quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

That hints at a simple workaround (though one that evades the central principle) - get them to make the cake; you put your own figures on the top of it.

You would think...

Denver baker sued for refusing to write anti-gay slogans on cake

According to Ms. Silva, Jack pulled out a piece of paper with the phrase “God hates gays” and anti-gay passages he said were from the Bible. Silva also said that Jack wanted her to draw two men holding hands with an “X” crossing them out. "After I read it, I was like 'No way.' " Silva told USA Today. " ‘We're not doing this. This is just very discriminatory and hateful.’ ”

Instead, Silva said she told Jack that she would make a cake with a blank Bible page so that he could draw the messages himself. She even claims she offered him frosting and a pastry bag to do so. "I told him, ‘I’ll make you a cake any flavor and shape that you like and then I’ll give you the icing and you can write the message yourself,’” Silva told the Daily News...

Jack refused, and asserts that the bakery discriminated against him based on his religious beliefs.

Jack has filed a complaint with the Civil Rights division of the Department of Regulatory Agencies. The bakery is now under investigation for religious discrimination, and if the agency feels discriminatory acts were committed, the case could move forward to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. A decision on the case will not be made for several months.

File category: "RFRA Follies"

K.

Would the baker under indiana law be protected?
By the way will those very christian bakers refuse also to bake cakes for second marriages?

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

Sorry but... do you mean among the canapes there was some fingerfood version of pizza or you had an actual pizza served to you?

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

Just out of curiosity, you don't think a request for the traditional figures on the top of cake to be two "grooms" or two 'brides" would be a clue?

That hints at a simple workaround (though one that evades the central principle) - get them to make the cake; you put your own figures on the top of it. I guess you make a point to the relevant cake maker by sending them photos of their cake being cut at the wedding.

What point would that be? That the gay/lesbian couple made someone unknowingly violate their religious beliefs? This from people that expect you to recognize their right to follow theirs?

The point that whether the cake makers like it or not, their product is going to be used for a gay wedding. Also the point that the consumer is *free* to do what he or she wants with the product, once it has been bought.

While forcing someone else to go against their beliefs...by being dishonest in the manner they do so. Yes Sir...that's something to teach your children: Never let your beliefs be attacked or sabotaged but feel free to attack anyone else's or sabotage anyone else's...as long as the 'anyone else' are Christians.

Well, not a particularly noble move, to send pics of the wedding cake adapted for a gay wedding - but, on the other hand, it does underline the power of the free market. Still, the cake makers would probably survive the horror of it, I should imagine.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

The point is that the "bigots" want to protect businesses from having to do things they find morally offensive.
The "reasonable open minded" people want to kill people who disagree with them.

If you're not able to see this in terms of the freedoms of both sides, you'd not be able to adjudicate.

quote:

ORIGINAL: epiphiny43

Latest from Indiana: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-32166862
Arkansas voted in a similar law, the Gov. refused to sign it, veto is implied, situation not clearly resolved?

Any possibility here of posting to a thread without 'replying' to a specific person? Which doesn't edit out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

Just out of curiosity, you don't think a request for the traditional figures on the top of cake to be two "grooms" or two 'brides" would be a clue?

That hints at a simple workaround (though one that evades the central principle) - get them to make the cake; you put your own figures on the top of it. I guess you make a point to the relevant cake maker by sending them photos of their cake being cut at the wedding.

What point would that be? That the gay/lesbian couple made someone unknowingly violate their religious beliefs? This from people that expect you to recognize their right to follow theirs?

The point that whether the cake makers like it or not, their product is going to be used for a gay wedding. Also the point that the consumer is *free* to do what he or she wants with the product, once it has been bought.

While forcing someone else to go against their beliefs...by being dishonest in the manner they do so. Yes Sir...that's something to teach your children: Never let your beliefs be attacked or sabotaged but feel free to attack anyone else's or sabotage anyone else's...as long as the 'anyone else' are Christians.

Well, not a particularly noble move, to send pics of the wedding cake adapted for a gay wedding - but, on the other hand, it does underline the power of the free market. Still, the cake makers would probably survive the horror of it, I should imagine.

quote:

So not catering an ceremony you disagree with is on the same level as death threats?
On one hand it is a question of does a person have the right to set moral codes for their business.
On the other hand is is a question of whether people who don't like it have the right to kill them.

quote:


Seems to me that one hand, you recognize that both sides have beliefs and freedoms and yet, on the other hand, it's still o.k. to disregard others'...as long as they're Christians...beliefs. Because "they'll get over it".

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

So not catering an ceremony you disagree with is on the same level as death threats?
On one hand it is a question of does a person have the right to set moral codes for their business.
On the other hand is is a question of whether people who don't like it have the right to kill them.

No, it's a question of having good adjudication between freedoms so that people don't even *start* to act like animals. If one side doesn't think its freedoms are being recognised, it could get violent. Nobody has the right to get violent, but that's what tends to happen. This is about prevention as opposed to cure: stop the anger that leads to the violence, or try to deal with it once it's started.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

So not catering an ceremony you disagree with is on the same level as death threats?
On one hand it is a question of does a person have the right to set moral codes for their business.
On the other hand is is a question of whether people who don't like it have the right to kill them.

No, it's a question of having good adjudication between freedoms so that people don't even *start* to act like animals. If one side doesn't think its freedoms are being recognised, it could get violent. Nobody has the right to get violent, but that's what tends to happen. This is about prevention as opposed to cure: stop the anger that leads to the violence, or try to deal with it once it's started.

So the side which more likely to turn to violence must be catered to?

quote:

ORIGINAL: epiphiny43
Latest from Indiana: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-32166862
Arkansas voted in a similar law, the Gov. refused to sign it, veto is implied, situation not clearly resolved?

Any possibility here of posting to a thread without 'replying' to a specific person? Which doesn't edit out.

quote:

Meanwhile, over at Yelp.com, more than a thousand “reviews” of Memories Pizza rapidly accumulated, quickly overwhelming the positive comments from actual customers who like the pizza, the hospitality and the small-town charm. Folks who never heard of Walkerton attacked Crystal O’Connor’s business, her morality and her Lord. Many of the remarks included racially charged descriptions of genitalia and sex acts. “Reviewers” also posted pictures of naked men, of Adolf Hitler shouting “Ich habe ein pizza” (I have a pizza), and of Jesus gesturing with his middle finger. Over on Facebook, the restaurant’s 5-star average rating rapidly plunged to one star, as non-customers slammed away at Crystal’s little business.

In Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, a manifesto of political power, Rule No. 12 says, in part:

"Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)"

The Left doesn’t care who gets hurt, so long as they get what they want. They’re willing — no, they’re eager — to sacrifice a small-town business, and it’s owners.

Lest you think I’m being too dramatic. Late Wednesday, word comes that Jess Dooley, a female coach at Concord High School 45 minutes away in Elkhart, has been suspended after tweeting:

Who’s going to Walkerton, IN to burn down #memoriespizza w me?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Will people go into the bakery and announce that it is their second marriage and the give details of the divorce?
You do know that the reason for the divorce and other things make a difference. For example a Catholic friend of mine got an annulment from the church.