Reply to Indiana's Religious Freedom law

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Indiana's Religious Freedom law"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Sure they do. Otherwise they would they would not be essentially crucifying Christians for exercising their religious rights. Again, the Oregon bakery did not turn down the business of the gay couple. They shopped there previously and were never turned down. They were only turned down when asked for a specialty item for their wedding. The gay bakery that turned down the Christian baker wanting an anti-gay cake did the exact same thing. You just feel that their message was more hateful. You know DAMN well that if a gay baker in Oregon turned down a cake for a patron that said "Gay Marriage Is Wrong", the lefties like you would be all over it as a hateful message. And the courts would likely agree with you. That's the double-standard today. The court in Oregon, in my opinion was wrong in their decision.[/quote]
The big difference is that the Oregon bakery was asked to provide the [i]exact same cake[/i] -- a wedding cake -- but it refused only when the couple getting married was a lesbian couple.  So it's clear there was a double standard at work.  In your "gay baker" hypothetical, the situation is lots murkier because you're talking about an individualized message on the cake ("gay marriage is wrong").  I address this situation on the other thread at page 6 at 6:29 (http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/75/460001.page).  If your "gay baker" hypothetical was a true apples-to-apples parallel -- where the gay baker simply refused to serve any cake at all to the Christian buyer -- I'd totally agree with you that the gay baker would be violating the anti-discrimination law.[/quote]
You are simply picking and choosing what you like and what you don't like The cakes in both cases are the exact same cakes. So either both bakeries follow the rules or neither. Both bakeries were willing to serve both patrons. It was the special orders that were the problem. Directly parallel. [/quote]
Really?  Show me where the Oregon bakery was asked to make a cake with the message "support gap marriage" written on it.  I've read several articles now, and haven't seen anything suggesting that.[/quote]

Because the gay bakery/Christian cake issue was a set-up , i.e. a man posing as a Christian conservative went to gay bakers and asked them to make such a cake, And video'd the responses. Trust me, those responses got absolutely vicious. And they refused to make the cake. Funny how it works when the tables are turned.

So you are making a distinction because you don't like the idea of a cake saying something like "I don't support gay marriage", saying the gay baker should not be made to create that, because to you, it's some form of discriminatory hate speech.  That's a complete red herring.  I mean, it's just a cake.  In truth, they are both just cakes.. So if the Christian baker must make the gay couple's cake, the gay baker also bakes cakes for a living, so he should made to bake it and write what the Christians want on it, especially if it's a Christian activists' wedding, and that's what they want on their cake.  Or maybe even the words "Marriage is between a man and a woman".  The gay baker should be forced to make it because he bakes cakes for a living, just like the Christian baker.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics