Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: November 19, 2024, 4:53 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
Quote: No, I'm not arguing that point at all. I'm just saying that if pro gay marriage activists, i.e., for one, want to threaten businesses with boycotts or threaten and harass people they disagree with, then turn about is fair play. I would support an organized effort to combat such activists at their game. In other words, use their own tactics of bullying and harassment against them and against the businesses who support their efforts.

The businesses in question wanted to deny service to a specific group of people, a like-for-like retaliatory boycott would mean boycotting every business that doesn't refuse to serve everyone equally - this is crazy, and also impossible
“The larger the group, the more toxic, the more of your beauty as an individual you have to surrender for the sake of group thought. And when you suspend your individual beauty you also give up a lot of your humanity. You will do things in the name of a group that you would never do on your own. Injuring, hurting, killing, drinking are all part of it, because you've lost your identity, because you now owe your allegiance to this thing that's bigger than you are and that controls you.”  - George Carlin
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
(July 5, 2015 at 1:06 am)Saxmoof Wrote:
Quote: No, I'm not arguing that point at all. I'm just saying that if pro gay marriage activists, i.e., for one, want to threaten businesses with boycotts or threaten and harass people they disagree with, then turn about is fair play. I would support an organized effort to combat such activists at their game. In other words, use their own tactics of bullying and harassment against them and against the businesses who support their efforts.

The businesses in question wanted to deny service to a specific group of people, a like-for-like retaliatory boycott would mean boycotting every business that doesn't refuse to serve everyone equally - this is crazy, and also impossible

Yes! Thank you, this is exactly my point.
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
I wonder how this will finally play out in the courts on appeal, especially if this goes to the SCOTUS. I knew this was going end up as an assault against peoples' religious and moral convictions. Serving gays, individually, as customers is one thing. But forcing business owners to recognize gay marriage against their religious convictions is another. This is the very thing that the dissenting justices and people of faith warned about. This assault against people of faith is very concerning. This is why I say there needs to be an organized effort to preserve the freedom of religion for people of faith.


Quote:Bakery ordered to pay $135,000 for denying wedding cake to lesbian couple

The former owners of an Oregon bakery have been ordered to pay $135,000 to a lesbian couple who were refused a wedding cake, in the latest front in the battle between religious liberty and individual rights.
Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian ordered Aaron and Melissa Klein, who owned the Sweet Cakes by Melissa bakery in Gresham, Ore., to compensate the couple for emotional and mental suffering that resulted from the denial of service.
The Kleins had cited their Christian beliefs against same-sex marriage in refusing to make the wedding cake for Rachel and Laurel Bowman-Cryer.

Aaron Klein said his family had suffered because of the case and the glare of media attention.

The bakery's car was vandalized and broken into twice, he said. Photographers and florists severed ties with the company, eventually forcing the Kleins to close their storefront shop in September 2013.


http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/bakery-...id=DELLDHP
"Inside every Liberal there's a Totalitarian screaming to get out"

[Image: freddy_03.jpg]

Quote: JohnDG...
Quote:It was an awful mistake to characterize based upon religion. I should not judge any theist that way, I must remember what I said in order to change.
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
(July 5, 2015 at 8:22 am)A Theist Wrote: I wonder how this will finally play out in the courts on appeal, especially if this goes to the SCOTUS. I knew this was going end up as an assault against peoples' religious and moral convictions. Serving gays, individually, as customers is one thing. But forcing business owners to recognize gay marriage against their religious convictions is another. This is the very thing that the dissenting justices and people of faith warned about. This assault against people of faith is very concerning.


Quote:Bakery ordered to pay $135,000 for denying wedding cake to lesbian couple

The former owners of an Oregon bakery have been ordered to pay $135,000 to a lesbian couple who were refused a wedding cake, in the latest front in the battle between religious liberty and individual rights.
Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian ordered Aaron and Melissa Klein, who owned the Sweet Cakes by Melissa bakery in Gresham, Ore., to compensate the couple for emotional and mental suffering that resulted from the denial of service.
The Kleins had cited their Christian beliefs against same-sex marriage in refusing to make the wedding cake for Rachel and Laurel Bowman-Cryer.

Aaron Klein said his family had suffered because of the case and the glare of media attention.

The bakery's car was vandalized and broken into twice, he said. Photographers and florists severed ties with the company, eventually forcing the Kleins to close their storefront shop in September 2013.


http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/bakery-...id=DELLDHP

While obviously I don't think their car should be vandalized, I think everything else is fine considering the bakery owners broke the law by using their business to discriminate.
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
(July 5, 2015 at 8:26 am)Mr.wizard Wrote:
(July 5, 2015 at 8:22 am)A Theist Wrote: I wonder how this will finally play out in the courts on appeal, especially if this goes to the SCOTUS. I knew this was going end up as an assault against peoples' religious and moral convictions. Serving gays, individually, as customers is one thing. But forcing business owners to recognize gay marriage against their religious convictions is another. This is the very thing that the dissenting justices and people of faith warned about. This assault against people of faith is very concerning.




http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/bakery-...id=DELLDHP

While obviously I don't think their car should be vandalized, I think everything else is fine considering the bakery owners broke the law by using their business to discriminate.

I don't think the owners were denying gays other services in their bakery, they just had a problem with being forced to recognize gay weddings, against their religious convictions, by baking the lesbian couple a wedding cake. This is playing out exactly the way people of faith feared it would.
"Inside every Liberal there's a Totalitarian screaming to get out"

[Image: freddy_03.jpg]

Quote: JohnDG...
Quote:It was an awful mistake to characterize based upon religion. I should not judge any theist that way, I must remember what I said in order to change.
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
(July 5, 2015 at 8:32 am)A Theist Wrote:
(July 5, 2015 at 8:26 am)Mr.wizard Wrote: While obviously I don't think their car should be vandalized, I think everything else is fine considering the bakery owners broke the law by using their business to discriminate.

I don't think the owners were denying gays other services in their bakery, they just had a problem with being forced to recognize gay weddings, against their religious convictions, by baking the lesbian couple a wedding cake. This is playing out exactly the way people of faith feared it would.

Bullshit! They refused to bake a cake for a couple because they where gay, who cares what the occasion was for. Their business is baking cakes, its not to tell people what marriages they think should be recognized. Would you be ok if they refused to bake a cake for an interracial marriage?

This does not violate religious freedom in any way shape or form, you cannot use your religion to violate somebody else's civil rights, that is not religious freedom.
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
Of course. You're in the 70% of the demographic, but that won't stop you from screaming 'persecution'. Your religious freedoms aren't oppressed in any way. If you can't keep your bigotry out of your business, don't whine when met with backlash.

Vandalism I don't agree with, but boycotting discrimination bakeries? Why not?

They don't have to 'recognize' their clients marriage, they're not a fucking church. What they were asked for was a damn cake, not their opinions on civil rights.
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
(July 5, 2015 at 8:43 am)Mr.wizard Wrote:
(July 5, 2015 at 8:32 am)A Theist Wrote: I don't think the owners were denying gays other services in their bakery, they just had a problem with being forced to recognize gay weddings, against their religious convictions, by baking the lesbian couple a wedding cake. This is playing out exactly the way people of faith feared it would.

Bullshit! They refused to bake a cake for a couple because they where gay, who cares what the occasion was for. Their business is baking cakes, its not to tell people what marriages they think should be recognized. Would you be ok if they refused to bake a cake for an interracial marriage?

This does not violate religious freedom in any way shape or form, you cannot use your religion to violate somebody else's civil rights, that is not religious freedom.

Yeah, Bullshit backatcha! Yes it does violate their religious freedom. Unlike serving up some coffee and a doughnut or a cream puff, baking a wedding cake for those two lesbians and being forced to recognize gay marriage was an infringement on the Baker's religious convictions.

Quote:you cannot use your religion to violate somebody else's civil rights, that is not religious freedom.

What about the other way around? Can someone use their Civil Rights to violate the Civil Rights of others, namely, Freedom Of Religion?

Quote:Would you be ok if they refused to bake a cake for an interracial marriage?
 Only if the interracial couple were gay.
"Inside every Liberal there's a Totalitarian screaming to get out"

[Image: freddy_03.jpg]

Quote: JohnDG...
Quote:It was an awful mistake to characterize based upon religion. I should not judge any theist that way, I must remember what I said in order to change.
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
(July 5, 2015 at 12:00 pm)A Theist Wrote:
(July 5, 2015 at 8:43 am)Mr.wizard Wrote: Bullshit! They refused to bake a cake for a couple because they where gay, who cares what the occasion was for. Their business is baking cakes, its not to tell people what marriages they think should be recognized. Would you be ok if they refused to bake a cake for an interracial marriage?

