Current Events > Baking a cake for a same-sex wedding? No!

Topic List
Page List: 1, 2, 3
burritosatan
05/23/19 5:10:34 PM
#51:


DevsBro posted...
Nobody dies if you don't bake a cake.


This is true but I heard theres only 1 place in the entire world that bakes cakes so what are people supposed to do
---
Same sex marriage is not gay privilege, its equal rights. Privilege would be something like gay people not paying taxes. Like churches don't
... Copied to Clipboard!
nemu
05/23/19 5:11:32 PM
#52:


DarkRoast posted...
nemu posted...
What is the cake in this particular example? If it's "Congratulations on your wedding Todd and Howard" with two groom figures, I don't think there's any way you could say the person is being forced to make a design against their wishes unless they would refuse to put the names of a straight couple and groom and bride figures. I feel you'd need an extremely flamboyant cake to have any grounds for refusal.


You can literally refuse to make a white cake if you're so inclined. Trying to set limits is missing the bigger picture - you shouldn't be able to tell someone else to make something exactly the way you want.

If the person would put the names of a straight couple on a cake, they need to put the names of a gay couple as well. That is a direct service that is being declined due to the clients' sexual orientation.
... Copied to Clipboard!
HiddenLurker
05/23/19 5:13:46 PM
#53:


nemu posted...
DarkRoast posted...
nemu posted...
What is the cake in this particular example? If it's "Congratulations on your wedding Todd and Howard" with two groom figures, I don't think there's any way you could say the person is being forced to make a design against their wishes unless they would refuse to put the names of a straight couple and groom and bride figures. I feel you'd need an extremely flamboyant cake to have any grounds for refusal.


You can literally refuse to make a white cake if you're so inclined. Trying to set limits is missing the bigger picture - you shouldn't be able to tell someone else to make something exactly the way you want.

If the person would put the names of a straight couple on a cake, they need to put the names of a gay couple as well. That is a direct service that is being declined due to the clients sexual orientation.

Except when it is a Muslim bakery that refuses citing their religion people like you give them a pass.
---
Our culture accepts two lies.
If you disagree with someone's lifestyle, you must fear/hate them. To love someone you agree with everything they believe/do.
... Copied to Clipboard!
DarkRoast
05/23/19 5:13:51 PM
#54:


nemu posted...
DarkRoast posted...
nemu posted...
What is the cake in this particular example? If it's "Congratulations on your wedding Todd and Howard" with two groom figures, I don't think there's any way you could say the person is being forced to make a design against their wishes unless they would refuse to put the names of a straight couple and groom and bride figures. I feel you'd need an extremely flamboyant cake to have any grounds for refusal.


You can literally refuse to make a white cake if you're so inclined. Trying to set limits is missing the bigger picture - you shouldn't be able to tell someone else to make something exactly the way you want.

If the person would put the names of a straight couple on a cake, they need to put the names of a gay couple as well. That is a direct service that is being declined due to the clients sexual orientation.


He can refuse to do any customization he wants, for any reason he wants. As long as he offers a product of reasonable equivalence. Hell, there's nothing wrong with refusing to write Steve on a cake because you don't like the name Steve. It doesn't matter what the reason is. First amendment rights are what they are, no matter what your deeply held beliefs are.
---
Well allons-y, Alonso!
... Copied to Clipboard!
QuantumTheory
05/23/19 5:14:28 PM
#55:


nemu posted...
DarkRoast posted...
nemu posted...
What is the cake in this particular example? If it's "Congratulations on your wedding Todd and Howard" with two groom figures, I don't think there's any way you could say the person is being forced to make a design against their wishes unless they would refuse to put the names of a straight couple and groom and bride figures. I feel you'd need an extremely flamboyant cake to have any grounds for refusal.


You can literally refuse to make a white cake if you're so inclined. Trying to set limits is missing the bigger picture - you shouldn't be able to tell someone else to make something exactly the way you want.

If the person would put the names of a straight couple on a cake, they need to put the names of a gay couple as well. That is a direct service that is being declined due to the clients' sexual orientation.


Calm down, this isnt North Korea.
---
Nothing is real.
... Copied to Clipboard!
burritosatan
05/23/19 5:16:51 PM
#56:


QuantumTheory posted...
nemu posted...
DarkRoast posted...
nemu posted...
What is the cake in this particular example? If it's "Congratulations on your wedding Todd and Howard" with two groom figures, I don't think there's any way you could say the person is being forced to make a design against their wishes unless they would refuse to put the names of a straight couple and groom and bride figures. I feel you'd need an extremely flamboyant cake to have any grounds for refusal.


You can literally refuse to make a white cake if you're so inclined. Trying to set limits is missing the bigger picture - you shouldn't be able to tell someone else to make something exactly the way you want.

If the person would put the names of a straight couple on a cake, they need to put the names of a gay couple as well. That is a direct service that is being declined due to the clients' sexual orientation.


Calm down, this isnt North Korea.


So it seems CE is full of "my agenda is supposed to mean more than yours"
---
Same sex marriage is not gay privilege, its equal rights. Privilege would be something like gay people not paying taxes. Like churches don't
... Copied to Clipboard!
QuantumTheory
05/23/19 5:18:51 PM
#57:


burritosatan posted...
QuantumTheory posted...
nemu posted...
DarkRoast posted...
nemu posted...
What is the cake in this particular example? If it's "Congratulations on your wedding Todd and Howard" with two groom figures, I don't think there's any way you could say the person is being forced to make a design against their wishes unless they would refuse to put the names of a straight couple and groom and bride figures. I feel you'd need an extremely flamboyant cake to have any grounds for refusal.


You can literally refuse to make a white cake if you're so inclined. Trying to set limits is missing the bigger picture - you shouldn't be able to tell someone else to make something exactly the way you want.

If the person would put the names of a straight couple on a cake, they need to put the names of a gay couple as well. That is a direct service that is being declined due to the clients' sexual orientation.


Calm down, this isnt North Korea.


So it seems CE is full of "my agenda is supposed to mean more than yours"


So whats your solution then?
---
Nothing is real.
... Copied to Clipboard!
nemu
05/23/19 5:19:00 PM
#58:


DarkRoast posted...
nemu posted...
DarkRoast posted...
nemu posted...
What is the cake in this particular example? If it's "Congratulations on your wedding Todd and Howard" with two groom figures, I don't think there's any way you could say the person is being forced to make a design against their wishes unless they would refuse to put the names of a straight couple and groom and bride figures. I feel you'd need an extremely flamboyant cake to have any grounds for refusal.


You can literally refuse to make a white cake if you're so inclined. Trying to set limits is missing the bigger picture - you shouldn't be able to tell someone else to make something exactly the way you want.

If the person would put the names of a straight couple on a cake, they need to put the names of a gay couple as well. That is a direct service that is being declined due to the clients sexual orientation.


He can refuse to do any customization he wants, for any reason he wants. As long as he offers a product of reasonable equivalence. Hell, there's nothing wrong with refusing to write Steve on a cake because you don't like the name Steve. It doesn't matter what the reason is. First amendment rights are what they are, no matter what your deeply held beliefs are.

If it's a service you offered straight people, it needs to be upheld for gay people. If you have certain parameters in which you will customize a cake, those parameters must be upheld for all clientele. We're not talking about some kind of nonsense cake with "I [baker] support gay people in all aspects of life and denounce [religion]." Someone should not be allowed to refuse to make a portrait of a black person on a cake if they do portraits of white people.
... Copied to Clipboard!
Smashingpmkns
05/23/19 5:21:23 PM
#59:


Gay people are statistically the least likely to have abortions. Conservatives should love them tbh
---
Clean Butt Crew
... Copied to Clipboard!
QuantumTheory
05/23/19 5:22:12 PM
#60:


nemu posted...
DarkRoast posted...
nemu posted...
DarkRoast posted...
nemu posted...
What is the cake in this particular example? If it's "Congratulations on your wedding Todd and Howard" with two groom figures, I don't think there's any way you could say the person is being forced to make a design against their wishes unless they would refuse to put the names of a straight couple and groom and bride figures. I feel you'd need an extremely flamboyant cake to have any grounds for refusal.


You can literally refuse to make a white cake if you're so inclined. Trying to set limits is missing the bigger picture - you shouldn't be able to tell someone else to make something exactly the way you want.

If the person would put the names of a straight couple on a cake, they need to put the names of a gay couple as well. That is a direct service that is being declined due to the clients sexual orientation.


He can refuse to do any customization he wants, for any reason he wants. As long as he offers a product of reasonable equivalence. Hell, there's nothing wrong with refusing to write Steve on a cake because you don't like the name Steve. It doesn't matter what the reason is. First amendment rights are what they are, no matter what your deeply held beliefs are.

If it's a service you offered straight people, it needs to be upheld for gay people. If you have certain parameters in which you will customize a cake, those parameters must be upheld for all clientele. We're not talking about some kind of nonsense cake with "I [baker] support gay people in all aspects of life and denounce [religion]." Someone should not be allowed to refuse to make a portrait of a black person on a cake if they do portraits of white people.


While thats a dickish thing to do, would you fine or jail someone for refusing to do that?
---
Nothing is real.
... Copied to Clipboard!
nemu
05/23/19 5:25:04 PM
#61:


QuantumTheory posted...
nemu posted...
DarkRoast posted...
nemu posted...
DarkRoast posted...
nemu posted...
What is the cake in this particular example? If it's "Congratulations on your wedding Todd and Howard" with two groom figures, I don't think there's any way you could say the person is being forced to make a design against their wishes unless they would refuse to put the names of a straight couple and groom and bride figures. I feel you'd need an extremely flamboyant cake to have any grounds for refusal.


You can literally refuse to make a white cake if you're so inclined. Trying to set limits is missing the bigger picture - you shouldn't be able to tell someone else to make something exactly the way you want.

If the person would put the names of a straight couple on a cake, they need to put the names of a gay couple as well. That is a direct service that is being declined due to the clients sexual orientation.


He can refuse to do any customization he wants, for any reason he wants. As long as he offers a product of reasonable equivalence. Hell, there's nothing wrong with refusing to write Steve on a cake because you don't like the name Steve. It doesn't matter what the reason is. First amendment rights are what they are, no matter what your deeply held beliefs are.

If it's a service you offered straight people, it needs to be upheld for gay people. If you have certain parameters in which you will customize a cake, those parameters must be upheld for all clientele. We're not talking about some kind of nonsense cake with "I [baker] support gay people in all aspects of life and denounce [religion]." Someone should not be allowed to refuse to make a portrait of a black person on a cake if they do portraits of white people.


While thats a dickish thing to do, would you fine or jail someone for refusing to do that?

I think such businesses need to adhere to anti-discrimination laws, or simply stop customizing things. I don't think the book needs to be thrown at them on a first offense, but they definitely deserve what they get if they continue to discriminate despite that. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure most of the 100k+ lawsuits on these businesses come from months or years of pigheaded stubbornness of refusal to simply follow the law.
... Copied to Clipboard!
I Like Toast
05/23/19 5:26:34 PM
#62:


nemu posted...
Someone should not be allowed to refuse to make a portrait of a black person on a cake if they do portraits of white people.


Indeed becsuse race is a federally protected class Sexuality isn't. The business can refuse. And the couple can go to the media. And a competitor can cease the media attention to go hey we aren't bigots buy our wedding cakes instead.

You can argue they probably should be a federally protected class given all the nonsense we're still going through with gay marriage and general lbgt rights. But we aren't there.


Under federal anti-discrimination laws, businesses can refuse service to any person for any reason, unless the business is discriminating against a protected class.

At the national level, protected classes include:

Race or color
National origin or citizenship status
Religion or creed
Sex
Age
Disability, pregnancy, or genetic information
Veteran status

---
If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all
... Copied to Clipboard!
TrevorBlack79
05/23/19 5:37:25 PM
#63:


DarkRoast posted...
nemu posted...
What is the cake in this particular example? If it's "Congratulations on your wedding Todd and Howard" with two groom figures, I don't think there's any way you could say the person is being forced to make a design against their wishes unless they would refuse to put the names of a straight couple and groom and bride figures. I feel you'd need an extremely flamboyant cake to have any grounds for refusal.


You can literally refuse to make a white cake if you're so inclined. Trying to set limits is missing the bigger picture - you shouldn't be able to tell someone else to make something exactly the way you want.


The law disagrees.
---
"a minority is someone who you can tell off the bat they are black/hispanic/colored. LGBT isn't a minority" - Blakkheim1
... Copied to Clipboard!
burritosatan
05/23/19 5:41:33 PM
#64:


QuantumTheory posted...
burritosatan posted...
QuantumTheory posted...
nemu posted...
DarkRoast posted...
nemu posted...
What is the cake in this particular example? If it's "Congratulations on your wedding Todd and Howard" with two groom figures, I don't think there's any way you could say the person is being forced to make a design against their wishes unless they would refuse to put the names of a straight couple and groom and bride figures. I feel you'd need an extremely flamboyant cake to have any grounds for refusal.


You can literally refuse to make a white cake if you're so inclined. Trying to set limits is missing the bigger picture - you shouldn't be able to tell someone else to make something exactly the way you want.

If the person would put the names of a straight couple on a cake, they need to put the names of a gay couple as well. That is a direct service that is being declined due to the clients' sexual orientation.


Calm down, this isnt North Korea.


So it seems CE is full of "my agenda is supposed to mean more than yours"


So whats your solution then?


Go to an different bakery and take your agenda with you
---
Same sex marriage is not gay privilege, its equal rights. Privilege would be something like gay people not paying taxes. Like churches don't
... Copied to Clipboard!
TrevorBlack79
05/23/19 5:48:26 PM
#65:


burritosatan posted...
QuantumTheory posted...
burritosatan posted...
QuantumTheory posted...
nemu posted...
DarkRoast posted...
nemu posted...
What is the cake in this particular example? If it's "Congratulations on your wedding Todd and Howard" with two groom figures, I don't think there's any way you could say the person is being forced to make a design against their wishes unless they would refuse to put the names of a straight couple and groom and bride figures. I feel you'd need an extremely flamboyant cake to have any grounds for refusal.


You can literally refuse to make a white cake if you're so inclined. Trying to set limits is missing the bigger picture - you shouldn't be able to tell someone else to make something exactly the way you want.

If the person would put the names of a straight couple on a cake, they need to put the names of a gay couple as well. That is a direct service that is being declined due to the clients' sexual orientation.


Calm down, this isnt North Korea.


So it seems CE is full of "my agenda is supposed to mean more than yours"


So whats your solution then?


Go to an different bakery and take your agenda with you


Or, the baker obeys the law like they agreed to when they opened their business, and leaves their agenda out of it.
---
"a minority is someone who you can tell off the bat they are black/hispanic/colored. LGBT isn't a minority" - Blakkheim1
... Copied to Clipboard!
burritosatan
05/23/19 5:49:46 PM
#66:


Or, the baker obeys the law like they agreed to when they opened their business, and leaves their agenda out of it.


So they should leave their agenda aside... in order to appease you and your agenda?
---
Same sex marriage is not gay privilege, its equal rights. Privilege would be something like gay people not paying taxes. Like churches don't
... Copied to Clipboard!
MarqueeSeries
05/23/19 5:53:17 PM
#67:


twitterfriends posted...
This is why religious fundamentalist are dangerous, the ironic thing is they hate Muslims for the same reasons.

It is pretty funny that the same people who fear monger about Muslims and Sharia Law are a-ok with forcing people to abide by their religion when its convenient
---
Posted with GameRaven 3.5.1
... Copied to Clipboard!
TrevorBlack79
05/23/19 6:01:27 PM
#68:


burritosatan posted...
Or, the baker obeys the law like they agreed to when they opened their business, and leaves their agenda out of it.


So they should leave their agenda aside... in order to appease you and your agenda?


My "agenda" is buying a custom cake from a bakery that provides custom cakes. Again, the baker already agreed to obey the law when they opened their business. You are literally arguing that bakers should inexplicably be given free reign to defy laws that literally every other business is required to obey. Why?
---
"a minority is someone who you can tell off the bat they are black/hispanic/colored. LGBT isn't a minority" - Blakkheim1
... Copied to Clipboard!
burritosatan
05/23/19 6:34:59 PM
#69:


TrevorBlack79 posted...
burritosatan posted...
Or, the baker obeys the law like they agreed to when they opened their business, and leaves their agenda out of it.


So they should leave their agenda aside... in order to appease you and your agenda?


My "agenda" is buying a custom cake from a bakery that provides custom cakes. Again, the baker already agreed to obey the law when they opened their business. You are literally arguing that bakers should inexplicably be given free reign to defy laws that literally every other business is required to obey. Why?


If I was the Baker and I disagreed with a client I'd just bake the cake after they paid in full and sell the names wrong out of spite. Or accidentally drop it.

Same end result but you're off the hook and then their agenda didnt win in the end
---
Same sex marriage is not gay privilege, its equal rights. Privilege would be something like gay people not paying taxes. Like churches don't
... Copied to Clipboard!
I Like Toast
05/23/19 6:43:25 PM
#70:


TrevorBlack79 posted...
Again, the baker already agreed to obey the law when they opened their business.

https://www.freedomforallamericans.org/states/
---
If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all
... Copied to Clipboard!
ModLogic
05/23/19 6:48:02 PM
#71:


TrevorBlack79 posted...
burritosatan posted...
Or, the baker obeys the law like they agreed to when they opened their business, and leaves their agenda out of it.


So they should leave their agenda aside... in order to appease you and your agenda?


My "agenda" is buying a custom cake from a bakery that provides custom cakes. Again, the baker already agreed to obey the law when they opened their business. You are literally arguing that bakers should inexplicably be given free reign to defy laws that literally every other business is required to obey. Why?

by this logic. i can call up an electrician and force him to accept my job even though he doesn't want to.
---
... Copied to Clipboard!
TrevorBlack79
05/23/19 6:48:44 PM
#72:


burritosatan posted...
TrevorBlack79 posted...
burritosatan posted...
Or, the baker obeys the law like they agreed to when they opened their business, and leaves their agenda out of it.


So they should leave their agenda aside... in order to appease you and your agenda?


My "agenda" is buying a custom cake from a bakery that provides custom cakes. Again, the baker already agreed to obey the law when they opened their business. You are literally arguing that bakers should inexplicably be given free reign to defy laws that literally every other business is required to obey. Why?


If I was the Baker and I disagreed with a client I'd just bake the cake after they paid in full and sell the names wrong out of spite. Or accidentally drop it.

Same end result but you're off the hook and then their agenda didnt win in the end


Then you're refunding the cost, wasting your own time and supplies, and likely paying damages to the couple who's event was negatively impacted by your "carelessness." Even absent damages, you've cost yourself a great deal...so..."Haha take that, liberals!" Or something. I'm guessing you thought you had a point here?

I Like Toast posted...
TrevorBlack79 posted...
Again, the baker already agreed to obey the law when they opened their business.

https://www.freedomforallamericans.org/states/


Obviously we're discussing this issue in the context of cities and states that provide these protections.
---
"a minority is someone who you can tell off the bat they are black/hispanic/colored. LGBT isn't a minority" - Blakkheim1
... Copied to Clipboard!
TrevorBlack79
05/23/19 6:52:09 PM
#73:


ModLogic posted...
TrevorBlack79 posted...
burritosatan posted...
Or, the baker obeys the law like they agreed to when they opened their business, and leaves their agenda out of it.


So they should leave their agenda aside... in order to appease you and your agenda?


My "agenda" is buying a custom cake from a bakery that provides custom cakes. Again, the baker already agreed to obey the law when they opened their business. You are literally arguing that bakers should inexplicably be given free reign to defy laws that literally every other business is required to obey. Why?

by this logic. i can call up an electrician and force him to accept my job even though he doesn't want to.


If the local laws require that he not discriminate, and his reason for "not wanting to" amounts to you belonging to a group protected from discrimination, then yes. The electrician (provided he's operating an actual business and not just a handyman doing odd jobs for friends) has to abide by nondiscrimination laws. Did you actually think otherwise?
---
"a minority is someone who you can tell off the bat they are black/hispanic/colored. LGBT isn't a minority" - Blakkheim1
... Copied to Clipboard!
I Like Toast
05/23/19 6:53:05 PM
#74:


TrevorBlack79 posted...
Obviously we're discussing this issue in the context of cities and states that provide these protections.

Where the Supreme Court supported the bakers?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/narrow-ruling-supreme-court-gives-victory-baker-who-refused-make-n872946

You can't argue follow the law when the law said they did.

Your argument has to center around the first amendment. Or your argument needs to be that lbgt needs to become a federally protected class to accelerate the process of getting over archaic bigotry.

Be educated not ignorant or you're no better than the people you're saying are wrong.
---
If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all
... Copied to Clipboard!
burritosatan
05/23/19 6:53:57 PM
#75:


TrevorBlack79 posted...
burritosatan posted...
TrevorBlack79 posted...
burritosatan posted...
Or, the baker obeys the law like they agreed to when they opened their business, and leaves their agenda out of it.


So they should leave their agenda aside... in order to appease you and your agenda?


My "agenda" is buying a custom cake from a bakery that provides custom cakes. Again, the baker already agreed to obey the law when they opened their business. You are literally arguing that bakers should inexplicably be given free reign to defy laws that literally every other business is required to obey. Why?


If I was the Baker and I disagreed with a client I'd just bake the cake after they paid in full and sell the names wrong out of spite. Or accidentally drop it.

Same end result but you're off the hook and then their agenda didnt win in the end


Then you're refunding the cost, wasting your own time and supplies, and likely paying damages to the couple who's event was negatively impacted by your "carelessness." Even absent damages, you've cost yourself a great deal...so..."Haha take that, liberals!" Or something. I'm guessing you thought you had a point here?

I Like Toast posted...
TrevorBlack79 posted...
Again, the baker already agreed to obey the law when they opened their business.

https://www.freedomforallamericans.org/states/


Obviously we're discussing this issue in the context of cities and states that provide these protections.


I wouldn't refund anything. Will they refund my time as a store owner when they wasted it arguing because I dont wanna put steve and Phil or something on their damn cake? Like just go somewhere else and stop making a scene already
---
Same sex marriage is not gay privilege, its equal rights. Privilege would be something like gay people not paying taxes. Like churches don't
... Copied to Clipboard!
TrevorBlack79
05/23/19 7:01:04 PM
#76:


I Like Toast posted...
TrevorBlack79 posted...
Obviously we're discussing this issue in the context of cities and states that provide these protections.

Where the Supreme Court supported the bakers?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/narrow-ruling-supreme-court-gives-victory-baker-who-refused-make-n872946

You can't argue follow the law when the law said they did.


Oh look, this deliberately dishonest bullshit again. From your link:

The opinion did not address the larger question of whether businesses can refuse to serve gay and lesbian customers.


I know you already know this. Everyone already knows this, so why do you think you can get away with lying about it?

burritosatan posted...
I wouldn't refund anything.


Yes you would, whether you like it or not. Regardless, that you've devolved to this nonsense just reinforces that you don't have anything of value to say.
---
"a minority is someone who you can tell off the bat they are black/hispanic/colored. LGBT isn't a minority" - Blakkheim1
... Copied to Clipboard!
burritosatan
05/23/19 7:30:14 PM
#77:


TrevorBlack79 posted...
I Like Toast posted...
TrevorBlack79 posted...
Obviously we're discussing this issue in the context of cities and states that provide these protections.

Where the Supreme Court supported the bakers?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/narrow-ruling-supreme-court-gives-victory-baker-who-refused-make-n872946

You can't argue follow the law when the law said they did.


Oh look, this deliberately dishonest bullshit again. From your link:

The opinion did not address the larger question of whether businesses can refuse to serve gay and lesbian customers.


I know you already know this. Everyone already knows this, so why do you think you can get away with lying about it?

burritosatan posted...
I wouldn't refund anything.


Yes you would, whether you like it or not. Regardless, that you've devolved to this nonsense just reinforces that you don't have anything of value to say.


Theres a thing called "No Refunds"
---
Same sex marriage is not gay privilege, its equal rights. Privilege would be something like gay people not paying taxes. Like churches don't
... Copied to Clipboard!
TrevorBlack79
05/23/19 7:44:03 PM
#78:


burritosatan posted...
Theres a thing called "No Refunds"


Which doesn't apply when the business outright fails to provide the service that was paid for, which would be the case with a cake that was unusable because it got dropped. Chargeback on the credit card and you're SOL.
---
"a minority is someone who you can tell off the bat they are black/hispanic/colored. LGBT isn't a minority" - Blakkheim1
... Copied to Clipboard!
burritosatan
05/23/19 8:15:22 PM
#79:


TrevorBlack79 posted...
burritosatan posted...
Theres a thing called "No Refunds"


Which doesn't apply when the business outright fails to provide the service that was paid for, which would be the case with a cake that was unusable because it got dropped. Chargeback on the credit card and you're SOL.


Mistakes happen. Names get misspelled all the time. Tell them you only accept cash or you cant take their order. No cash refunds. Done
---
Same sex marriage is not gay privilege, its equal rights. Privilege would be something like gay people not paying taxes. Like churches don't
... Copied to Clipboard!
MorbidFaithless
05/23/19 8:24:59 PM
#80:


burritosatan posted...
TrevorBlack79 posted...
burritosatan posted...
Theres a thing called "No Refunds"


Which doesn't apply when the business outright fails to provide the service that was paid for, which would be the case with a cake that was unusable because it got dropped. Chargeback on the credit card and you're SOL.


Mistakes happen. Names get misspelled all the time. Tell them you only accept cash or you cant take their order. No cash refunds. Done

Why are you so adamant about being bigoted?
---
walk like thunder
... Copied to Clipboard!
burritosatan
05/23/19 9:11:15 PM
#81:


MorbidFaithless posted...
burritosatan posted...
TrevorBlack79 posted...
burritosatan posted...
Theres a thing called "No Refunds"


Which doesn't apply when the business outright fails to provide the service that was paid for, which would be the case with a cake that was unusable because it got dropped. Chargeback on the credit card and you're SOL.


Mistakes happen. Names get misspelled all the time. Tell them you only accept cash or you cant take their order. No cash refunds. Done

Why are you so adamant about being bigoted?


I'm not, I'm giving examples of how they could simply get around you "they have to follow the law! THE LAW!" argument
---
Same sex marriage is not gay privilege, its equal rights. Privilege would be something like gay people not paying taxes. Like churches don't
... Copied to Clipboard!
TrevorBlack79
05/23/19 9:27:32 PM
#82:


burritosatan posted...
TrevorBlack79 posted...
burritosatan posted...
Theres a thing called "No Refunds"


Which doesn't apply when the business outright fails to provide the service that was paid for, which would be the case with a cake that was unusable because it got dropped. Chargeback on the credit card and you're SOL.


Mistakes happen. Names get misspelled all the time. Tell them you only accept cash or you cant take their order. No cash refunds. Done


Misspelled names make the cake unusable. You'll be fixing it or refunding payment. If you're an actual store, you have card readers installed. If you refuse to allow only gay people to use the card readers, you're going to get hit for discrimination on that alone. If the customers willingly paid cash and you still refused the refund you'll get sued and, being an open-and-shut case of "services not rendered," you'll be paying the refund plus legal expenses (yours and theirs) under court order. Have fun with all that just because you think you have a "right" to break a law you agreed to obey when you opened your business.
---
"a minority is someone who you can tell off the bat they are black/hispanic/colored. LGBT isn't a minority" - Blakkheim1
... Copied to Clipboard!
DarkRoast
05/23/19 9:59:28 PM
#83:


They broke no law. The supreme court agreed. Stop pretending otherwise.

The only law that potentially could've been broken is forcing the baker to make a decoration he didn't want to make. That would be a violation of free speech.

The baker is not denying service by refusing to make a specific decoration. He was willing to sell them a cake of reasonable approximation.

Just like Costco will sell you a smiley face cake but not a hentai cake.

This is not complicated, and your feelings about bigotry do not change this. You can't force someone to make any decoration you want.
---
Well allons-y, Alonso!
... Copied to Clipboard!
TrevorBlack79
05/23/19 10:08:07 PM
#84:


DarkRoast posted...
The supreme court agreed.


Objectively wrong. The supreme court didn't comment on whether or not the baker broke the law.
---
"a minority is someone who you can tell off the bat they are black/hispanic/colored. LGBT isn't a minority" - Blakkheim1
... Copied to Clipboard!
burritosatan
05/23/19 10:31:16 PM
#85:


TrevorBlack79 posted...
DarkRoast posted...
The supreme court agreed.


Objectively wrong. The supreme court didn't comment on whether or not the baker broke the law.


So then they didn't break the law
---
Same sex marriage is not gay privilege, its equal rights. Privilege would be something like gay people not paying taxes. Like churches don't
... Copied to Clipboard!
TrevorBlack79
05/23/19 10:41:12 PM
#86:


burritosatan posted...
TrevorBlack79 posted...
DarkRoast posted...
The supreme court agreed.


Objectively wrong. The supreme court didn't comment on whether or not the baker broke the law.


So then they didn't break the law


They did, but they got away with it because Colorado screwed the case. It's still illegal to discriminate in this manner in CO, and it would still be illegal if the same baker did it again.
---
"a minority is someone who you can tell off the bat they are black/hispanic/colored. LGBT isn't a minority" - Blakkheim1
... Copied to Clipboard!
burritosatan
05/23/19 10:55:34 PM
#87:


TrevorBlack79 posted...
burritosatan posted...
TrevorBlack79 posted...
DarkRoast posted...
The supreme court agreed.


Objectively wrong. The supreme court didn't comment on whether or not the baker broke the law.


So then they didn't break the law


They did, but they got away with it because Colorado screwed the case. It's still illegal to discriminate in this manner in CO, and it would still be illegal if the same baker did it again.


It's not illegal if you dont get caught
---
Same sex marriage is not gay privilege, its equal rights. Privilege would be something like gay people not paying taxes. Like churches don't
... Copied to Clipboard!
I Like Toast
05/23/19 11:11:18 PM
#88:


TrevorBlack79 posted...

They did, but they got away with it because Colorado screwed the case. It's still illegal to discriminate in this manner in CO, and it would still be illegal if the same baker did it again.


this is a laughable misunderstanding of the court system. I can only assume you're actually a bigot at this point and trying to deliberately make the opposing side look bad.

The supreme court ruled in favor of the bakery and refused to make any generalized claim that could be applied to other states or even other businesses involved in the wedding industry. They stated that the bakers religious beliefs which are protected trumped gay rights since they aren't a federally protected class for anti-discrimination.

Don't center your argument about what the law is, if you don't understand what the law is to begin with.
---
If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all
... Copied to Clipboard!
TrevorBlack79
05/23/19 11:37:15 PM
#89:


I Like Toast posted...
The supreme court ruled in favor of the bakery and refused to make any generalized claim that could be applied to other states or even other businesses involved in the wedding industry. They stated that the bakers religious beliefs which are protected trumped gay rights since they aren't a federally protected class for anti-discrimination.


This isn't even remotely what happened. The SC ruled that the state of CO acted with hostility towards Phillips' religious beliefs and made a ruling exclusive to that one case. It does not set any precedent, it does not change existing CO law. Quit trolling.
---
"a minority is someone who you can tell off the bat they are black/hispanic/colored. LGBT isn't a minority" - Blakkheim1
... Copied to Clipboard!
Vertania
05/24/19 4:14:23 AM
#90:


TrevorBlack79 posted...
They did, but they got away with it because Colorado screwed the case. It's still illegal to discriminate in this manner in CO, and it would still be illegal if the same baker did it again.

Oh, really?

https://www.apnews.com/88f528e624c34cf384c238b857ee4a72

...because the same baker did do it again and the Colorado Civil Rights Commission unanimously voted to dismiss its administrative action against him, ending every ongoing legal dispute between him and the state.
... Copied to Clipboard!
MrMallard
05/24/19 4:47:59 AM
#91:


DarkRoast posted...
They broke no law. The supreme court agreed. Stop pretending otherwise.

The only law that potentially could've been broken is forcing the baker to make a decoration he didn't want to make. That would be a violation of free speech.

The baker is not denying service by refusing to make a specific decoration. He was willing to sell them a cake of reasonable approximation. Arguments like "well if he makes cakes with brides and grooms, he can't refuse cakes with two grooms" show a gross lack of basic understanding of free speech.

Just like Costco will sell you a smiley face cake but not a hentai cake.

This is not complicated, and your feelings about bigotry do not change this. You can't force someone to make any decoration you want.

This entire post is shitty, but it's this attitude that stands out as being the most revolting.

You've just compared gay people to smut to justify your belief in "free speech". How is a cake depicting two men or two women in a romantic context at all analogous to sexual nudity in a public place, or public depictions of sexual intercourse? Why put same-sex love
- a chaste cake-topper of two men or two women, or two masculine/feminine names on a wedding cake - on the same pedestal as pornography? It's not perverse if you depict a man and a woman, what makes it so NSFW if it's a same-sex couple?

This attitude has been a pervasive argument against homosexuality for decades, if not longer. Can't have gay teachers, because they're all secretly pedophiles who prey on children - because they're sexual deviants! The AIDS epidemic is primarily affecting the gay community because of their promiscuity, and we should do as little as possible to help them. Wait, straight people can get it too? You can get it through blood transfusions? Fund that cure, baby!

Comparing gay people to pornography, and boiling their existence down to having sex? It's got roots in Western homophobia that harken back to the days where gay people were sought out, bashed and murdered for their sexuality on a wide scale. When that shit was socially acceptable. Even if this post isn't dog-whistling, and you didn't intend it, that's the legacy of this discourse. That's its historical significance. So your post can go and fuck right off.
---
Now Playing: Yakuza 5, A Night in the Woods, Phantasy Star
... Copied to Clipboard!
TrevorBlack79
05/24/19 8:07:05 AM
#92:


Vertania posted...
TrevorBlack79 posted...
They did, but they got away with it because Colorado screwed the case. It's still illegal to discriminate in this manner in CO, and it would still be illegal if the same baker did it again.

Oh, really?

https://www.apnews.com/88f528e624c34cf384c238b857ee4a72

...because the same baker did do it again and the Colorado Civil Rights Commission unanimously voted to dismiss its administrative action against him, ending every ongoing legal dispute between him and the state.


Literally not the same situation, so no, the same baker did not do it again. This also doesn't say his refusal to serve the trans woman was legal, and she is still free to pursue legal action herself. But hey, you tried.
---
"a minority is someone who you can tell off the bat they are black/hispanic/colored. LGBT isn't a minority" - Blakkheim1
... Copied to Clipboard!
Vertania
05/24/19 9:06:46 AM
#93:


TrevorBlack79 posted...
Literally not the same situation, so no, the same baker did not do it again. This also doesn't say his refusal to serve the trans woman was legal, and she is still free to pursue legal action herself. But hey, you tried.

It says shes free to pursue civil action. Civil courts deal with liability for damages and do not determine legality of matters like discrimination (that would be an administrative or government agency decision).
... Copied to Clipboard!
#94
Post #94 was unavailable or deleted.
Malfunction
05/24/19 9:09:31 AM
#95:


MrMallard posted...
DarkRoast posted...
They broke no law. The supreme court agreed. Stop pretending otherwise.

The only law that potentially could've been broken is forcing the baker to make a decoration he didn't want to make. That would be a violation of free speech.

The baker is not denying service by refusing to make a specific decoration. He was willing to sell them a cake of reasonable approximation. Arguments like "well if he makes cakes with brides and grooms, he can't refuse cakes with two grooms" show a gross lack of basic understanding of free speech.

Just like Costco will sell you a smiley face cake but not a hentai cake.

This is not complicated, and your feelings about bigotry do not change this. You can't force someone to make any decoration you want.

This entire post is shitty, but it's this attitude that stands out as being the most revolting.

You've just compared gay people to smut to justify your belief in "free speech". How is a cake depicting two men or two women in a romantic context at all analogous to sexual nudity in a public place, or public depictions of sexual intercourse? Why put same-sex love
- a chaste cake-topper of two men or two women, or two masculine/feminine names on a wedding cake - on the same pedestal as pornography? It's not perverse if you depict a man and a woman, what makes it so NSFW if it's a same-sex couple?

This attitude has been a pervasive argument against homosexuality for decades, if not longer. Can't have gay teachers, because they're all secretly pedophiles who prey on children - because they're sexual deviants! The AIDS epidemic is primarily affecting the gay community because of their promiscuity, and we should do as little as possible to help them. Wait, straight people can get it too? You can get it through blood transfusions? Fund that cure, baby!

Comparing gay people to pornography, and boiling their existence down to having sex? It's got roots in Western homophobia that harken back to the days where gay people were sought out, bashed and murdered for their sexuality on a wide scale. When that shit was socially acceptable. Even if this post isn't dog-whistling, and you didn't intend it, that's the legacy of this discourse. That's its historical significance. So your post can go and fuck right off.

... Copied to Clipboard!
Malfunction
05/24/19 9:09:48 AM
#96:


Conflict posted...
Vertania posted...
Letting babies be born? No!

Forcing business owners to make whatever a customer requests? Yes!

#dishonestarguments


Is that really the best you can come up with?

Waah, a baker had to do their job. Lol

Lol ikr, bet they thought they had one there!
... Copied to Clipboard!
Vertania
05/24/19 9:39:20 AM
#97:


Conflict posted...
Is that really the best you can come up with?

Waah, a baker had to do their job. Lol

Youre right; I didnt come close to matching TCs extremely dishonest and statistically insignificant example.

How about: Forcing a Christian baker to depict a Satanic blood orgy? Yes!
... Copied to Clipboard!
burritosatan
05/24/19 9:52:18 AM
#98:


Conflict posted...
Vertania posted...
Letting babies be born? No!

Forcing business owners to make whatever a customer requests? Yes!

#dishonestarguments


Is that really the best you can come up with?

Waah, a baker had to do their job. Lol


Supreme court says no.
---
Same sex marriage is not gay privilege, its equal rights. Privilege would be something like gay people not paying taxes. Like churches don't
... Copied to Clipboard!
BalanceLost
05/24/19 9:54:48 AM
#99:


Vertania posted...
Conflict posted...
Is that really the best you can come up with?

Waah, a baker had to do their job. Lol

Youre right; I didnt come close to matching TCs extremely dishonest and statistically insignificant example.

How about: Forcing a Christian baker to depict a Satanic blood orgy? Yes!

Youre really grasping for straws huh? I guess the OP hit close to home.
---
"BalanceLost has a steam-powered PS2 because Sweden don't have electric" - dimeanatrix
... Copied to Clipboard!
warnerbroman
05/24/19 9:57:50 AM
#100:


Duncanwii posted...
deupd_u posted...
BalanceLost posted...
Forcing a minor to give birth to her rapists baby? Yes!

Which, as we know, is a scenario that occurs to 118% of women

Even if it happened to less then .1% of woman it isnt right for that to happen.

Is the pro or anti-Vaccines?
---
1478 4237 6903 Xavier
Flying....you can't stop staring can you?
... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List
Page List: 1, 2, 3