By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

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

Honestly the gay couple seem to be much bigger assholes than than the baker himself. Way to create a ruckus just because 10 mins of your life got wasted.



Bet with Intrinsic:

The Switch will outsell 3DS (based on VGchartz numbers), according to me, while Intrinsic thinks the opposite will hold true. One month avatar control for the loser's avatar.

Around the Network
flashfire926 said:
Honestly the gay couple seem to be much bigger assholes than than the baker himself. Way to create a ruckus just because 10 mins of your life got wasted.

EXACTLY. I'm sure there were plenty other bakers that were willing to do it.



NightlyPoe said:

There's a whole lot of assumption in this post that your views on his religion are the correct ones and this baker should adhere to your interpretation of what his faith should be.

Religion is built on the foundations of assumptions to start with.

If people believed in actual evidence, there wouldn't be any need for religion and this entire issue would be a non-issue. :P

Feel free to be more specific and point out the assumptions though.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Ka-pi96 said:
hmm, not sure what to think of this. On one hand businesses should have the right to choose what business they take, but on the other hand refusing customers due to their sexual orientation is not a good precedent.

I guess really it should depend on what the details were. ie. if they wanted a custom made cake then he should be well within his rights to refuse, but if they were just buying a regular cake from the menu or shop window or something then refusing that should be grounds for a discrimination case.

This. I wish we had a closer look at the circumstances. 



NightlyPoe said:

In the first and second responses you tried to say what parts should make up his Christian faith.  First by talking about what the Christian faith should or shouldn't be about, and then saying that it's hypocrisy that they don't focus on other things in the second response.

Basically, what I'm saying is that it's not your place to impose what you think another person's faith should be.

Also on this point:


Firstly... I am not imposing anything, on anyone, in regards to their religious indoctrination. - I am parroting what the Bible states, it's really that simple, no more to it.

If they/you have an issue to the statements I provided earlier... Then you should probably follow another religion or discard said religion in question, in it's entirety. - Because clearly there is a conflict there.

The Bible is against divorce. Christians base their entire religious indoctrination on the Bible, to deny same-sex couples a cake and not deny someone being married a second time is hypocritical.

NightlyPoe said:

Freedom of Religion also has an implied right of Freedrom from Religion

There is no implication in the 1st Amendment whatsoever that there is a right of freedom from religion from your fellow citizen.  In fact, it's difficult to imagine how a government protecting the rights of "freedom from religion" could do so without "prohibiting the free exercise thereof".  In order to exercise their religious freedom without prohibitions, the government obviously cannot restrict the exercise of religious practices and beliefs to the home and place of worship and feel free to trample those rights everywhere else.

"Implied". - To have freedom of religion is to have freedom from religion, because someones non-religious views could be misconstrued as almost religious depending on perspective or belief system.
I.E. Pagan/Flying Spaghetti Monster. etc'.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Around the Network



To deny anyone, anything, based on Gender, Sexuality, Race or other attribute is discrimination... And is against good, fair, conscience in my eyes.




What if a pedophile wanted you to paint him with the child he molested? 

I'm not saying pedophile = homosexual, but being human is making judgements. To a Christian, homosexuality is reprehensible. In fact, to most of the world outside the West, homosexuality is seen as disgusting and undesirable. We are the strange ones. 



Rightling said:



To deny anyone, anything, based on Gender, Sexuality, Race or other attribute is discrimination... And is against good, fair, conscience in my eyes.




What if a pedophile wanted you to paint him with the child he molested? 

I'm not saying pedophile = homosexual, but being human is making judgements. To a Christian, homosexuality is reprehensible. In fact, to most of the world outside the West, homosexuality is seen as disgusting and undesirable. We are the strange ones. 

Your analogy is blatantly bullshit.

A child cannot provide Adult consent, so it's illegal to start with.  - Not to mention the psychological damage you would potentially do to said child in having their person portrayed in such a reprehensible manner.
Thus... That is why your analogy will not work.

Homosexuality allows for two Adults to provide Adult consent, which is why it cannot and should not morally ever be compared.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:
Rightling said:

What if a pedophile wanted you to paint him with the child he molested? 

I'm not saying pedophile = homosexual, but being human is making judgements. To a Christian, homosexuality is reprehensible. In fact, to most of the world outside the West, homosexuality is seen as disgusting and undesirable. We are the strange ones. 

Your analogy is blatantly bullshit.

A child cannot provide Adult consent, so it's illegal to start with.  - Not to mention the psychological damage you would potentially do to said child in having their person portrayed in such a reprehensible manner.
Thus... That is why your analogy will not work.

Homosexuality allows for two Adults to provide Adult consent, which is why it cannot and should not morally ever be compared.

But you are judging a pedophile based on their sexual orientation, right? What if they were just born that way, they have no choice being attracted to children. I'm not comparing the morality, I'm saying that we do judge people. You find pedophiles morally wrong and homosexuality okay but to a lot of other people, homosexuality is just as disgusting. They don't care that it's two adults or that it's legal. 

In any case, I don't think a business should be forced to provide a service by the government. If it was a vital service like health care, electricity or internet, that would be different. The less the government is involved in guiding morality, the better. 



Snoopy said:
SpokenTruth said:

What the hell is a gay cake?

A simple google image search will show you hundreds of examples.

Well i just googled and FML. If I was a baker worth my salt I wouldn't want to make that either. Looks terrible.

How is that look visually appealing to eat? Give me a black forrest chocolate cake over this coloured dye fest any day



 

 

Rightling said:
Pemalite said:

Your analogy is blatantly bullshit.

A child cannot provide Adult consent, so it's illegal to start with.  - Not to mention the psychological damage you would potentially do to said child in having their person portrayed in such a reprehensible manner.
Thus... That is why your analogy will not work.

Homosexuality allows for two Adults to provide Adult consent, which is why it cannot and should not morally ever be compared.

But you are judging a pedophile based on their sexual orientation, right? What if they were just born that way, they have no choice being attracted to children. I'm not comparing the morality, I'm saying that we do judge people. You find pedophiles morally wrong and homosexuality okay but to a lot of other people, homosexuality is just as disgusting. They don't care that it's two adults or that it's legal. 

In any case, I don't think a business should be forced to provide a service by the government. If it was a vital service like health care, electricity or internet, that would be different. The less the government is involved in guiding morality, the better. 

That's the thing. People need to take mortal views out of it.

Look at other countries they have children brides, age of consent at 13 etc.  Morally we know they are wrong. Yet we all sit in our own bubble here. If we truly cared, we be up in arms fighting this in those countries.

Here we talking about a bloody cake. If a shop don't want my money then whatever I go to another shop that does and never return to the shop that refused me service. Their loss not mine.