• 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]

AGENT J said:
nope :shrug:

the law is not allowing the business owner to illegal discriminate, break the law and violate peoples rights

but again please post your OPINION, FANTASIES and PHILOSOPHIES and spin it anyway you like, facts will defeat them every time
Click to expand...

Wow, you do a wonderful job at skating around an argument, but a piss poor job of hiding it.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Mason66 said:
The more you throw it in my face the less I give a **** about what gays do or don't do.

They can do whatever they want in their bedrooms.

I don't think sexual orientation should be a protected class. Where did that idea even come from?
Click to expand...


Have you seen gays having sex on the streets? I havent. Nor have I seen straight people doing so.

Sex has as much to do with gay relationships as it does with straight ones....it is only one part...and the longer the relationship, the less it matters (generally).

Do you look at straight couples and imagine them having sex? Is that what you think when you look at them? About their sex lives? Yes? (ew). No? Then why do so with gay couples?
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

CriticalThought said:
In this hypothetical, would the state be prohibited from discriminating? People who argue that businesses should be free to discriminate do so on the basis that the government would not be free to discriminate. Segregation and apartheid were primarily government policies and were enforced by law.
Click to expand...

Uhhh, I guess the government would be neutral in this scenario. The point is about allowing individuals to discriminate on their private property per "freedom".
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Mason66 said:
1.)The more you throw it in my face
2.)the less I give a **** about what gays do or don't do.
3.)They can do whatever they want in their bedrooms.
4.)I don't think sexual orientation should be a protected class. Where did that idea even come from?
Click to expand...

1.) its not thrown in your face
2.) good your not supposed to care its not your businesses what other Americans do as long as they arent breaking the law or infringing on your rights, good job!
3.) they already do
4.) your opinion is meanignless its worthy just like race, religion, gender etc
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Henrin said:
So white straight men would be a protected class? :lol:
Click to expand...

Not in that scenario, you would be discriminated against. How would you feel?
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Henrin said:
Wow, you do a wonderful job at skating around an argument, but a piss poor job of hiding it.
Click to expand...

there has to actually be a legit and factual argument first, your post didnt provide one. I have no interest in talking OPINION, FANTASIES and PHILOSOPHIES when facts are being discussed.

But please try to make this about me, use more deflections and failed insults im sure that will help the lack of a legit and factual argument in your post.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Mason66 said:
As was pointed out before, who would want to eat a cake from a baker that was forced to bake that cake?

There seems to be a lot of mental instability going on in cases like these.
Click to expand...

You know, this would have probably been a better strategy in the long run. Make the cakes for the gay couple, just don't make a good cakes; make one that just isn't made well. The patrons to the wedding, probably mostly gay, would not bother to purchase items from an establishment who's products are inferior.

At the same time, bake and sell the good cakes to the straight people.

After all, there's no law against being a bad cook. :lamo
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

AGENT J said:
there has to actually be a legit and factual argument first, your post didnt provide one. I have no interest in talking OPINION, FANTASIES and PHILOSOPHIES when facts are being discussed.

But please try to make this about me, use more deflections and failed insults im sure that will help the lack of a legit and factual argument in your post.
Click to expand...

Is that why you didn't even try to counter my argument? :lol:
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Henrin said:
Is that why you didn't even try to counter my argument? :lol:
Click to expand...
still got no argument huh? i didnt think so

again there was no legit and factual argument, that has to be one first, cant counter something that doesn't exist, let me know when you can post one, a real and factual one
not your OPINION, FANTASIES and PHILOSOPHIES that nobody cares about
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

AGENT J said:
still got no argument huh? i didnt think so

again there was no legit and factual argument, that has to be one first, cant counter something that doesn't exist, let me know when you can post one, a real and factual one
not your OPINION, FANTASIES and PHILOSOPHIES that nobody cares about
Click to expand...

I already provided my argument. You just think you don't have to counter it.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Henrin said:
The right to force people to associate with you.
The right to get service from other people against their will.
The right to enter property that is not your own.
The right to use resources that are not your own.

Do I have it about covered on this "equal" rights argument of yours?

I still can't help to laugh at people believing there is a such thing as a public business. :lo
Click to expand...
l:
Click to expand...




It's not just 'people'. In Heart of Atlanta Motel Inc. v. United States, 379 U.S. 241 (1964) The U.S. Supreme Court held that the U.S. Congress could use the Constitution's Commerce Clause power to force private businesses to abide by the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Read more here: Heart - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You might want to read about the case several times so that you don't forget it. It throws a lot of Libertarian ideas about property rights in the trash can.

Deal with it.




"Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself." ~ Robert Green Ingersoll
 
Last edited:
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

shrubnose said:
It's not just 'people'. In Heart of Atlanta Motel Inc. v. United States, 379 U.S. 241 (1964) The U.S. Supreme Court held that the U.S. Congress could use the Constitution's Commerce Clause power to force private businesses to abide by the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Read more here: Heart - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

So there is a trade dispute between the listed members? So businesses and customers are listed in the commerce clause? :lol:
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Henrin said:
1.)I already provided my argument.
2.)You just think you don't have to counter it.
Click to expand...

