Unholy Ingredients: Taking a closer look at the sin-by-association supply chain.

[Lisa]

That is like saying if they believe serving pork is a sin then they should either sell their restaurant or stop selling food to Muslims also. The government did not make them turn Muslim nor did the government force them to open a restaurant, but if they open a restaurant in the US they will damn sure obey all laws passed by Americans who support gay rights, abortions, socialism, restricted free speech, gun-grabbers and what not.

They can serve pork but they must serve it to everyone who asks. If a kosher deli doesn't serve spork because of their religious beliefs then you cannot go into the deli and demand that they make you a ham sandwich because you are not an observant Jew.

Nobody is forcing these bakeries to make wedding cakes, but if they choose to make wedding cakes then they must offer them equally to LGBT and heteros and members of any religious, despite the owners religious beliefs. He cannot just serve conservative Christians in a bakery that is open to the public. If he does choose to serve only conservative Christians then he must post that sign it is a members-only bakery and customers cannot just walk on off the street, but instead they must apply to be a customer. That decision would mean that loss of many sales but it is his right to do so.

If you placed a wedding cake for an LGBT wedding beside of a wedding cake for a hetero wedding at the Baptist church how could you tell them apart visually? How are the LGBT couple threatening the owners religious beliefs when that person's religious beliefs are not and have never been mentioned during the design of the cake?

Jesus was explicit in telling his followers not to treat others this way in Luke 6:31 and Matthew 7:12, so how can you possibly say that this disocimnation is based on sincere religious beliefs? Is obeying those passages of Matthew and Luke also a vioaltion of your sincere religious beliefs?

There are nothing religious about your homophobic belifs. It is merely the exp[ected reaction by religious conservatives to the fact that you lost in the Supreme Court so you are claiming that your religious beliefs are being violated to obeyu these decisions, just as the religious bigots made similar arguments after the 1964 Civil Rights Act that ended discrimination based on race and the Loving v. Virigna decision that guaranteed equal marriage rights for interracial couples. You expect us not to notice that you are having a religious temper tantrum just because the Supreme Court will not permit to enforce your discriminatory religious beliefs as secular law in the US.

 

[marke]

Lincoln was not a Christian.

Sez you.

The democratic party was split over slavery before the Civil War. The northern democratic party was more progressive and opposed it while the southern democrats were in support of slavery.

And yet the republican part was formed primarily to resist democrat support for slavery. And the KKK was formed by southern democrats to fight republican efforts to help blacks integrate into society after slaves were freed.

 

[marke]

Not the same at all. If a Muslim business decides not to serve pork, then they do not have any pork to sell to anyone at any time. Not to heteros, gays, women, men, black, white, brown, Christian, Hindu, Russian or American... Everyone is treated equally. Those bakers do sell wedding cakes, but they are not offered to everyone, that is discrimination, and if you are a business open to the public, you serve the entire public.

Baloney. The sign in the window says, 'We do not serve if no shirt is worn, if no shoes are worn, if foul language is used, or to promote sexual perversion of any kind.

 

[marke]

I’m not interested in historical republicans. Today, in this thread, a Republican voter was fine with discrimination.

Good discrimination is not bad. For example, if a school will not allow a kid to show up in a bathing suit for class, then the casually attired kid can claim discrimination all he wants but he will get his punk rear end off campus until he gets with the program.

 

[AProudLefty]

Baloney. The sign in the window says, 'We do not serve if no shirt is worn, if no shoes are worn, if foul language is used, or to promote sexual perversion of any kind.

Sexual perversion? Like doing it on a table in front of eating customers?

 

[bongsaway]

If a cake can be considered sinful if it is made or sold to be used in a gay wedding,
just how far back up the supply chain does this sin-by-association thing go?
The supplier who sells flour,
if that supplier knows one of the bakeries he sells his product to is known to be an establishment that will bake cakes for gay weddings,
is he in sin as well as he provides their flour?
The farmer who grows the wheat that is processed into the flour that is sold to the couple getting gay-married,
is he in sin?
How about the company hat sells the farmer all of his farming equipment,
is every emplyee of this company in sin,
or just upper mangement,
are they sinning?
It is a small town, everybody knows everybody's business,
so since half the people employed by that farming supply company are friends of the gay couple getting married,
and will be attending that gay-wedding already,
are they in double sin?

Following that line of thought, I would go back to god for creating us. Also, I believe people are people and most of us humans pretty much want the same things no matter of the color of our skins or how we look physically. To live in peace and try our best to have a happy life.

 

[marke]

If she was alive today, should have she gone to another bakery miles away in her old age?

Refusing service to someone based upon skin color is not something that can be based upon a religious belief. Refusing service to someone without a tie is also not something which is based upon a religious belief. Refusing to make a cake with two naked homosexuals making love on top is something which has a religious exemption subject to the baker's beliefs.

 

[marke]

What a way to miss the point. Some small cities have only one bakery in them.

If a rural bakery does not make cakes celebrating homosexual sex, then the homosexuals may have to go to another city to get what they want. What is wrong with that?

 

[marke]

They can serve pork but they must serve it to everyone who asks. If a kosher deli doesn't serve spork because of their religious beliefs then you cannot go into the deli and demand that they make you a ham sandwich because you are not an observant Jew.

Sign on window: "We do not make cakes celebrating perverted sex. Not bestiality, not homosexuality, not adultery, not sadism, not anything immoral or unnatural."

What should a sex pervert do when he shows up and finds the baker does not do sex perversion? Contact MSNBC and the rest of the ungodly barbarian crowd and let them make a stupid big deal about it like they always do.

 

[TheGoverness]

If I were a baker, I'd make the cake even if I was as religious as the guy in Colorado. Who am I to judge?

However, the couple who wanted the cake had their pick of dozens of bakers. They picked the religious guy because they knew he would turn them down. They should've gone to one of the other bakers instead.

Gotta make sure your baker don't hate the gays!

 

[marke]

Sexual perversion? Like doing it on a table in front of eating customers?

Exactly. That and gay pride perversion and stinking stuff like that.

 

[AProudLefty]

Exactly. That and gay pride perversion and stinking stuff like that.

I've never heard of anyone doing it on a table at a restaurant.

 

[Serenity]

Gotta make sure your baker don't hate the gays!

Someone needs to explain to them that you can have your gay and eat it too!

 

[Joel]

Baloney. The sign in the window says, 'We do not serve if no shirt is worn, if no shoes are worn, if foul language is used, or to promote sexual perversion of any kind.

The no shoes no shirt no service rule was for all customers, not just for some customers but not for others.

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk

 

[marke]

I've never heard of anyone doing it on a table at a restaurant.

Can a Christian baker refuse to serve naked homosexuals who want to do it on a table while their baker makes a cake glorifying free perverted sex?

 

[Joel]

Refusing service to someone based upon skin color is not something that can be based upon a religious belief. Refusing service to someone without a tie is also not something which is based upon a religious belief. Refusing to make a cake with two naked homosexuals making love on top is something which has a religious exemption subject to the baker's beliefs.

Nobody is fighting for the right to put cake toppers depicting naked people engaged in graphic sex acts. Nobody! Rein it in a little buddy.

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk

 

[marke]

The no shoes no shirt no service rule was for all customers, not just for some customers but not for others.

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk

Sign in window: "We are Christians. We do not bake cakes for gays, straights or others who want us to glorify perverted sex." There. Nobody is left out.

 

[AProudLefty]

Can a Christian baker refuse to serve naked homosexuals who want to do it on a table while their baker makes a cake glorifying free perverted sex?

Yep...

 

[marke]

Nobody is fighting for the right to put cake toppers depicting naked people engaged in graphic sex acts. Nobody! Rein it in a little buddy.

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk

You want us to narrow down the exceptions to the open bakery door rules? OK. Here is a list Christians should post:

"We do not honor adult-child sex on our cakes. We do not honor bestiality on our cakes. We do not honor adultery on our cakes. We do not honor rape on our cakes. We do not honor sodomy on our cakes. We do not honor pornography on our cakes. We do not honor prostitution on our cakes. And if we left anything off, let it be known that we do not portray any acts or beliefs which disrespect or dishonor God on our cakes."

Everybody is covered. No discrimination there.

 

[Joel]

Sign in window: "We are Christians. We do not bake cakes for gays, straights or others who want us to glorify perverted sex." There. Nobody is left out.

Wrong again. They are a business that sells baked goods that is open to the public. Slapping a Christian label on it doesn't justify discrimination. What your customers choose to do with what they purchase is their business, they bought it, they now own it.

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk

 

[Joel]

You want us to narrow down the exceptions to the open bakery door rules? OK. Here is a list Christians should post:

"We do not honor adult-child sex on our cakes. We do not honor bestiality on our cakes. We do not honor adultery on our cakes. We do not honor rape on our cakes. We do not honor sodomy on our cakes. We do not honor pornography on our cakes. We do not honor prostitution on our cakes. And if we left anything off, let it be known that we do not portray any acts or beliefs which disrespect or dishonor God on our cakes."

Everybody is covered. No discrimination there.

Do you really expect anyone to take that post seriously?

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk

 

[AProudLefty]

You want us to narrow down the exceptions to the open bakery door rules? OK. Here is a list Christians should post:

"We do not honor adult-child sex on our cakes. We do not honor bestiality on our cakes. We do not honor adultery on our cakes. We do not honor rape on our cakes. We do not honor sodomy on our cakes. We do not honor pornography on our cakes. We do not honor prostitution on our cakes. And if we left anything off, let it be known that we do not portray any acts or beliefs which disrespect or dishonor God on our cakes."

Everybody is covered. No discrimination there.

 

[Lisa]

Sign on window: "We do not make cakes celebrating perverted sex. Not bestiality, not homosexuality, not adultery, not sadism, not anything immoral or unnatural."

What should a sex pervert do when he shows up and finds the baker does not do sex perversion? Contact MSNBC and the rest of the ungodly barbarian crowd and let them make a stupid big deal about it like they always do.

Laurence O'Donnell and Rachel Maddow are both Catholics.

That sign would not be legally permissible or defensible as a way to support discrimination in a public business.

Would you aks to see a marriage license before you would bake a kids birthday cake so as to know if the parents were married when the child was conceived? Do you want a DNA test to make sure the parents are actually the child's biological parents?

Would you deny to bake w a wedding cake for a divorced hetero couple?

Would you baker a cake for the end of Ramadan or other non-Christian religious celebrations?


Maybe you should understand that they are just baking cakes and not endorsing the customers religious or social l beliefs? Their customers aren't asking for their approval. It is a simple transition. They give you money and you v bake a cake. What they do with it is irrelevant to you because you are in business to make money and not judge them. Jesus also taught his followers not to judge others, or is that idea also a violation of your religious beliefs?

 

[Lisa]

Can a Christian baker refuse to serve naked homosexuals who want to do it on a table while their baker makes a cake glorifying free perverted sex?

Has that ever happened, even with heteros, or is that something that you fear might happen?

 

[Lisa]

If a rural bakery does not make cakes celebrating homosexual sex, then the homosexuals may have to go to another city to get what they want. What is wrong with that?

How does a cake celebrate homosexual sex? How does a cake celebrate heterosexual sex either?