Quantcast
US Supreme Court: Christian baker does not have to bake 'the gay cake'

Forums - Politics Discussion - US Supreme Court: Christian baker does not have to bake 'the gay cake'

massimus said:
How are they the same in our conversation? They are both taken in human context. Their “loving intimate relationship” is based on nothing more than your wishful thinking. I guess because of your position on human homosexuality? You want it to be a normal part of nature I guess? Justification of some sort? Is that why you are irritated? I’m not talking about humans, we are talking about the animal kingdom. Homosexuality isn’t rampant in the wild, it’s a fact. The article before yours had a whole book of examples and it’s still a rare occurrence. There are any number of reasons why these things happen.

Educate yourself. You are wrong. Plenty of citations in these articles for you to peruse.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior



Around the Network
I donít educate myself on Wikipedia.

d21lewis said:
Slippery slope.

With this ruling and the recent refusal of service to Sarah Sanders, I feel that we're moving backwards. I'm black. My wife is white. What's to stop a restaurant from saying "Sorry. We don't serve interracial couples." What's to stop a store from saying "You blacks are nothing but trouble. I'm not selling you that gun."

This is not good. Not good at all. Even if I disagree with somebody's lifestyle choices, religion, political views, etc. I still feel that their rights should not be compromised.

At the end of the day who cares though?

Is it wrong and stupid and the person saying all that a racist fuck? sure

But look on the flip side, we are in the world of social media, leave them a bad review and let the people crucify them by not going to those places to do their shopping. This is how a democracy works. Smart people will survive in business, racist pricks will not.

I know it still doesn't make it right, but I would rather see the person for who they are and give my money to a person who is accepting of others.

Same goes for this cake shop. I don't get why we still debating it a month later lol. There is 100s of cake shops, just go to another. Leave this one a bad review and watch it's business decline with time.

 



 

 

Even if I don't agree with the ruling, the business has the right to do what they want, even if it is due to religious reasons. The caveats of a free market.

However, as in any capitalist system, people need to vote with their wallets and not support this kind of behavior. They're masking their unwillingness and bigotry by religious reasons, and with that I disagree.

massimus said:
I don’t educate myself on Wikipedia.

You don't use wikipedia as a reference, you use it as a list of references that you can check for yourself. For that application Wikipedia works extremely well. 



...

Around the Network
Torillian said:
massimus said:
I don’t educate myself on Wikipedia.

You don't use wikipedia as a reference, you use it as a list of references that you can check for yourself. For that application Wikipedia works extremely well. 

I don’t use it at all, just personal preference. 



Personally I hope his business fails. He has the right to discriminate based upon freedom of speech and religion but on the flip side people that aren't close minded or bigoted have the right to avoid his business like it's the plague

massimus said:
Torillian said:

You don't use wikipedia as a reference, you use it as a list of references that you can check for yourself. For that application Wikipedia works extremely well. 

I don’t use it at all, just personal preference. 

Well here's a list of references so that you can learn about homosexuality in animals:

Would be simpler if you could click the links but this way you have all the citations you need without the pesky middle man.



...

I don’t use screenshots of Wikipedia either lol thanks though. Most of those sources look ridiculous, there are like 2 that are problay worth clicking on that seem like real studies. I see where he got that gay penguin article from now. That’s why I don’t use Wikipedia. You have the entire library of Congress and endless studies at your fingertips, why be lazy lol?

If I was interested I would look into it more but I have already read a few articles from him and other users and they all say the same thing. A handful of species display habitual homosexual behaviors, mostly birds with brains the size of a peanut. 57 other species have displayed homosexual behaviors but it’s very rare to see. That’s all I needed to know. There is no gay pride going on in the animal kingdom. There is zero evidence that animals are searching out same sex partners because of their sexual preference for “intimate relationships”. Showing homosexual behaviors and being a homosexual are different things. They don’t think or operate like humans do, it’s as simple as that.

 

im more interested in how you got all of that shit open at the same time lol. Damn brah.

Last edited by massimus - on 08 July 2018

massimus said:

I don’t use screenshots of Wikipedia either lol thanks though. Most of those sources look ridiculous, there are like 2 that are problay worth clicking on that seem like real studies. I see where he got that gay penguin article from now. That’s why I don’t use Wikipedia. You have the entire library of Congress and endless studies at your fingertips, why be lazy lol?

"You can bring a horse to water, but you can't make it drink".

Wikipedia articles are as strong as the citations that they are built from, if you would prefer to ignore such extremely fantastic sources of evidence and information, then so be it, but the fact you refuse to actually check it out (But still hold an opinion on it) just undermines your own position.

massimus said:


If I was interested I would look into it more but I have already read a few articles from him and other users and they all say the same thing. A handful of species display habitual homosexual behaviors, mostly birds with brains the size of a peanut. 57 other species have displayed homosexual behaviors but it’s very rare to see. That’s all I needed to know. There is no gay pride going on in the animal kingdom.

If you aren't interested in it, then why are you even debating the topic?


massimus said:

There is zero evidence that animals are searching out same sex partners because of their sexual preference for “intimate relationships”. Showing homosexual behaviors and being a homosexual are different things.

Incorrect.
The evidence provided in this thread shows that some animals are searching out same-sex partners, don't try and spin your own narrative here. :P

Just because it's not happening en-masse' doesn't mean it doesn't occur.


massimus said:

They don’t think or operate like humans do, it’s as simple as that.

You could use that excuse in any comparison between animals and human beings, could you not?