Judge rules in favor of Baker refusing to make cake for same sex couple.

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Again with people putting their foot in their mouths. If that is the case then the baker definitely should not have made a cake for anything he does not approve. Why on earth would you give me a refutation to your own thinking?

But thank you for further proving me right.

If you think I supported your position, then you need to read more carefully.

If the baker would be willing to bake a particular cake design for an opposite-sex couple, he should be obliged to provide it to a same-sex couple on the same terms.

 

[Curious George]

Right: it’s about sex.



No.

Let me try again:

Sexual orientation refers to things like heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, pansexuality, etc.

A baker who was discriminating against sexual orientation would refuse to make a wedding cake for a bisexual person regardless of whether their fiance(e) was male or female. If the baker would bake a cake for a bisexual if their fiance(e) is a male but refuse if they were female (or vice versa), then the discrimination is on the basis of sex.

That is like saying a person who discriminates based on race will discriminate against all races but one. It is mistaken.

 

[Curious George]

Here's the overall principle:
- nobody can dictate to the business what sorts of products they will or won't sell.
- nobody can dictate to the business what sorts of cake designs they will or won't be willing to do.
- once the business decides that they'll offer a particular range of products with a particular range of designs to the public, they can't use illegal discrimination to decide who they will or won't sell them to.

I disagree with you on points one and two. Plaintiffs acknowledge that they were dictating limitations on the cake.

Further businesses can absolutely be regulated on the type and design of their products.

 

[Curious George]

I don't like having the government feeling entitled to meddle in any way, especially when it's counterproductive.

If all the SJWs can find to "get woke" about is wedding cakes, then it's time for them to ride off into the sunset. Or at least get jobs.
Tom

It is discussing a larger issue and it is a case on principle. That you do not understand it, does not make it irrelevant.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That is like saying a person who discriminates based on race will discriminate against all races but one. It is mistaken.

Do you bother to read posts before you reply to them?

 

[Curious George]

Do you bother to read posts before you reply to them?

Yes. Do you try to understand posts that you read?

 

[columbus]

It is discussing a larger issue and it is a case on principle. That you do not understand it, does not make it irrelevant.

Give me a break.
I grew up in the 60s, when virulent bigotry was the norm. I've been seriously out since the 80s. And an active member of the NAACP for years. I certainly do understand the issue.
Over the course of my life, I've watched (and helped) the culture of bigotry erode about 90%. There are still holdouts and pockets of bigotry, and there probably always will. Because people are often mean to each other over stupid things. Unfortunately, religion tends to exacerbate that tendency.

But as the bigotry has receded, something else has grown. The culture of victimhood and entitlement. I see it all around me. This wedding cake nonsense is emblematic of what I see as the real problem in 2017. People had to fight for the right to marry. We got it. For some reason, they want to go on fighting. So now they're squabbling over pastry.

I see the same thing going on concerning other issues as well. I see the tendency of people to wrap themselves in victimhood as a bigger problem now than the bigotry that used to be the problem.
Tom

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Give me a break.
I grew up in the 60s, when virulent bigotry was the norm. I've been seriously out since the 80s. And an active member of the NAACP for years. I certainly do understand the issue.
Over the course of my life, I've watched (and helped) the culture of bigotry erode about 90%. There are still holdouts and pockets of bigotry, and there probably always will. Because people are often mean to each other over stupid things. Unfortunately, religion tends to exacerbate that tendency.

But as the bigotry has receded, something else has grown. The culture of victimhood and entitlement. I see it all around me. This wedding cake nonsense is emblematic of what I see as the real problem in 2017. People had to fight for the right to marry. We got it. For some reason, they want to go on fighting. So now they're squabbling over pastry.

I see the same thing going on concerning other issues as well. I see the tendency of people to wrap themselves in victimhood as a bigger problem now than the bigotry that used to be the problem.
Tom

So you think that someone who reports a company breaking the law is “wrapping themselves in victimhood?”

I once reported a restaurant to the fire department for having one of their exit doors locked and bolted during business hours. I guess you think that was out of line too, eh? After all, we’ve come along way since Triangle Shirtwaist and Cocoanut Grove.

 

[columbus]

So you think that someone who reports a company breaking the law is “wrapping themselves in victimhood?”

Yep.
At least sometimes it is.

I once reported a restaurant to the fire department for having one of their exit doors locked and bolted during business hours. I guess you think that was out of line too, eh?

No.
The threat to life by blocking fire escapes is enormous. The fact that you think that blocking fire escapes is comparable to wedding cakes is kinda symbolic of what I am talking about.
Tom

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yep.
At least sometimes it is.


No.
The threat to life by blocking fire escapes is enormous. The fact that you think that blocking fire escapes is comparable to wedding cakes is kinda symbolic of what I am talking about.
Tom

It was only one fire exit in a restaurant with many. Presumably, the manager had a key and could have opened it in a few minutes. The restaurant didn’t have any other apparent safety issues: all the fire extinguisher cabinets had extinguishers in them, no flammables being store in unusual places, etc., so the risk that the exit would ever have to be used was low.

For me, the principle is the same: fire safety and discrimination are both serious issues, so we craft laws to combat them and enforce them properly. We don’t allow slippage on the small stuff, because the small breaches lead to bigger breaches.

 

[columbus]

For me, the principle is the same: fire safety and discrimination are both serious issues,

You're still comparing fire escapes to pastry.

There's a barber here in town who only cuts hair for black men. No whites allowed. No women allowed. He is really good at the stuff black men like and has all the business he wants.
Do you think he should be sued for a six figure settlement?
Tom

 

[Akivah]

I have been saying the same thing for years.

I agree, we have too many laws in this nation.

Now my question is, "Why do religionists keep going on about this...

Because like any other person, they want to express their opinions.

They act like they're a persecuted minority, instead of the overwhelming majority that they are.

Playing the victim card is an easy and inspiring tactic. Both Dem and Rep groups do it.

 

[columbus]

I agree, we have too many laws in this nation.

But most of them benefit religious people.
Those people don't even have to pay property taxes.
Tom

 

[Akivah]

But most of them benefit religious people.
Those people don't even have to pay property taxes.
Tom

As a tax expert, I'm telling you that is a false statement. Religious people pay taxes just like non-religious people. You may be thinking of religious organizations. Exempt organizations include organizations that are charitable, religious, educational, or culturally significant.

 

[columbus]

As a tax expert, I'm telling you that is a false statement. Religious people pay taxes just like non-religious people. You may be thinking of religious organizations. Exempt organizations include organizations that are charitable, religious, educational, or culturally significant.

Are you telling me that the RCC church pays property taxes?
Or that Catholics aren't people?
Tom

 

[Curious George]

Give me a break.
I grew up in the 60s, when virulent bigotry was the norm. I've been seriously out since the 80s. And an active member of the NAACP for years. I certainly do understand the issue.
Over the course of my life, I've watched (and helped) the culture of bigotry erode about 90%. There are still holdouts and pockets of bigotry, and there probably always will. Because people are often mean to each other over stupid things. Unfortunately, religion tends to exacerbate that tendency.

But as the bigotry has receded, something else has grown. The culture of victimhood and entitlement. I see it all around me. This wedding cake nonsense is emblematic of what I see as the real problem in 2017. People had to fight for the right to marry. We got it. For some reason, they want to go on fighting. So now they're squabbling over pastry.

I see the same thing going on concerning other issues as well. I see the tendency of people to wrap themselves in victimhood as a bigger problem now than the bigotry that used to be the problem.
Tom

You understand it but never thought that they might not consider themselves "victims" in any large sense? Helping ensure that laws combating discrimination are upheld is very important to some.

The sense I get from your post is that people are making a huge deal over not getting a cake. I don't see it in those terms. It is just as likely that people see an important law being neglected and wish to hold the line that a law represents.

Are police entitled or victims because they ticket people who are speeding? After all, in the grand scheme of law, speeding violations are rather trivial. The law is there for a purpose. A person who breaks that law should be held accountable.


Holding people accountable does not sound like victimhood or entitlement. Letting people neglect responsibility because they don't like or approve of the law, does sound like victimhood and entitlement.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Are you telling me that the RCC church pays property taxes?
Or that Catholics aren't people?
Tom

I think he's telling you that Catholics aren't the RCC.

 

[Curious George]

Are you telling me that the RCC church pays property taxes?
Or that Catholics aren't people?
Tom

The RCC is a religious organization. Being Catholic doesn't exempt one from paying taxes. He was being pedantic. While it was clear what you meant, perhaps you should have said "these legal entities don't even have to pay taxes and that surely benefits the people who make up the religious entity."

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You're still comparing fire escapes to pastry.

Fire exits, not escapes. There's a difference.

And what I'm comparing is different kinds of accommodation: accommodating safety concerns versus accommodating discrimination concerns. Draw a line and stick to it. The difference in safety is negligible if you inspect your fire extinguishers every 6 weeks instead of every month, but since the rule says to do it every month, that's what's required.

There's a barber here in town who only cuts hair for black men. No whites allowed. No women allowed. He is really good at the stuff black men like and has all the business he wants.

Is he breaking the law?

Does he actually say "no whites allowed?" Like is there a sign or something?

Do you think he should be sued for a six figure settlement?
Tom

Do you think the women in this story sued for a six figure settlement?

 

[Akivah]

Are you telling me that the RCC church pays property taxes?
Or that Catholics aren't people?
Tom

Seriously? You already forgot what you posted just above in post #233?

You said:

But most of them benefit religious people.
Those people don't even have to pay property taxes.

You said PEOPLE, religious people don't pay property taxes. You didn't say religious organizations.

I responded that religious PEOPLE pay taxes and get no special benefits. It is only certain ORGANIZATIONS including religious ones, that might avoid paying taxes.