This does not violate religious freedom in any way shape or form, you cannot use your religion to violate somebody else's civil rights, that is not religious freedom.

Yeah, Bullshit backatcha! Yes it does violate their religious freedom. Unlike serving up some coffee and a doughnut or a cream puff, baking a wedding cake for those two lesbians and being forced to recognize gay marriage was an infringement on the Baker's religious convictions.

Quote:you cannot use your religion to violate somebody else's civil rights, that is not religious freedom.

What about the other way around? Can someone use their Civil Rights to violate the Civil Rights of others, namely, Freedom Of Religion?

Quote:Would you be ok if they refused to bake a cake for an interracial marriage?
 Only if the interracial couple were gay.

Its not a violation of the business owners civil rights because when you open a business to serve the public you are subject to anti-discrimination laws. Their personal stance on gay marriage is irrelevant when it comes to their business and the laws that govern that business.

Why only if the interracial couple was gay? There are plenty of Religious views that promote racial segregation, why would you be against a baker discriminating against a straight interracial couple and not a gay interracial couple?

Bottom line is bigots don't get to hide behind their religions to discriminate against groups of people.
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
(July 5, 2015 at 12:17 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote:
(July 5, 2015 at 12:00 pm)A Theist Wrote: Yeah, Bullshit backatcha! Yes it does violate their religious freedom. Unlike serving up some coffee and a doughnut or a cream puff, baking a wedding cake for those two lesbians and being forced to recognize gay marriage was an infringement on the Baker's religious convictions.


What about the other way around? Can someone use their Civil Rights to violate the Civil Rights of others, namely, Freedom Of Religion?

 Only if the interracial couple were gay.

Its not a violation of the business owners civil rights because when you open a business to serve the public you are subject to anti-discrimination laws. Their personal stance on gay marriage is irrelevant when it comes to their business and the laws that govern that business.

Why only if the interracial couple was gay? There are plenty of Religious views that promote racial segregation, why would you be against a baker discriminating against a straight interracial couple and not a gay interracial couple?

Bottom line is bigots don't get to hide behind their religions to discriminate against groups of people.

Bigot is a word that's used too loosely to attack people who doesn't agree with a particular stance of another person. It's not bigotry to refuse to bake a cake for a gay wedding, especially if gay marriages are against a person's religious convictions. I know of Christians who would refuse to recognize a straight marriage if the couple had been divorced from previous marriages. That doesn't they're bigoted against divorcees, it means that they have religious objections to divorce.
"Inside every Liberal there's a Totalitarian screaming to get out"

[Image: freddy_03.jpg]

Quote: JohnDG...
Quote:It was an awful mistake to characterize based upon religion. I should not judge any theist that way, I must remember what I said in order to change.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Leaked Supreme Court Decision signals majority set to overturn Roe v. Wade Cecelia 234 24209 June 7, 2022 at 11:58 am
Last Post: Fake Messiah
  Same guy? onlinebiker 10 996 May 27, 2022 at 6:42 pm
Last Post: The Architect Of Fate
  Madison Cawthorn Sex Tape Released Divinity 26 5018 May 6, 2022 at 4:52 am
Last Post: onlinebiker
  Supreme Court To Take Up Right to Carry Firearm Outside Home onlinebiker 57 3634 April 29, 2021 at 8:20 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Court Ordered Quarantine brewer 2 551 October 24, 2019 at 10:15 am
Last Post: Brian37
  Supreme Court Considers Mandatory Govt Funding of Religious Education EgoDeath 8 1153 September 24, 2019 at 10:37 am
Last Post: EgoDeath
  Fed Court, "hand over 8yrs of your finances" Brian37 15 1554 May 22, 2019 at 6:34 pm
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  Corruption is the same worldwide..... Brian37 4 794 December 2, 2018 at 12:59 pm
Last Post: Brian37
  Hitler Had The Same Problem Minimalist 4 818 November 26, 2018 at 6:41 am
Last Post: Gawdzilla Sama
  Court of Appeals Tells Alabama Shitheads to "Fuck Off!" Minimalist 6 1387 August 23, 2018 at 2:00 am
Last Post: Minimalist



Users browsing this thread: 21 Guest(s)