Colo. court lets ruling stand on baker who denied gay couple service
87 replies, posted
[URL="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/colorado-court-lets-ruling-stand-on-baker-who-denied-gay-couple-service/"]SOURCE[/URL]
[QUOTE][B]DENVER [/B]-- The Colorado Supreme Court refused Monday to take up the case of a[URL="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/court-ruling-colorado-baker-refused-gay-wedding-cake/"]suburban Denver baker who would not make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple[/URL], letting stand a lower court's ruling that the Masterpiece Cakeshop owner cannot cite his Christian beliefs in refusing service.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]"The highest court in Colorado today affirmed that no one should be turned away from a public-facing business because of who they are or who they love," Ria Tabacco Mar, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union's LGBT Project who argued the case, said in a statement. "We all have a right to our personal beliefs, but we do not have a right to impose those beliefs on others and discriminate against them."[/QUOTE]
whoot whoot!
On one hand, its good that they're going forwards in LGBT rights, but on the other hand if the dude doesn't want to make a cake for you, then thats how it is. Go find another bakery, he's out a sale because of his beliefs and thats that. Nobody should be forced to do something they don't wish to do/that is against their beliefs.
[QUOTE=Valon Kyre;50202123]On one hand, its good that they're going forwards in LGBT rights, but on the other hand if the dude doesn't want to make a cake for you, then thats how it is. Go find another bakery, he's out a sale because of his beliefs and thats that. Nobody should be forced to do something they don't wish to do/that is against their beliefs.[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/7/3/2/8/1/4/webimg/510646593_tp.jpg[/IMG]
if someone doesn't want to serve blacks, the blacks should just find another bakery
[QUOTE=Valon Kyre;50202123]On one hand, its good that they're going forwards in LGBT rights, but on the other hand if the dude doesn't want to make a cake for you, then thats how it is. Go find another bakery, he's out a sale because of his beliefs and thats that. Nobody should be forced to do something they don't wish to do/that is against their beliefs.[/QUOTE]
Especially because I think there's a difference between not allowing a gay person in your establishment and not wanting to make a cake (arguably art, and therefore speech) if you don't agree with their choices. I'm pro gay marriage, but I would refuse to serve a couple if the wife was 13 and the husband was 21, if that was the case (which, I know is probably illegal in every state except maybe West Virginia). I know that gay marriage isn't morally reprehensible like incestuous marriages or underaged marriages, but to some people (this business owner) it is, and to create a cake for their wedding is, in his view, signing his own name to an act which he considers to be immoral (and therefore, acting against his religion).
I'm not saying he's right, I'm just saying that I can see where he's coming from
[editline]25th April 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=KingOfScience;50202141][IMG]http://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/7/3/2/8/1/4/webimg/510646593_tp.jpg[/IMG]
if someone doesn't want to serve blacks, the blacks should just find another bakery[/QUOTE]
I don't think they're comparable in this case. Racism is just a product of ignorance. Christianity is very explicit in its belief that homosexuality is a sin.
I was waiting for that response. Thats an extreme example, but in the case of LGBT people (afaik) most people are accepting towards them, they're not hated/oppressed on a national scale. Nor is it socially acceptable to convey any sort of hate towards LGBT like it was towards blacks.
[QUOTE=Valon Kyre;50202123]On one hand, its good that they're going forwards in LGBT rights, but on the other hand if the dude doesn't want to make a cake for you, then thats how it is. Go find another bakery, he's out a sale because of his beliefs and thats that. Nobody should be forced to do something they don't wish to do/that is against their beliefs.[/QUOTE]
There are probably legitimate reasons to deny an order besides saying you don't approve of gays
Also what about Jewish or Muslim weddings? Those should be against her Christian faith too as they aren't Christian weddings, allowing faith as a free pass in public businesses is a terribly steep slope
[QUOTE=proboardslol;50202156]Especially because I think there's a difference between not allowing a gay person in your establishment and not wanting to make a cake (arguably art, and therefore speech) if you don't agree with their choices. I'm pro gay marriage, but I would refuse to serve a couple if the wife was 13 and the husband was 21, if that was the case (which, I know is probably illegal in every state except maybe West Virginia). I know that gay marriage isn't morally reprehensible like incestuous marriages or underaged marriages, but to some people (this business owner) it is, and to create a cake for their wedding is, in his view, signing his own name to an act which he considers to be immoral (and therefore, acting against his religion).
I'm not saying he's right, I'm just saying that I can see where he's coming from
[editline]25th April 2016[/editline]
I don't think they're comparable in this case. Racism is just a product of ignorance. Christianity is very explicit in its belief that homosexuality is a sin.[/QUOTE]
And listening to what the bible says is also a product of ignorance.
[QUOTE=l337k1ll4;50202177]And listening to what the bible says is also a product of ignorance.[/QUOTE]
Man, thats just not nice. Christian or not, dont shit on people beliefs.
[QUOTE=Valon Kyre;50202123]On one hand, its good that they're going forwards in LGBT rights, but on the other hand if the dude doesn't want to make a cake for you, then thats how it is. Go find another bakery, he's out a sale because of his beliefs and thats that. Nobody should be forced to do something they don't wish to do/that is against their beliefs.[/QUOTE]
but don't you think it's wrong to deny service to someone simply based off their sexual preference? you can make the argument that they can find another place, but they shouldn't have to in the first place. if you're gonna deny service, at least make it reasonable, such as denying customers service if they're unruly as all get out.
[QUOTE=Valon Kyre;50202184]Man, thats just not nice. Christian or not, dont shit on people beliefs.[/QUOTE]
I won't shit on other people's beliefs if they don't use said beliefs to shit on other people's humanity.
Fair deal imo.
[QUOTE=Valon Kyre;50202170]I was waiting for that response. Thats an extreme example, but in the case of LGBT people (afaik) most people are accepting towards them, they're not hated/oppressed on a national scale. Nor is it socially acceptable to convey any sort of hate towards LGBT like it was towards blacks.[/QUOTE]
Now, I really don't know how you got this far in life being so sheltered, but no, being LGBT is actually pretty shitty, especially for Trans people. Beside, what is even considered a national scale? There are entire countries where being LGBT is illegal. If we're just thinking of just US/US Hat, the concept of LGBT tolerance is only really pervasive in larger cities, with smaller population areas being at best neutral if not outright hostile.
[QUOTE=l337k1ll4;50202177]And listening to what the bible says is also a product of ignorance.[/QUOTE]
I don't disagree, but while the former is the government asking an individual to change their secular, humanistic outlook on life to accommodate everyone else, the latter is asking an individual to compromise on something which they believe affects whether or not they'll go to heaven or hell. I mean, a racist can learn not to be a racist, but the only way for a bible-thumping homophobe to learn not to be a homophone is for them to lose a part of their religion, and that's what the government is asking they do by playing part in something which they consider to be against their religion.
Once again, I don't agree, I just understand where he's coming from
[QUOTE=Rocko's;50202185]but don't you think it's wrong to deny service to someone simply based off their sexual preference? you can make the argument that they can find another place, but they shouldn't have to in the first place. if you're gonna deny service, at least make it reasonable, such as denying customers service if they're unruly as all get out.[/QUOTE]
The cake wasn't denied on sexual preference, he didn't not make them a cake because they where gay. He refused to make them a cake for a same sex wedding. There is a difference.
[QUOTE=Valon Kyre;50202184]Man, thats just not nice. Christian or not, dont shit on people beliefs.[/QUOTE]
wow what a superbly retarded argument
any good natured Christian understands that scripture is not concrete, and that alongside things like science and social evolution the teachings are flexible/just plain dated.
if the bible said 'thou shalt not pay a man of dark skin any generosity' you would NOT be saying that it's 'not nice'
[QUOTE=Rocko's;50202185]but don't you think it's wrong to deny service to someone simply based off their sexual preference? you can make the argument that they can find another place, but they shouldn't have to in the first place. if you're gonna deny service, at least make it reasonable, such as denying customers service if they're unruly as all get out.[/QUOTE]
Yes, it is wrong. But I also believe people should be able to refuse to do something, reasonable or not in their justification, because in the end they have to make that cake, and its their business should they choose to serve or not serve certain people.
You shouldn't have to do something because its socially acceptable, I'm a little more "right of center" in the belief that people should have the freedom to make their own decisions? If this makes sense?
[QUOTE=BusterBluth;50202234]The cake wasn't denied on sexual preference, he didn't not make them a cake because they where gay. He refused to make them a cake for a same sex wedding. There is a difference.[/QUOTE]
no, there isn't. the decision was made on one key object which was 'these people support homosexuality, i do not like homosexuals and thus i will not provide them a service'
this is illegal. this has been illegal in the workforce for a long time and we've gone through this before with the civil rights movement. I can guarantee that MLK has drilled a hole to china he's been spinning so hard over the fact that society is so retarded as to completely dismiss civil rights as a comparison 'because they were gay instead, its different!'
So how is forcing your belief that people shouldn't be allowed to let their belief to effect how they conduct business in anyway better? I feel like the baker will make a shitty cake now out of spite.
If I was a bakery owner I'd bake a cake for any person that walked into my shop provided they have the dollars but really if this guy wants to miss out on some frog skins that's on him, someone else will get the money he could've got. His business will go under from the boycotters.
[QUOTE=Valon Kyre;50202237]Yes, it is wrong. But I also believe people should be able to refuse to do something, reasonable or not in their justification, because in the end they have to make that cake, and its their business should they choose to serve or not serve certain people.
You shouldn't have to do something because its socially acceptable, I'm a little more "right of center" in the belief that people should have the freedom to make their own decisions? If this makes sense?[/QUOTE]
That makes sense up to a degree. You can dismiss people who you view to be unruly customers or pose a threat to you, you do not reserve the right to dismiss people over their gender, race, or sexual affiliation
this stuff isn't new people, i feel like I've walked into a conversation straight of a bar in the 1920's.
[QUOTE=Valon Kyre;50202170]I was waiting for that response. Thats an extreme example, but in the case of LGBT people (afaik) most people are accepting towards them, they're not hated/oppressed on a national scale. Nor is it socially acceptable to convey any sort of hate towards LGBT like it was towards blacks.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=proboardslol;50202156]I don't think they're comparable in this case. Racism is just a product of ignorance. Christianity is very explicit in its belief that homosexuality is a sin.[/QUOTE]
christian teachings were warped and used as justification for segregation by preachers in the 50's and 60's, it doesn't make that justified. and i'm not saying the situation with this bakery is as bad as segregation was, but arguments like that are what's leading to bills like north carolina's "bathroom bill".
also, there are plenty of pastors and christian leaders who are fully accepting of lgbt individuals, and many christians are lgbt themselves. being christian and being gay are not mutually exclusive.
people don't get to use their religion to justify prejudice. your religious freedom ends when it starts infringing on the freedoms of others.
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;50202236]wow what a superbly retarded argument
[B]any good natured Christian understands that scripture is not concrete, and that alongside things like science and social evolution the teachings are flexible/just plain dated.[/B]
if the bible said 'thou shalt not pay a man of dark skin any generosity' you would NOT be saying that it's 'not nice'[/QUOTE]
I don't think that's a fact. As an atheist, I think that the bible is meant to be more concretely interpretted, especially when it explicity says
'If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.' Leviticus 20:13
I don't think that's up to interpretation really. I think that modern day Christians like to choose which parts of the bible to follow because it suits their needs, but I think the ones that choose not to read the part about "kill the gays" are just as bad Christians as the ones that choose not to read "love thy neighbor".
I think Christianity is a backwards, outdated religion whose holy book justifies horrible crimes against non-believers and teaches very backwards things about women and gays, etc.
I think this is the same for Islam, and for Judaism as well. The only difference is that most Christians are simply [B]bad Christians.[/B] (thank god!)
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;50202236]wow what a superbly retarded argument
any good natured Christian understands that scripture is not concrete, and that alongside things like science and social evolution the teachings are flexible/just plain dated.
if the bible said 'thou shalt not pay a man of dark skin any generosity' you would NOT be saying that it's 'not nice'[/QUOTE]
I took it in a more critical sense that "believing -anything- in the bible is the product of ignorance", thats my bad, should have worded it differently.
[QUOTE=LtKyle2;50202243]So how is forcing your belief that people shouldn't be allowed to let their belief to effect how they conduct business in anyway better? I feel like the baker will make a shitty cake now out of spite.
If I was a bakery owner I'd bake a cake for any person that walked into my shop provided they have the dollars but really if this guy wants to miss out on some frog skins that's on him, someone else will get the money he could've got. His business will go under from the boycotters.[/QUOTE]
because my belief isn't based on a book written almost two thousand years ago, my belief (and the belief of our supreme court) is based on the simple fact that all humans have the right to live as they want without fearing they'll be marginalized because they're simply different from another. If you can't see the difference, your opinion isn't going to be changed by people on the internet anyway and you're just fishing for a reaction.
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;50202242]no, there isn't. the decision was made on one key object which was 'these people support homosexuality, i do not like homosexuals and thus i will not provide them a service'
this is illegal. this has been illegal in the workforce for a long time and we've gone through this before with the civil rights movement. I can guarantee that MLK has drilled a hole to china he's been spinning so hard over the fact that society is so retarded as to completely dismiss civil rights as a comparison 'because they were gay instead, its different!'[/QUOTE]
No, it's different because he's not saying "GAY NO SERVICE AT ALL!". It's different because he's saying "I will provide you with any service that does not go against my beliefs."
[QUOTE=proboardslol;50202265]I don't think that's a fact. As an atheist, I think that the bible is meant to be more concretely interpretted, especially when it explicity says
'If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.' Leviticus 20:13
I don't think that's up to interpretation really. I think that modern day Christians like to choose which parts of the bible to follow because it suits their needs, but I think the ones that choose not to read the part about "kill the gays" are just as bad Christians as the ones that choose not to read "love thy neighbor".
I think Christianity is a backwards, outdated religion whose holy book justifies horrible crimes against non-believers and teaches very backwards things about women and gays, etc.
I think this is the same for Islam, and for Judaism as well. The only difference is that most Christians are simply [B]bad Christians.[/B] (thank god!)[/QUOTE]
It's really not, even the church explicitly states that you should live life through the virtues provided by the word, not it's explicit writing.
hell, christianity is built on the concept that you SHOULD do that, christ died for our sins in order to save us from judgement, and so long as you believe in the lord you shall be given rest in heaven and what have you
[editline]25th April 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;50202278]No, it's different because he's not saying "GAY NO SERVICE AT ALL!". It's different because he's saying "I will provide you with any service that does not go against my beliefs."[/QUOTE]
when your beliefs are 'no gay service' then you're saying 'no gay service', you can abstract it all you want but at the end of the day not only are you wrong, but they are wrong too because of this outcome in particular.
[QUOTE=Valon Kyre;50202184]Man, thats just not nice. Christian or not, dont shit on people beliefs.[/QUOTE]
If you 100% agree with the phrase "If a man lies with another man he should be stoned" then I have zero problem shitting on your beliefs because your beliefs are horrible.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;50202265]I don't think that's a fact. As an atheist, I think that the bible is meant to be more concretely interpretted, especially when it explicity says
'If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.' Leviticus 20:13
I don't think that's up to interpretation really. I think that modern day Christians like to choose which parts of the bible to follow because it suits their needs, but I think the ones that choose not to read the part about "kill the gays" are just as bad Christians as the ones that choose not to read "love thy neighbor".
I think Christianity is a backwards, outdated religion whose holy book justifies horrible crimes against non-believers and teaches very backwards things about women and gays, etc.
I think this is the same for Islam, and for Judaism as well. The only difference is that most Christians are simply [B]bad Christians.[/B] (thank god!)[/QUOTE]
you don't really have the right to decide how other people practice their religion
plus, the bible says that you can't eat shellfish or wear gold, or wear clothes made of a blend of cotton and linen. there's plenty of archaic outdated shit that was probably lost in translation over two millennia.
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;50202272]because my belief isn't based on a book written almost two thousand years ago, my belief (and the belief of our supreme court) is based on the simple fact that all humans have the right to live as they want without fearing they'll be marginalized because they're simply different from another. If you can't see the difference, your opinion isn't going to be changed by people on the internet anyway and you're just fishing for a reaction.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, my opinion won't be changed. Regardless I'm going to ask this, how is a baker refusing to make you a cake going to marginalize you? No, I'm not fishing for a reaction.
"right to live as they want without fearing they'll be marginalized because they're simply different from another."
So a baker isn't allowed to refuse business because he is different.
[QUOTE=BusterBluth;50202234]The cake wasn't denied on sexual preference, he didn't not make them a cake because they where gay. He refused to make them a cake for a same sex wedding. There is a difference.[/QUOTE]
My bad, it's late so I didn't think that post out. I meant it along the lines of denying service to a same sex couple for their wedding.
A lot of people used religion to justify racism, and still do.
And so the argument that homosexuality is different because it's a religious belief isn't a valid argument.
What stops someone from simply saying "I'm not providing you this product" without even going into their religious beliefs or convictions? Couldn't a bakery simply refuse to serve a customer regardless of sexual orientation?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.