| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/08/2014 01:07:16 PM · #6351 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
But that's not really the whole story, is it, Tom? And it doesn't have anything to with being a part of it. It's simply asking you to not interfere in their lives because you cannot tolerate who they are, having been raised with half-truths, lies, & bigotry.
Heaven forbid, sensitivity training! Horrors! To possibly enact empathy and compassion for your fellow man?
Oh, the unreasonable things we ask of you! |
I'm not certain how I can spell it out. You mention nobody's forcing anyone to be part of gay marriage. I mentioned there are businesses being sued because they don't want to be part of a gay marriage.
Elane Photography v. Vanessa Willcock
Oregon Bakery Fined $150k
Baker forced to make gay wedding cakes, undergo sensitivity training, after losing lawsuit
Who's interfering with who's lives? These businesses didn't go out of their way to find these gay marriages and impose their beliefs on them. The gay couples came to them and forcing them to participate in their marriage or be sued.
We live in America in a capitalistic society, take your money elsewhere.
(The most disturbing is the "sensitivity" training. I've only hear such training imposed on people who are opposed to communist governments.)
|
|
|
|
12/08/2014 01:13:37 PM · #6352 |
because if you run a business you arent allowed to discriminate. if you want to run a business you have to follow the laws.
i know that sucks, but if it makes you feel better, nothing is stopping you from being a bigot in private. |
|
|
|
12/08/2014 02:31:23 PM · #6353 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Who's interfering with who's lives? |
That would be the business owners who refuse to serve blacks/women/muslims/gays/your kind and find themselves in violation of the U.S. Constitution for practicing discrimination against others (not to mention violating their own professed beliefs by judging others). These businesses didn't go out of their way to find African Americans to refuse to serve (dumbest argument EVER). We live in America, and their money is as good as yours.
Message edited by author 2014-12-08 16:09:01. |
|
|
|
12/08/2014 04:55:58 PM · #6354 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Nullix:
Who's interfering with who's lives? |
That would be the business owners who refuse to serve blacks/women/muslims/gays/your kind and find themselves in violation of the U.S. Constitution for practicing discrimination against others (not to mention violating their own professed beliefs by judging others). These businesses didn't go out of their way to find African Americans to refuse to serve (dumbest argument EVER). We live in America, and their money is as good as yours. |
So you're equating baking a cake to "White Only" restuarants? I'm not seeing gays forced to sit at the back of the bus or only drink from the "LGBT" drinking fountain.
Infact, in the Oregon case the lesbian woman was a repeat customer. How is this the same plight as the blacks had in the 60s when she was a repeat customer?
Message edited by author 2014-12-08 16:56:45. |
|
|
|
12/08/2014 05:16:41 PM · #6355 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
So you're equating baking a cake to "White Only" restuarants? I'm not seeing gays forced to sit at the back of the bus or only drink from the "LGBT" drinking fountain.
Infact, in the Oregon case the lesbian woman was a repeat customer. How is this the same plight as the blacks had in the 60s when she was a repeat customer? |
A repeat customer?
Then why is doing business with her all of a sudden a problem?
|
|
|
|
12/08/2014 05:27:19 PM · #6356 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
A repeat customer?
Then why is doing business with her all of a sudden a problem? |
She wanted a cake for her gay wedding. Baker didn't want to be a part of the gay wedding.
Hence, gay marriage is being forced on people. |
|
|
|
12/08/2014 05:51:14 PM · #6357 |
So she was a good customer till she mentioned she was gay. Well that explains everything right?
Ray |
|
|
|
12/08/2014 09:42:58 PM · #6358 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
So you're equating baking a cake to "White Only" restuarants? I'm not seeing gays forced to sit at the back of the bus or only drink from the "LGBT" drinking fountain. |
Yes, somebody refusing to sell a cake to a customer just because they're black, Jewish or gay is exactly the same thing (despite specific and naive claims to the contrary). If you're not seeing the effort to carve out hetero-only bakeries, weddings, photo sessions (...blood donations, tax benefits, adoptions, etc.) that YOU keep bringing up, then you're blind to the obvious.
Message edited by author 2014-12-08 21:48:26. |
|
|
|
12/08/2014 11:43:13 PM · #6359 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
(The most disturbing is the "sensitivity" training. I've only hear such training imposed on people who are opposed to communist governments.) |
I work for a large corporation and get such training programs on a yearly basis.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2014 06:33:51 AM · #6360 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
A repeat customer?
Then why is doing business with her all of a sudden a problem? |
She wanted a cake for her gay wedding. Baker didn't want to be a part of the gay wedding.
Hence, gay marriage is being forced on people. |
He wasn't obliged to go to the wedding (assuming he was invited)... all he needed to do was back the cake, something that bakers do in the wee hours or the morning, probably alone and then place the offending cake in a box and no one would be the wiser.
Given you line of thinking, would you be OK with police officers, paramedics, firemen and the like denying emergency services to people based only on their assumption that the recipient is gay.
Think about that for a bit and let us know.
Ray
Message edited by author 2014-12-09 06:35:29. |
|
|
|
12/09/2014 06:44:21 AM · #6361 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
A repeat customer?
Then why is doing business with her all of a sudden a problem? |
Originally posted by Nullix:
She wanted a cake for her gay wedding. Baker didn't want to be a part of the gay wedding.
Hence, gay marriage is being forced on people. |
Tom......you just said it yourself. They wanted a cake. From an establishment they already had a relationship with. They weren't inviting them to the wedding.
They wanted a cake.
Too bad the bakery didn't have the sign in the window stating that the owners were bigoted, judgemental un-Christian-like people who try to impose their beliefs on someone else just because they want a cake.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2014 07:00:31 AM · #6362 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Think about that for a bit and let us know.
Ray |
You are wasting your time. He grew up being taught not to think or question, only to do as he was instructed.
Thinking wasn't an encouraged practice.
Forgive him, for he knows not what he does. |
|
|
|
12/09/2014 08:42:56 AM · #6363 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
So you're equating baking a cake to "White Only" restuarants? I'm not seeing gays forced to sit at the back of the bus or only drink from the "LGBT" drinking fountain. |
Yah......we're such a modern free-thinking, open-minded, tolerant society.
We have people like you who have a completely distorted view of humanity & compassion who call themselves Christian.
And then there's this...
The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, also known as the Matthew Shepard Act, is an American Act of Congress, passed on October 22, 2009, and signed into law by President Barack Obama on October 28, 2009, as a rider to the National Defense Authorization Act for 2010 (H.R. 2647). Conceived as a response to the murders of Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr., the measure expands the 1969 United States federal hate-crime law to include crimes motivated by a victim's actual or perceived gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.
And in the article you cited earlier, and cherry-picked the more innocuous part.....:
âNo one from the LGBT community has ever had fire hoses turned on them by the police department, they have never had to drink out of an LGBT water fountain,â pastor Stacy Swimp told the House committee that considered the measure. âThere is no record of LGBT â homosexuals, lesbiansâbeing forced to sit at the back of the bus in an LGBT section.â
Nope.....no fire hose, or the LGBT water fountain, but gays have been assaulted and killed for being gay......not because their lives interfered with anyone else's life. And this up through the end of the 20th century? REALLY?????
And it takes an Act of Congress to call out that you shouldn't kill someone for being gay?
I have a lot of trouble with people who are so vehemently opposed to another's personal characteristics that they can justify assault and murder.
That okay with you, Tom? Death to fags?
Or are you a more liberal bigot? No cake for you, fag.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2014 09:19:58 AM · #6364 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Nope.....no fire hose, or the LGBT water fountain, but gays have been assaulted and killed for being gay......not because their lives interfered with anyone else's life. And this up through the end of the 20th century? REALLY?????
And it takes an Act of Congress to call out that you shouldn't kill someone for being gay?
I have a lot of trouble with people who are so vehemently opposed to another's personal characteristics that they can justify assault and murder.
That okay with you, Tom? Death to fags?
Or are you a more liberal bigot? No cake for you, fag. |
I seem to have touched a nerve. We were talking about people forcing their beliefs on others. You changed the subject to killing. Then you called me a bigot.
Great, if you cannot defend the argument, just change the subject and start name calling.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2014 09:28:23 AM · #6365 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
We were talking about people forcing their beliefs on others. |
funny, thats sounds a lot like what you were attempting to do. |
|
|
|
12/09/2014 09:45:39 AM · #6366 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Nope.....no fire hose, or the LGBT water fountain, but gays have been assaulted and killed for being gay......not because their lives interfered with anyone else's life. And this up through the end of the 20th century? REALLY?????
And it takes an Act of Congress to call out that you shouldn't kill someone for being gay?
I have a lot of trouble with people who are so vehemently opposed to another's personal characteristics that they can justify assault and murder.
That okay with you, Tom? Death to fags?
Or are you a more liberal bigot? No cake for you, fag. |
Originally posted by Nullix:
I seem to have touched a nerve. We were talking about people forcing their beliefs on others. You changed the subject to killing. Then you called me a bigot.
Great, if you cannot defend the argument, just change the subject and start name calling. |
Tom.....you're the one who hasn't been answering direct questions and trying to obfuscate the issue.
When a business that has an ongoing relationship with a customer, and all of a sudden refuses their business, then who is forcing whose beliefs on whom?
You were the one who cited the Michigan law article talking about the drinking fountain style of discrimination trying to downplay the issue.......I am merely pointing out the fallacy of your argument.
As to calling you a bigot? Sir, you have told me that you are one by virtue of your beliefs that someone else's marriage has anything whatsoever to do with your life.
I would bet that I have asked you no less than a dozen times how another couple getting married has *ANY* effect on your life, and you have *never* answered the question.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2014 11:54:57 AM · #6367 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
I seem to have touched a nerve. We were talking about people forcing their beliefs on others. You changed the subject to killing. Then you called me a bigot.
Great, if you cannot defend the argument, just change the subject and start name calling. |
In passing, do you have any form of response to the questions that were raised or will you simply resort to your normal "Ignore it and it will go away" approach to things.
Regarding your initial post, did you actually read what the proposal says and who do you think it will benefit?
Ray |
|
|
|
12/10/2014 07:37:15 PM · #6368 |
A cake baker was asked to bake a cake, and public accommodation laws require businesses that receive bunsinees licenses to serve customers equally.
Marriage rights or not, the business owner was in the wrong when they refused to uphold the obligations of the law attendant with that business license.
Hey didn't we already cover this like 1000 times so far?
|
|
|
|
12/10/2014 08:06:55 PM · #6369 |
Originally posted by Mousie:
Hey didn't we already cover this like 1000 times so far? |
1001 ... and counting ... :-( |
|
|
|
12/11/2014 10:29:41 AM · #6370 |
Originally posted by Mousie:
A cake baker was asked to bake a cake, and public accommodation laws require businesses that receive bunsinees licenses to serve customers equally.
Marriage rights or not, the business owner was in the wrong when they refused to uphold the obligations of the law attendant with that business license.
Hey didn't we already cover this like 1000 times so far? |
Sorry Mouse. It is a dead horse that needs to rest in peace.
I only bring it up since NikonJeb seems to think nobody is effected by "gay" marriage.
Times are a-changing.
I do wish you happiness and love in your life.
|
|
|
|
12/11/2014 11:58:37 AM · #6371 |
anyone "affected" by gay marriage is only affected by their inability obey the laws.
misdirected hostility. |
|
|
|
12/11/2014 12:05:29 PM · #6372 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
NikonJeb seems to think nobody is effected by "gay" marriage. |
NikonJeb also seems to think the earth orbits the sun, the Pope is Catholic, and old cars are good subjects for photography. He happens to be correct on all counts. |
|
|
|
12/11/2014 12:58:52 PM · #6373 |
Originally posted by Mousie:
A cake baker was asked to bake a cake, and public accommodation laws require businesses that receive bunsinees licenses to serve customers equally.
Marriage rights or not, the business owner was in the wrong when they refused to uphold the obligations of the law attendant with that business license.
Hey didn't we already cover this like 1000 times so far? |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Sorry Mouse. It is a dead horse that needs to rest in peace.
I only bring it up since NikonJeb seems to think nobody is effected by "gay" marriage.
Times are a-changing.
I do wish you happiness and love in your life. |
Sigh.....
Aren't you the one whose stance is that these people like this bakery are affected by gay marriage?
They are not.
They are affected by their using gay marriage as an excuse to further their ignorance, hatred, and lack of empathy or compassion.
You seemed to avoid talking about the fact that this couple apparently had a prior business relationship with this bakery.
Now, I'm going to try and equate this for you in a manner where I have personal involvement and maybe it will help you see more clearly.
I started going into a flower shop here locally about five years ago to inundate my GF with beauty and love......it was really nuts for about a year and a half.......virtually every day. I got to know everyone that worked there by name, and a little bit so that I could carry on pleasant surface conversations while they would put the finishing touches on a bouquet or arrangement.They are a great bunch of people and have truly nice flowers.
So there was a relationship there, and as time went on, they'd kid me about being the most in love man they'd ever met......even coined the term "Frequent Flower" discount after a while. I'd had them make a couple of hairpieces, corsages, and boutonnieres for me.
So.....when it came time for Vivi's daughter's wedding, that was a no-brainer.......the girls trooped off to Royer's to select the flowers and how they'd be presented for the wedding. They did themselves and us proud........everything was FABULOUS!!!!!
No one from the flower shop went to the wedding, no invites were made, yet this place did take part in the wedding. AS A BUSINESS. They sold us a passel of flowers, and it cost a bunch of money. That's how a small, personally oriented business stays alive.
We could have ordered off the 'Net and probably been just fine, but we were happy to spend the money right here, in a small merchant that had given us good service. We shopped where the service and quality were exactly what we wanted.
So what difference does it make as far as the gender of my girlfriend's daughter's partner to the owner's life in any way?
If he found out that she was marrying another woman, and stated that he would make no further sales to us, or them, who is being affected by this action?
Everyone, because i's wrong. It's using the excuse of belief to merely perpetuate hatred, intolerance, and discrimination. The gender of the partner is completely irrelevant, and it's just plain presumptuous of anyone who would state that this affects their life because of their beliefs.
Hello? Who's getting married here??? How is this about YOU, merely the vendor who was contracted, on the basis of a favorable business relationship, which is why you cultivate customers in the first place.
Is there even a glimmer of the disconnect that's missing as far as who is forcing whose beliefs on the other party?
Message edited by author 2014-12-11 12:59:27.
|
|
|
|
12/12/2014 08:08:26 AM · #6374 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Nullix:
I seem to have touched a nerve. We were talking about people forcing their beliefs on others. You changed the subject to killing. Then you called me a bigot.
Great, if you cannot defend the argument, just change the subject and start name calling. |
In passing, do you have any form of response to the questions that were raised or will you simply resort to your normal "Ignore it and it will go away" approach to things.
Regarding your initial post, did you actually read what the proposal says and who do you think it will benefit?
Ray |
 Nullix... we are still eagerly awaiting a response on this. Any chance we will ever get one?
Ray |
|
|
|
12/12/2014 09:24:18 AM · #6375 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Nullix:
I seem to have touched a nerve. We were talking about people forcing their beliefs on others. You changed the subject to killing. Then you called me a bigot.
Great, if you cannot defend the argument, just change the subject and start name calling. |
In passing, do you have any form of response to the questions that were raised or will you simply resort to your normal "Ignore it and it will go away" approach to things.
Regarding your initial post, did you actually read what the proposal says and who do you think it will benefit?
Ray |
Nullix... we are still eagerly awaiting a response on this. Any chance we will ever get one?
Ray |
Of course I read the proposal and I know who would benefit from it. That's why I ignored your post. It seemed like an obvious cut down that I didn't actually know what I was talking about.
Ray, if you have a point to make, please be forward with it and not use leading questions. |
|
