• 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!

How will the USSC rule on the Bakery vs the Gay wedding case?

How will the Supreme Court rule on the Bakery vs Gay wedding case

  • The Supreme Court will uphold the lower court ruling

    Votes: 10 30.3%

  • The Supreme Court will overturn the ruling

    Votes: 10 30.3%

  • The Supreme Court will affirm part of the lower court ruling

    Votes: 5 15.2%

  • The Supreme Court will find against the Bakery but reduce damages

    Votes: 2 6.1%

  • The Supreme Court will remand the case on some other grounds

    Votes: 2 6.1%

  • Other

    Votes: 4 12.1%
  • Total voters
    33
TurtleDude said:
and I believe that law should be overturned. and I note that the instigators of this chose him purely to create controversy. Its akin to taking a wild pig you shot to a muslim taxidermist and asking him to stuff the beast for you
Click to expand...

You nor anyone else have any evidence that the couple chose him to create controversy.
 
celticwar17 said:
Makes sense to me.

They are discriminating against the event not the people. You can refuse business to an event all you want, for any reason you want, the bakers don't mind to bake a cake for gay people, they mind to bake a cake for a gay wedding specifically(they do not agree with what deems as religious symbolism to them in the ceremony, they find it to be a violation of their beliefs).... it's the event that matters to them, not the individuals. But if you refuse business to someone because they are gay or have a certain skin color, that's illegal. If they said, because you are gay I will not sell you a cake...that is a bigger violation in my eyes...

Do you at least get the point? I'm not even sure if I agree with it now or not... but it seems you have trouble even understanding the logic lol.... which is an issue.

I said I am aware that it breaks the law to refuse service to a gay person because they are gay... I'm saying, I do not agree with the law... I think people should be free to discriminate, you should not be able to force someone to do a service they do not want to do.... I understand your argument that when someone engages in public exchange that they mus abide by laws...I am saying I do not agree with the law... I don't agree that someone can be forced to do a service they do not want to do in order to stay in business or fear being shot at by the government. But since that is the law... people certainly should abide by them..
Click to expand...

Actually this isn't true. For example, if two people come into the baker and ask for a Christmas cake for a Christmas party and Holiday Celebration respectfully, one identifying as Christian and the other as Muslim, the baker cannot agree to make a Christmas cake for the Christmas party but refuse to make the same Christmas cake for a Holiday party, regardless of which is attending which. That is discrimination, whether the baker is claiming that it is only because the cake would be used at a "Holiday party" rather than a Christmas party. He can refuse to write "Holiday Party" on the cake, but he cannot refuse to make the same (or close to the same) cake for two different people based on that reasoning legally.
 
TurtleDude said:
Yeah-Ok :roll:
Click to expand...

So do you have evidence of such? Im also curious why it matters one bit?

Are you suggesting if you know a person is going to break the law to just let them? or if you knew they were going to they are no longer guilty? If a woman finds out her boss probably wont promote her should she just not apply? A minority? A christian? "IF" so where else would you apply that logic.

If i know a part of town is bad and I drive through it anyway if somebody attempts to mug me or car jack me does that make it fine? NOT saying you are claiming that but that is the same logic. It doesnt work
 
mg2514 said:
How does this have nothing to do with Christianity, a large part of the Christian population believe that marriage is between a man and a woman and he obviously advocates for that. I'm not supporting his views I'm just trying to say that it obviously has to do with religion. Also I don't believe calling him an asshole is a correct claim. He wasn't rude to the gay couple, he didn't scream get out of my shop you Fag**. He simply said I won't make a wedding cake to you due to my religious beliefs, but I will sell you something else in the store, just not a wedding cake. I personally think him not wanting to sell to a gay couple is wrong, and his life would've been a hell of a lot easier these past 5 years if he didn't deny them service but I believe he is entitled to his opinion and he will reap the effects of it.
Click to expand...

I couldn't care less what they think. Beliefs don't make you right. There was a time when a large percentage of people thought the earth was flat. They were all wrong. Their beliefs were irrelevant. People need to understand that their religion has to stay at the door when they go to work, whether they like it or not. They are accountable to the law and to society and if they don't like the requirements that having a business license brings, they'd better not voluntarily get a business license.

This can't be that hard. These people need to rent a clue and join reality. They can believe in their imaginary friends on their own time. Business time isn't it.
 
AGENT J said:
So do you have evidence of such? Im also curious why it matters one bit?

Are you suggesting if you know a person is going to break the law to just let them? or if you knew they were going to they are no longer guilty? If a woman finds out her boss probably wont promote her should she just not apply? A minority? A christian? "IF" so where else would you apply that logic.

If i know a part of town is bad and I drive through it anyway if somebody attempts to mug me or car jack me does that make it fine? NOT saying you are claiming that but that is the same logic. It doesnt work
Click to expand...

I don't have any use for what the plaintiffs did. they knew that the baker wouldn't serve them and I don't think he should have to. why didn't they go to a baker they knew would. I get tired of people looking to be offended I think a business should have the absolute right to serve or not serve whomever they please. The only laws I see as legitimate are ones that prevent bar or gun store being prohibited from selling to minors or similar things like that
 
TurtleDude said:
1.) I don't have any use for what the plaintiffs did. they knew that the baker wouldn't serve them and I don't think he should have to.
2.) why didn't they go to a baker they knew would. I get tired of people looking to be offended I think a business should have the absolute right to serve or not serve whomever they please. The only laws I see as legitimate are ones that prevent bar or gun store being prohibited from selling to minors or similar things like that
Click to expand...

1.) I didnt ask you any of that.

I asked you IF you have evidence and since you didnt provided any Im guess you dont
I asked why it would matter to law even if true you didnt answer that but the answer is, it doesnt matter :shrug:

2.) why should they have too? why doest a women who gets raped just not go to that bar any more or walk down that alley, how about the guy that got robbed something. Guy that gets his car stolen, just dont buy nice stuff and park it out side. Sorry but that logic is VERY piss poor and all it suggests is that people should NOT defend themselves stand up for themselves and they should let others break the law . . .no thanks. DO you get tired of the girls dressing slutty too? or the guy with a nice suit? nice car? etc etc if not seems VERY inconstant to me. What these people are ACTUALLY looking for is for people NOT to break the law.

3.) i also asked where else do you apply that terrible logic but you chose not to answer that too. Im guessing because like your other points its not really defendable. You are free to feel how you do of course its not really supportable.
 
AGENT J said:
1.) I didnt ask you any of that.

I asked you IF you have evidence and since you didnt provided any Im guess you dont
I asked why it would matter to law even if true you didnt answer that but the answer is, it doesnt matter :shrug:

2.) why should they have too? why doest a women who gets raped just not go to that bar any more or walk down that alley, how about the guy that got robbed something. Guy that gets his car stolen, just dont buy nice stuff and park it out side. Sorry but that logic is VERY piss poor and all it suggests is that people should NOT defend themselves stand up for themselves and they should let others break the law . . .no thanks. DO you get tired of the girls dressing slutty too? or the guy with a nice suit? nice car? etc etc if not seems VERY inconstant to me. What these people are ACTUALLY looking for is for people NOT to break the law.

3.) i also asked where else do you apply that terrible logic but you chose not to answer that too. Im guessing because like your other points its not really defendable. You are free to feel how you do of course its not really supportable.
Click to expand...

I believe the constitutional right of association should trump lesser laws
 
TurtleDude said:
I believe the constitutional right of association should trump lesser laws
Click to expand...
AGAIN that doesnt answer any of my questions NOT ONE.

also That right is fully intact since these people CHOOSE to open their pubic accommodation business and AGREE to the laws, rules and regulations that governed it. nobody forced them to open that type of business. What if they didnt want to associate with the health code inspectors would that fly? nope.
 
AGENT J said:
AGAIN that doesnt answer any of my questions NOT ONE.

also That right is fully intact since these people CHOOSE to open their pubic accommodation business and AGREE to the laws, rules and regulations that governed it. nobody forced them to open that type of business. What if they didnt want to associate with the health code inspectors would that fly? nope.
Click to expand...

I don't you are getting the point I am making.
 
TurtleDude said:
I don't you are getting the point I am making.
Click to expand...

more questions no answered!

I understand how you "feel" but so far thats all you shared, you think people should be allowed to discriminate for any reason they want. Im very thankful thats not the case and that our country has laws and rights that protect us from such nonsense and keep us muc more civil and in unity. Everything you presented (they did it on purpose, association rights, go somewhere else) completely failed and doesn't hold water.
 
AGENT J said:
I understand how you "feel" but so far thats all you shared, you think people should be allowed to discriminate for any reason they want. Im very thankful thats not the case and that our country has laws and rights that protect us from such nonsense and keep us muc more civil and in unity. Everything you presented (they did it on purpose, association rights, go somewhere else) completely failed and doesn't hold water.
Click to expand...
I don't agree with that amount of governmental control. I don't support discrimination but I think government has become too big
 
TurtleDude said:
I don't agree with that amount of governmental control. I don't support discrimination but I think government has become too big
Click to expand...

I dont like the size of government either but this specif case doesnt bother me at all. in fact I want sexual orientation to be protected nationally. In this specific case you cant have it both ways :shrug:
Ill take this any day of the week to help promote a civil, fair and inclusive society (By choice mind you nobody HAS to have a public access business) over mayhem and bigots allowed to affect peoples daily life and **** on their rights.

Yes sometimes it maybe me something minor like not being sold gum and if the patron WISHES to turn the other cheek he may but if he doesnt . . to bad, idiots shouldnt break the laws they AGREED to follow. But in some cases it could be huge and even be life or death. The hell with the ill error on the side of caution and have the law protects us ALL and have it that we ALL play by the same rules.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom