Masterpiece Cakeshop owner in court again for denying LGBTQ customer

[Lisa]

I'm curious, do you consider it immoral if a white man discriminates against black women in the dating/sex/marriage market? Dating and sex is based on reciprocity, more so than exchanging a few dollars for a cake. It's also a much more important thing in life than buying something at a store.

How can they discriminate in the dating market? A personal bias on a date isn't discrimination. Discrimination about about the denial of legal rights. Its not illegal to be a racist dirtball.

 

[aociswundumho]

How can they discriminate in the dating market?

By refusing to date certain people because of their race. It's no different, in principle than refusing to do business with certain people because of their race.

A personal bias on a date isn't discrimination.

Of course it is. All biases are personal:

noun: discrimination

1. the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex.
​

Anyway, you didn't answer the question: do you consider it immoral if a white man discriminates against black women in the dating/sex/marriage market?

 

[Lisa]

By refusing to date certain people because of their race. It's no different, in principle than refusing to do business with certain people because of their race.



Of course it is. All biases are personal:

noun: discrimination

1. the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex.
​

Anyway, you didn't answer the question: do you consider it immoral if a white man discriminates against black women in the dating/sex/marriage market?

A date or a romantic relationship is not a legal right, unlike equal service in a business that is required to abide by the public accommodation protections.

Treating another is as less than equal to someone else in a romantic relationship might be immoral but it isn't illegal. A relationship isn't a market. You don't pay for a date as you would a product.

 

[marke]

lol. Right wingers want us to believe a for-profit baker is worried about the greater glory of our immortal souls in public accommodation, on a for Profit basis? Maximizing profits is what that for-profit baker should be doing. If that baker was actually worried about the greater glory of our immortal souls, that baker would be operating on a not-for-the-profit-of-Lucre-over-morals basis.

Augustinian, Benedictine, and Carmelite bread should be more moral.

It does not matter whether we make a profit or not or whether we are persecuted for our beliefs or not we must obey God rather then men.

 

[marke]

It is about profit not morals in public accommodation. The customer has First Amendment protection from "Baker's Morals" even though baker's dozen is a baker's concept.

That Capitalist has a obligation to maximize profit at the expense of morals under Capitalism on a for-profit basis. It is not illegal.

According to sexually perverted fascist socialists, the feelings of homosexuals take pecedence over the religious rights of Christians in business.

 

[marke]

Nobody is asking the baker to agree with the speech or actions of his customers. This is your biggest hurdle.

No leftist atheist fascist democrat socialist is listening to the religious concerns of a Christian baker who cannot do anything publicly which would appear to others to give the impression he is OK with homosexual perversion. Now if the homosexuals had just kept quiet about their perversion they they would have been able to buy a cake with no problem, but that was not on the homosexual agenda. They did not want a cake from another baker and they did not want to keep their homosexuality out of it. They were targeting the Christian for his religious beliefs and determined to hurt him if he did not repent of his beliefs in Bible doctrine.

 

[marke]

Nobody is even asking him to change his religious views. The law does not care of he agrees with the customer because that agreement is irrelevant. The law didn't require Maurice Bessinger to agree with equal rights for black people when he served this in his BBQ joint. You're adding something that isn't part of the service equation. He has the right to hate the customer and everything that he stands for, but he can't refuse equal service.

He can refuse service to anyone he likes, in a free country. But in the democrat socialist states of the USSA the atheistic fascists do not allow Christians to expose their religious beliefs in public.

If a racist KKK skinhead wants a cake to celebrate the assassin of MLK the atheist democrat socialists will not allow that, but if a sex pervert wants a cake to commemorate his sex change operation giving him unlimited access to girls' shower rooms on American college campuses then the socialist thugs will jail him and destroy his business if he does not comply.

 

[marke]

I'm curious, do you consider it immoral if a white man discriminates against black women in the dating/sex/marriage market? Dating and sex is based on reciprocity, more so than exchanging a few dollars for a cake. It's also a much more important thing in life than buying something at a store.

In Hillary's privileged all white girls' college there were strict rules against certain public associations between whites and blacks. The rules were later changed, after Hillary had already received her indoctrination and graduated.

 

[Mashmont]

Public accommodation laws are pretty clear. If you want to open your business to the public, you have to open it to the public. If you don't, you can hand select your clientele by any metric you choose. You don't get to... have your cake and eat it too.

On a moral note, there's literally nothing in the bible about the alleged sin of baking a cake for a homosexual and this guy is no different than a bigot who would hang a "No negroes" sign in front of his shop. Interacting with black people was also once claimed to be a violation of their religion by bigoted Christians. I'm glad we stopped tolerating that bull****.

It's really stupid when leftwing atheists say 'there is nothing in bible about.....' They don't even believe in the bible. Nothing in the bible condemning thermonuclear war either, but we know it's wrong. On a moral basis, the baker can and should refuse to participate in or facilitate immoral ceremonies, celebrations, or acts. It's a silly comparision between the 'no negroes' era since one has to do with doing and the other has to do with being. However, I believe a business should have the right to deny service to anyone they want for any reason they want, just as a customer has the right to not do business with anyone they choose for any reason they choose.

 

[danielpalos]

It does not matter whether we make a profit or not or whether we are persecuted for our beliefs or not we must obey God rather then men.

lol. On a for-the-profit-of-Lucre-not-morals basis?

 

[danielpalos]

According to sexually perverted fascist socialists, the feelings of homosexuals take precedence over the religious rights of Christians in business.

Only "mainstreet doesn't get it". For-profit means just that; moral Bakers incorporate on a not-for-profit basis.

 

[danielpalos]

Did the client insist on purchasing bakers morals and is there any receipt under our form of Capitalism? If not, it was just artistic writing on a cake, no morals involved, just Art.

 

[Marrybore]

He can refuse service to anyone he likes, in a free country. But in the democrat socialist states of the USSA the atheistic fascists do not allow Christians to expose their religious beliefs in public.

If a racist KKK skinhead wants a cake to celebrate the assassin of MLK the atheist democrat socialists will not allow that, but if a sex pervert wants a cake to commemorate his sex change operation giving him unlimited access to girls' shower rooms on American college campuses then the socialist thugs will jail him and destroy his business if he does not comply.

Once again, you seem to be calling Democrats fascists, and referring to homosexuals and transgender people as "perverts".
This seems to partially stem from your belief that the only reason people become transgender is so they can get "unlimited access to girls' shower rooms on American college campuses". I mean, I don't think you quite understand what trans people actually are.
And, let me be perfectly clear:
There are no "socialist thugs".
There is no "USSA".
LGBTQ+ is NOT sexual perversion.
You can voice your religious beliefs and opinions as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of anyone else.
Businesses will not be "destroyed".

 

[danielpalos]

Equality and equal protection of the laws.

"Judge not that ye be not judged, in public accommodation".

 

[Mashmont]

How can they discriminate in the dating market? A personal bias on a date isn't discrimination. Discrimination about about the denial of legal rights. Its not illegal to be a racist dirtball.

I don't think I would date an all-black woman if I were young and single. it has much more to do with a difference in culture and upbringing and common experiences. But also there are physical types I like, and that's really not one of them. Obviously neither I nor anyone who felt the same would be a racist, because racism implies a view of innate inferiority of another race, and that's not what this is.
To me, leftwingers like Lisa who make everything racist are the problem

 

[Marrybore]

I don't think I would date an all-black woman if I were young and single. it has much more to do with a difference in culture and upbringing and common experiences. But also there are physical types I like, and that's really not one of them. Obviously neither I nor anyone who felt the same would be a racist, because racism implies a view of innate inferiority of another race, and that's not what this is.
To me, leftwingers like Lisa who make everything racist are the problem

Would you support segregation, though, I wonder?

 

[aociswundumho]

A date or a romantic relationship is not a legal right, unlike equal service in a business that is required to abide by the public accommodation protections.

What's currently legal doesn't mean anything. Not too long ago white people had a legal property right to own black people, and I suppose if you were alive at the time you would have abided by the fugitive slave act like the good little citizen you are.

Treating another is as less than equal to someone else in a romantic relationship might be immoral but it isn't illegal.

Once again you evade the question. Did you think I wasn't going to notice? Of course it "might be immoral", I want to know if you believe that discrimination based on race is morally wrong regardless of the context.

A relationship isn't a market. You don't pay for a date as you would a product.

Dating/Marriage/sex are barter markets. Money just makes certain transactions easier, but it's not necessary, and people do exchange money for all three at times. There is nothing fundamentally different about the exchange that takes place when dating someone. When people date or have sex they are trading value for value.

 

[Marrybore]

What's currently legal doesn't mean anything. Not too long ago white people had a legal property right to own black people, and I suppose if you were alive at the time you would have abided by the fugitive slave act like the good little citizen you are.



Once again you evade the question. Did you think I wasn't going to notice? Of course it "might be immoral", I want to know if you believe that discrimination based on race is morally wrong regardless of the context.



Dating/Marriage/sex are barter markets. Money just makes certain transactions easier, but it's not necessary, and people do exchange money for all three at times. There is nothing fundamentally different about the exchange that takes place when dating someone. When people date or have sex they are trading value for value.

Discrimination, n. :
1) "the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex" - obviously, anything unjust almost certainly has to be immoral.
2) "recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another" - kind of what Mashmont was trying to say in post 615.

 

[Lisa]

It does not matter whether we make a profit or not or whether we are persecuted for our beliefs or not we must obey God rather then men.

if that is true then you are not a good fit to operate a public accommodation business because your religious beliefs do not permit you to ignore secular law. Go work for your church instead.

 

[Lisa]

He can refuse service to anyone he likes, in a free country. But in the democrat socialist states of the USSA the atheistic fascists do not allow Christians to expose their religious beliefs in public.

If a racist KKK skinhead wants a cake to celebrate the assassin of MLK the atheist democrat socialists will not allow that, but if a sex pervert wants a cake to commemorate his sex change operation giving him unlimited access to girls' shower rooms on American college campuses then the socialist thugs will jail him and destroy his business if he does not comply.

The Newman v. Piggie Park precedent says he cannot refuse equal service if he is operating a business that is required to obey public accommodation laws because of his religious bigotry. This has been explained to you ad nauseum by multiple people.

 

[CLAX1911]

The Newman v. Piggie Park precedent says he cannot refuse equal service if he is operating a business that is required to obey public accommodation laws because of his religious bigotry. This has been explained to you ad nauseum by multiple people.

I doubt he would make such a cake for anybody there for he's not denying equal service he's providing it.

 

[marke]

Once again, you seem to be calling Democrats fascists, and referring to homosexuals and transgender people as "perverts".
This seems to partially stem from your belief that the only reason people become transgender is so they can get "unlimited access to girls' shower rooms on American college campuses". I mean, I don't think you quite understand what trans people actually are.
And, let me be perfectly clear:
There are no "socialist thugs".
There is no "USSA".
LGBTQ+ is NOT sexual perversion.
You can voice your religious beliefs and opinions as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of anyone else.
Businesses will not be "destroyed".

Russians celebrating the death of the czar never saw Stalin coming, just like those seeking to overthrow the Presidency of Donald Trump have no idea of the dispair they will facing if they finally get their beloved democrat Marxist fascists in power.

 

[marke]

The Newman v. Piggie Park precedent says he cannot refuse equal service if he is operating a business that is required to obey public accommodation laws because of his religious bigotry. This has been explained to you ad nauseum by multiple people.

I know pipsqueak leftist savages have crafted all sorts of laws in defiance of God, but Christians are not under such laws which defy and contradict the Bible.

 

[danielpalos]

I doubt he would make such a cake for anybody there for he's not denying equal service he's providing it.

Yes, in public accommodation and for the sake of Profit not Morals.

 

[Marrybore]

Russians celebrating the death of the czar never saw Stalin coming, just like those seeking to overthrow the Presidency of Donald Trump have no idea of the dispair they will facing if they finally get their beloved democrat Marxist fascists in power.

Yes, but healthy regulation of the private and public sectors is important in any kind of society. Let's not go over the top when it comes to governmental control.