1.) im sure you believe that but it wasnt a factual legit argument
2.) no, i know this fact because you cant counter what doesnt exist


again there was no legit and factual argument, let me know when you can post one, a real and factual one
not your OPINION, FANTASIES and PHILOSOPHIES which are not arguments against facts and which nobody cares about
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

AGENT J said:
1.) im sure you believe that but it wasnt a factual legit argument
2.) no, i know this fact because you cant counter what doesnt exist


again there was no legit and factual argument, let me know when you can post one, a real and factual one
not your OPINION, FANTASIES and PHILOSOPHIES which are not arguments against facts and which nobody cares about
Click to expand...

Cute. I make an argument and instead of actually countering the argument you think you can just declare it's not legitimate and thus not worth your efforts. There is a way to use this debating trick and win, but that isn't the way you are using it. Then again, when you are caught using it there is no way you can win the debate.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Henrin said:
So there is a trade dispute between the listed members? So businesses and customers are listed in the commerce clause?
Click to expand...
 :lol:
Click to expand...




Those who get taken to court for violating the 1964 Civil Rights Act are not smiling and they definitely don't leave court laughing.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

shrubnose said:
Those who get taken to court for violating the 1964 Civil Rights Act are not smiling and they definitely don't leave court laughing.
Click to expand...

Sorry, was that supposed to make the courts argument correct and somehow make the commerce clause apply to business and consumer relations?
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

AGENT J said:
1.) im sure you believe that but it wasnt a factual legit argument
2.) no, i know this fact because you cant counter what doesnt exist


again there was no legit and factual argument, let me know when you can post one, a real and factual one
not your OPINION, FANTASIES and PHILOSOPHIES which are not arguments against facts and which nobody cares about
Click to expand...

Henrin said:
Cute. I make an argument and instead of actually countering the argument you think you can just declare it's not legitimate and thus not worth your efforts. There is a way to use this debating trick and win, but that isn't the way you are using it. Then again, when you are caught using it there is no way you can win the debate.
Click to expand...

Moderator's Warning:
Ok, you guys are at an end here. You haven't added to the discussion in several posts. Stop the ping-pong match and baiting. Move on.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Henrin said:
Cute. I make an argument and instead of actually countering the argument you think you can just declare it's not legitimate and thus not worth your efforts.
2.) There is a way to use this debating trick and win, but that isn't the way you are using it. Then again, when you are caught using it there is no way you can win the debate.
Click to expand...

1.) you can call it what ever you want but you didn't make a legit argument it was all OPINION, FANTASIES and PHILOSOPHIES on a discussion based on facts. Recapping this fact wont change it.
2.) theres nothing to "win" this isnt about winning vs losing, facts disagree with your OPINION, FANTASIES and PHILOSOPHIES has nothgin t to do with me no matter how much you want it to

again there was no legit and factual argument, let me know when you can post one, a real and factual one
not your OPINION, FANTASIES and PHILOSOPHIES which are not arguments against facts and which nobody cares about
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Gina said:
Moderator's Warning:
Ok, you guys are at an end here. You haven't added to the discussion in several posts. Stop the ping-pong match and baiting. Move on.
Click to expand...

I agree 100% and sorry i missed this post
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Look at the post right above yours Agent. This conversion is done.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Henrin said:
Sorry, was that supposed to make the courts argument correct and somehow make the commerce clause apply to business and consumer relations
Click to expand...
?
Click to expand...




If you would go to the link that I provided and do a little reading you would learn that the U.S. Supreme Court required the Heart of Atlanta Motel to receive business from clientele of all races.

IOW the court threw the Libertarians property rights ideas in the trash can.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

digsbe said:
The bigotry lies in forcing someone to go against their beliefs via their private business to provide you with a service for something they believe is wrong.

This goes beyond gay "rights" and gets into bullying through the courts.
Click to expand...

It will probably make its way to higher courts.

Insisting someone has to use their labor and materials to sell something is wrong. It has nothing to do with Gay Rights and everything to do with the rights of the individual. The market will decide.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

shrubnose said:
If you would go to the link that I provided and do a little reading you would learn that the U.S. Supreme Court required the Heart of Atlanta Motel to receive business from clientele of all races.

IOW the court threw the Libertarians property rights ideas in the trash can.
Click to expand...

I'm aware of the case. While it is true they showed no understanding of the commerce clause, what was perhaps worse is that they also showed themselves to have no understanding of slavery. For some reason they thought it was wise to suggest that only chattel slavery exists, which is of course nonsense. They attempted to be dishonest, but I fear they also came off as retarded.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Grant said:
It will probably make its way to higher courts.

Insisting someone has to use their labor and materials to sell something is wrong. It has nothing to do with Gay Rights and everything to do with the rights of the individual. The market will decide.
Click to expand...

It is basically throwing the entire concept of rights in the trash and only valuing slavery.
 
Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

Henrin said:
I'm aware of the case. While it is true they showed no understanding of the commerce clause, what was perhaps worse is that they also showed themselves to have no understanding of slavery. For some reason they thought it was wise to suggest that only chattel slavery exists, which is of course nonsense. They attempted to be dishonest, but I fear they also came off as retarded.
Click to expand...




The case that I cited was decided 49 years ago.

Since then most people in the USA accept the 1964 Civil Rights Act as settled law.

But a few people still try to swim upstream.

Not my problem.




"Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself." ~ Robert Green Ingersoll
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom