    This is what real involuntary servitude looks like:





    Letting Tony and Lakeisha eat hamburgers in your roadway diner to eat as every other law abiding customer -- [X] Not

  6. #2006
    Temp Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    58,111

    Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

    Quote Originally Posted by Paperview View Post
    This is what real involuntary servitude looks like:





    Letting Tony and Lakeisha eat hamburgers in your roadway diner to eat as every other law abiding customer -- [X] Not
    If I'm forced to serve someone I am very much their involuntary servant.

  7. #2007
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:21 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,578

    Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    What? If I'm forced to make a cake for your benefit I'm an involuntary servant.
    First.. lets call a spade a spade. Involuntary servitude is slavery.
    Involuntary servitude - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    So, your definition of slavery is being forced to do something you don't want to do, which benefits someone else.

    Things that are slavery:
    Caring for your children.
    Being a child.
    Going to school.
    Following traffic laws.
    Meeting contractual obligations.

  8. #2008
    Sage
    Paperview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    The Road Less Travelled
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,898

    Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    First.. lets call a spade a spade. Involuntary servitude is slavery.
    Involuntary servitude - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    So, your definition of slavery is being forced to do something you don't want to do, which benefits someone else.

    Things that are slavery:
    Caring for your children.
    Being a child.
    Going to school.
    Following traffic laws.
    Meeting contractual obligations.
    That idiocy was tried in the landmark case Heart of Atlanta Motel v US -- where the hotel owner claimed renting rooms to blacks put him in a position of involuntary servitude - violating his Thirteenth Amendment rights. Ha!

    The Justices didn't buy it, and ruled 9-0.

    One of a number of cases the CRA was found to be Constitutional.

  9. #2009
    Temp Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    58,111

    Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

    Quote Originally Posted by Paperview View Post
    That idiocy was tried in the landmark case Heart of Atlanta Motel v US -- where the hotel owner claimed renting rooms to blacks put him in a position of involuntary servitude - violating his Thirteenth Amendment rights. Ha!

    The Justices didn't buy it, and ruled 9-0.
    One of a number of cases the CRA was found to be Constitutional.
    So nine idiots couldn't bring themselves to admit the law is involuntary servitude. So what?

  10. #2010
    Temp Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    58,111

    Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    First.. lets call a spade a spade. Involuntary servitude is slavery.
    Involuntary servitude - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    So, your definition of slavery is being forced to do something you don't want to do, which benefits someone else.

    Things that are slavery:
    Caring for your children.
    Being a child.
    Going to school.
    Following traffic laws.
    Meeting contractual obligations.
    Involuntary servitude is a United States legal and constitutional term for a person laboring against that person's will to benefit another, under some form of coercion other than the worker's financial needs.
    Forcing someone to make a cake for someone else is involuntary servitude even according to your link.

Posting Permissions

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