Justice Dept. sides with baker who refused to serve gay couple

[Santander]

This is why Evangelicals largely voted for Trump.  Not because the like him but because he doesn't think that they are the equivalent of the KKK.

No one is saying "they are equivalent to the KKK."
The KKK is pure hate. The Christian religion (all faiths) have some flaws, but I do believe that they at least try to preach some basic standards of decency, morals and love.

It is becoming increasingly popular on the left to say that Christianity is all about hate of non-Christians.

[Kamala]

This is why Evangelicals largely voted for Trump.  Not because the like him but because he doesn't think that they are the equivalent of the KKK.

No one is saying "they are equivalent to the KKK."
The KKK is pure hate. The Christian religion (all faiths) have some flaws, but I do believe that they at least try to preach some basic standards of decency, morals and love.

It is becoming increasingly popular on the left to say that Christianity is all about hate of non-Christians.

That's true, but it doesn't excuse Carpetbagger's blatant straw man.

[BoAtlantis]

This is why Evangelicals largely voted for Trump.  Not because the like him but because he doesn't think that they are the equivalent of the KKK.

Supreme Court seat was more likely the reason.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

All they are doing is reinforcing the bigoted image of the Trump administration.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

This is why Evangelicals largely voted for Trump.  Not because the like him but because he doesn't think that they are the equivalent of the KKK.

No one is saying "they are equivalent to the KKK."
The KKK is pure hate. The Christian religion (all faiths) have some flaws, but I do believe that they at least try to preach some basic standards of decency, morals and love.

But for whatever reason, social liberals are obsessed with Christian teaching against homosexuality.  They think that people who hold such views are a threat to society.

[Ye We Can]

This is why Evangelicals largely voted for Trump.  Not because the like him but because he doesn't think that they are the equivalent of the KKK.

No one is saying "they are equivalent to the KKK."
The KKK is pure hate. The Christian religion (all faiths) have some flaws, but I do believe that they at least try to preach some basic standards of decency, morals and love.

But for whatever reason, social liberals are obsessed with Christian teaching against homosexuality.  They think that people who hold such views are a threat to society.

... Bigotry isn't a threat to society?

[Santander]

We need to pick up the ivory trade.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

This is why Evangelicals largely voted for Trump.  Not because the like him but because he doesn't think that they are the equivalent of the KKK.

No one is saying "they are equivalent to the KKK."
The KKK is pure hate. The Christian religion (all faiths) have some flaws, but I do believe that they at least try to preach some basic standards of decency, morals and love.

But for whatever reason, social liberals are obsessed with Christian teaching against homosexuality.  They think that people who hold such views are a threat to society.

... Bigotry isn't a threat to society?

It's not bigotry any more than Islam or Judaism is bigoted against me, a person who likes bacon.

[Daniel909012]

This is a subject where even Democrats and homosexuals are on the baker's side.The baker said he could sell them any cake except a wedding cake, An attempt to earn money and attention.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

On the one hand, forcing businesses to provide services to EVERYONE is problematic.
On the other- the mere notion of someone being denied service for his race/sexual orientation is repulsive and definitely against the principles we should have as democratic nations. Also, if one lives in a town where all bakeries won't provide him service because he's black or because he's gay- that is a terrible thing and he should be able to get service.
In conclusion- add sexual orientation to anti-discriminatory laws that already include race etc. LGBTQ people should be just as protected as people of color. A business should be able to deny service if the customer is being mean or violent- but if a baker wants to deny services because the customer is gay or black, which are exactly the same in terms of the lack of choice a person has over his birth, then let the damned baker pay a nice fine. A wedding gift, you could say.
Also, Wulfric-
You're making weird exceptions. Why is it just ok to deny services for a wedding and not ok otherwise? This is extremely weird. And lastly:

No Business should ever be allowed to discriminate based on race, religion, or sex (that's just sex, not sexual orientation or gender identity, although I do support some CSR protections for those groups.).

So now you're making an exception for sexual orientation or gender identity? Ok to discriminate based on it, but not on sex or race? This is worse than weird, this is bizarrely bigoted.

Helping with a wedding is basically indicating one's full approval of a relationship coming into existence. No other occasion or service rises to that level.

Okay, hypothetically, should a devout Catholic cashier be able to refuse to sell condoms? Or maybe just refuse to sell them to gay couples?

If a Catholic were to refuse to sell condoms on the basis of sexual orientation, I'd think it would be to straight couples since for them it would be unallowed birth control.

[SteveRogers]

This is a subject where even Democrats and homosexuals are on the baker's side.The baker said he could sell them any cake except a wedding cake, An attempt to earn money and attention.

People generally want wedding cakes for their weddings. Offering to sell them a birthday cake instead isn't a remedy.

[OSR stands with Israel]

In my opinion the goverment should only regulate things that can not  be regulated by the free market and this is one thing I believe that can be regulated by free market  

Meanwhile, if it fails to do so, you have a plethora of groups in society being denied services and discriminated against, in the name of the free market, of course. It baffles me how people can support something like this just to hold onto their stringent takes on an ideological stance, unless they really don't care, which may be the case.

Nope it won't fail cause denying services to any group a buisness wants doesn't apply to corporations and any buisness which is in more than one town . This means that people won't be denied services in edn

The "free market" doesn't exist. What you really mean is humans, who have beliefs and prejudices that will take precedence over money. What if all the business decided that white people have more money so we just charge them twice as much for it? Bet you'd freak on that as "racism".

First I never said all the buisnesses could do this, I specifically said sole proprietorships , partnerships who's business in only one city are allowed to do this . Corporations are for one not allowed to deny service to people for based on race , sex, religion  .


So for your question say a small business decided to charge whites more than everybody else ,  what that would mean is that many customers stop going to that buisness . That would cause that buisness to go out of business.

[Devout Centrist]

This is why Evangelicals largely voted for Trump.  Not because the like him but because he doesn't think that they are the equivalent of the KKK.

No one is saying "they are equivalent to the KKK."
The KKK is pure hate. The Christian religion (all faiths) have some flaws, but I do believe that they at least try to preach some basic standards of decency, morals and love.

But for whatever reason, social liberals are obsessed with Christian teaching against homosexuality.  They think that people who hold such views are a threat to society.

... Bigotry isn't a threat to society?

It's not bigotry any more than Islam or Judaism is bigoted against me, a person who likes bacon.

You realize dietary restrictions are completely different right? No Jewish person looks down on you for eating bacon.

[Ban my account ffs!]

This is why Evangelicals largely voted for Trump.  Not because the like him but because he doesn't think that they are the equivalent of the KKK.

No one is saying "they are equivalent to the KKK."
The KKK is pure hate. The Christian religion (all faiths) have some flaws, but I do believe that they at least try to preach some basic standards of decency, morals and love.

But for whatever reason, social liberals are obsessed with Christian teaching against homosexuality.  They think that people who hold such views are a threat to society.

... Bigotry isn't a threat to society?

It's not bigotry any more than Islam or Judaism is bigoted against me, a person who likes bacon.

You realize dietary restrictions are completely different right? No Jewish person looks down on you for eating bacon.

More likely he looks down on Jews and Muslims for not eating bacon and creates a projected fantasy that they actually look down on and judge him.

[pbrower2a]

This is why Evangelicals largely voted for Trump.  Not because the like him but because he doesn't think that they are the equivalent of the KKK.

No one is saying "they are equivalent to the KKK."
The KKK is pure hate. The Christian religion (all faiths) have some flaws, but I do believe that they at least try to preach some basic standards of decency, morals and love.

But for whatever reason, social liberals are obsessed with Christian teaching against homosexuality.  They think that people who hold such views are a threat to society.

I am tempted to believe that evangelical Christians are gullible, and I associate gullibility with a proclivity to fall for demagogues. EWTN doesn't push a wealth cult; for good reason there are no Episcopal televangelists.

[Santander]

I am tempted to believe that evangelical Christians are gullible, and I associate gullibility with a proclivity to fall for demagogues. EWTN doesn't push a wealth cult; for good reason there are no Episcopal televangelists.

Well, you kind of have to believe in God to evangelize.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I am tempted to believe that evangelical Christians are gullible, and I associate gullibility with a proclivity to fall for demagogues. EWTN doesn't push a wealth cult; for good reason there are no Episcopal televangelists.

Well, you kind of have to believe in God to evangelize.

Episcopalians believe in God.

[Helsinkian]

Okay, hypothetically, should a devout Catholic cashier be able to refuse to sell condoms? Or maybe just refuse to sell them to gay couples?

Should an accountant be able to refuse to help a married homosexual couple file their taxes jointly?

Should a religious bridal shop owner be able to refuse to sell a dress to a lesbian?

Should a devout realtor be able to refuse to sell a home to a newlywed homosexual couple, where they'll live together?

Should a mattress store owner be able to refuse to sell a mattress to a gay couple, knowing that it will be where they'll consummate the marriage?

Should a small hotel manager be able to refuse to allow a gay couple's wedding party to stay in his hotel's rooms?

There is a difference between a) selling a product which already exists, and b) using one's skills to create a new product for a specific purpose.

Should an artist be forced to paint a painting that he doesn't want to paint?

[Kamala]

Okay, hypothetically, should a devout Catholic cashier be able to refuse to sell condoms? Or maybe just refuse to sell them to gay couples?

Should an accountant be able to refuse to help a married homosexual couple file their taxes jointly?

Should a religious bridal shop owner be able to refuse to sell a dress to a lesbian?

Should a devout realtor be able to refuse to sell a home to a newlywed homosexual couple, where they'll live together?

Should a mattress store owner be able to refuse to sell a mattress to a gay couple, knowing that it will be where they'll consummate the marriage?

Should a small hotel manager be able to refuse to allow a gay couple's wedding party to stay in his hotel's rooms?

There is a difference between a) selling a product which already exists, and b) using one's skills to create a new product for a specific purpose.

Should an artist be forced to paint a painting that he doesn't want to paint?

If that artist is willing to paint the same painting for a straight customer, there's no reason for her to not paint the same painting for a gay customer.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

This is why Evangelicals largely voted for Trump.  Not because the like him but because he doesn't think that they are the equivalent of the KKK.

No one is saying "they are equivalent to the KKK."
The KKK is pure hate. The Christian religion (all faiths) have some flaws, but I do believe that they at least try to preach some basic standards of decency, morals and love.

But for whatever reason, social liberals are obsessed with Christian teaching against homosexuality.  They think that people who hold such views are a threat to society.

... Bigotry isn't a threat to society?

It's not bigotry any more than Islam or Judaism is bigoted against me, a person who likes bacon.

You realize dietary restrictions are completely different right? No Jewish person looks down on you for eating bacon.

I'm aware.  But the same principle applies.  A Muslim believes that it is immoral to eat bacon, I eat bacon, yet I am not offended.  I'm not Muslim and therefore I have no right to dictate to them what they should or should not believe.  And everyone accepts that.  And people accept that.  But for some reason, the Christian prohibition on sex between people of the same gender is considered a crime against humanity by some people.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Okay, hypothetically, should a devout Catholic cashier be able to refuse to sell condoms? Or maybe just refuse to sell them to gay couples?

Should an accountant be able to refuse to help a married homosexual couple file their taxes jointly?

Should a religious bridal shop owner be able to refuse to sell a dress to a lesbian?

Should a devout realtor be able to refuse to sell a home to a newlywed homosexual couple, where they'll live together?

Should a mattress store owner be able to refuse to sell a mattress to a gay couple, knowing that it will be where they'll consummate the marriage?

Should a small hotel manager be able to refuse to allow a gay couple's wedding party to stay in his hotel's rooms?

There is a difference between a) selling a product which already exists, and b) using one's skills to create a new product for a specific purpose.

Should an artist be forced to paint a painting that he doesn't want to paint?

If that artist is willing to paint the same painting for a straight customer, there's no reason for her to not paint the same painting for a gay customer.

Artists paint things they don't want to paint all the time.  If you know artists who paint, you'd know the ones actually trying to make money generally do so by painting what other people want.  They don't prefer this, but it brings in $$$.

Then on the side they paint what /they/ want to paint and display it in galleries for sale.

All that said... I think the line can be drawn here:  If you are advertising your painting service to the general public, you do not have the right to discriminate based on the customer... though you would have the right to deny painting something sexually explicit, for example.

If you are an artist or a baker who serves people through word of mouth or through personal connections, you should have the right to refuse since you are not a public business.  But if you have a brick and mortar or online presence, then you are a public business regardless of size and must adhere to discrimination laws.

[Kamala]

Fundamentally, a "gay wedding cake" is no different from a "regular wedding cake." The product, in essence, is the same. The only thing different is the people using it.

A baker should be able to refuse to serve a customer if they ask for something explicit - a cake covered in swastikas, for example. It doesn't matter if the customer is white, black, Jewish, or gay, the baker would never make a swastika cake. And that right to refuse should be extended to all potential cakes the baker may be asked to make. If a baker hates horses, he can refuse to make a cake with horse decorations. If a baker hates gays, he shouldn't be allowed to refuse service to them if they want some generic wedding cake.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Fundamentally, a "gay wedding cake" is no different from a "regular wedding cake." The product, in essence, is the same. The only thing different is the people using it.

A baker should be able to refuse to serve a customer if they ask for something explicit - a cake covered in swastikas, for example. It doesn't matter if the customer is white, black, Jewish, or gay, the baker would never make a swastika cake. And that right to refuse should be extended to all potential cakes the baker may be asked to make. If a baker hates horses, he can refuse to make a cake with horse decorations. If a baker hates gays, he shouldn't be allowed to refuse service to them if they want some generic wedding cake.

That's the thing.  You can refuse as long as you would refuse to all potential customers... sexually explicit... overtly racist... malicious... or simply outside of your abilities.  There is nothing wrong with that.  But two grooms or two brides is not endangering your salvation.  If two men marrying is a slap in the face to you, turn the other cheek.

[Devout Centrist]

This is why Evangelicals largely voted for Trump.  Not because the like him but because he doesn't think that they are the equivalent of the KKK.

No one is saying "they are equivalent to the KKK."
The KKK is pure hate. The Christian religion (all faiths) have some flaws, but I do believe that they at least try to preach some basic standards of decency, morals and love.

But for whatever reason, social liberals are obsessed with Christian teaching against homosexuality.  They think that people who hold such views are a threat to society.

... Bigotry isn't a threat to society?

It's not bigotry any more than Islam or Judaism is bigoted against me, a person who likes bacon.

You realize dietary restrictions are completely different right? No Jewish person looks down on you for eating bacon.

I'm aware.  But the same principle applies.  A Muslim believes that it is immoral to eat bacon, I eat bacon, yet I am not offended.  I'm not Muslim and therefore I have no right to dictate to them what they should or should not believe.  And everyone accepts that.  And people accept that.  But for some reason, the Christian prohibition on sex between people of the same gender is considered a crime against humanity by some people.

No it doesn't apply you idiot. You're conflating decades of oppression based on sexual orientation worth religious dietrary restrictions. You sound like an utter moron.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

This is why Evangelicals largely voted for Trump.  Not because the like him but because he doesn't think that they are the equivalent of the KKK.

No one is saying "they are equivalent to the KKK."
The KKK is pure hate. The Christian religion (all faiths) have some flaws, but I do believe that they at least try to preach some basic standards of decency, morals and love.

But for whatever reason, social liberals are obsessed with Christian teaching against homosexuality.  They think that people who hold such views are a threat to society.

... Bigotry isn't a threat to society?

It's not bigotry any more than Islam or Judaism is bigoted against me, a person who likes bacon.

You realize dietary restrictions are completely different right? No Jewish person looks down on you for eating bacon.

I'm aware.  But the same principle applies.  A Muslim believes that it is immoral to eat bacon, I eat bacon, yet I am not offended.  I'm not Muslim and therefore I have no right to dictate to them what they should or should not believe.  And everyone accepts that.  And people accept that.  But for some reason, the Christian prohibition on sex between people of the same gender is considered a crime against humanity by some people.

No it doesn't apply you idiot. You're conflating decades of oppression based on sexual orientation worth religious dietrary restrictions. You sound like an utter moron.

The baker was not oppressing anyone.