Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimination?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimination? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 11:17:07 AM   
ThatDizzyChick


Posts: 5490
Status: offline
quote:

It does not in any way prohibit individuals from exercising their religious liberty and in fact prohibits the state from imposing on that religious liberty.

And yet they do it all the time.

_____________________________

Not your average bimbo.

(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 11:17:23 AM   
crazyml


Posts: 5568
Joined: 7/3/2007
Status: offline 		Hey Awareness,

Thanks for your response. Obviously you disagree with the USSC on this, so I am now left wondering who I should believe... the USSC or you.

Oh my. Dilemma.

_____________________________

Remember.... There's always somewhere on the planet where it's jackass o'clock.

(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 11:24:22 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

I'll buy the religious liberty shit when Rastafarians can smoke pot and Mormons and Muslims can have multiple wives.


I knew I liked you.

(in reply to ThatDizzyChick)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 11:27:40 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
ORIGINAL: Awareness
ORIGINAL: thompsonx



Entirely within their rights to do so. They don't provide an essential service and there's no legal basis for compelling them to engage with people whose lifestyle they do not support.

I have heard that there are some lawyers who make a pretty good living litigating aptness of the equal protection clause of the 14th ammendment to the constitution of the united states of amerika to cases such as this.
Rather ironic that you were not 'aware' of that.



That people encourage and profit from lawlessness is unsurprising. Lawyers profit from doubt, uncertainty and fear. That doesn't make them right, it merely makes them unconscionable scumbags.

Why is it that you feel that those who defend the constitution are scumbags?

(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 12:38:41 PM   
NorthernGent1


Posts: 218
Joined: 6/27/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

Baker takes order for BIRTHDAY cake.

Baker than looks up client's facebook page, and finds that she is in a same-sex marriage.

Baker then texts her canceling the cake order, citing a refusal of services to same-sex couples.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ohio-bakery-gay-couple-cake_us_577eb60ae4b01edea78d1e2a



I think this is a good example of the world gone mad.

It shouldn't really be unthinkable that there will be some people in this world who don't want to serve other people because they're different in some way.

But, I think it's a sign of our times that some people need to find a cause in something. Most people in the Western world are comfortable, and probably bored in the sense that such a world doesn't offer them much in the way of political causes - and so they find one that isn't really there.

The argument goes that refusing someone in a shop is only the start. But, is it? It's not state sanctioned and there are other shops to buy cakes.

You won't find a world where everyone is agreeable. Surely refusing to bake a cake for someone is hardly plumbing the depths of genocide?





(in reply to Wayward5oul)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 12:48:39 PM   
ManOeuvre


Posts: 277
Joined: 3/2/2013
Status: offline 		NG1,

I think the prominence of this issue is an example of a failure to perform moral triage.

< Message edited by ManOeuvre -- 7/12/2016 12:56:05 PM >

(in reply to NorthernGent1)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 2:03:52 PM   
crazyml


Posts: 5568
Joined: 7/3/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness


quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

Baker takes order for BIRTHDAY cake.

Baker than looks up client's facebook page, and finds that she is in a same-sex marriage.

Baker then texts her canceling the cake order, citing a refusal of services to same-sex couples.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ohio-bakery-gay-couple-cake_us_577eb60ae4b01edea78d1e2a

Entirely within their rights to do so. They don't provide an essential service and there's no legal basis for compelling them to engage with people whose lifestyle they do not support.



I think you're confused about the law.

Let me help you out.

The Colorado case was brought on the basis of a law banning public accommodations from refusing service based on factors such as race, sex, marital status or sexual orientation.

That means that it was illegal to refuse service. Here's a link that you might find useful:

Colorado Civil Rights Commission
http://aclu-co.org/court-cases/masterpiece-cakeshop/
“Longstanding Colorado state law prohibits public accommodations, including businesses such as Masterpiece Cakeshop, from refusing service based on factors such as race, sex, marital status or sexual orientation.”

Now, you may wish to argue that the anti-discrimination law is a breach of the 1st amendment, but your argument would fail. Because, the USSC has already ruled that the 1st Amendment protects opinions, not actions, and that the law of the land is superior to religious belief.

I've provided a link, and a snippet:

Reynolds vs US 1878
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/98/145/case.html
"So here, as a law of the organization of society under the exclusive dominion of the United States, it is provided that plural marriages shall not be allowed. Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief?
To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and, in effect, to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government could exist only in name under such circumstances."

One of the key sources is Jefferson, you may be aware that he was quite involved in the creation of the constitution, and his take was that there should be a distinction between the power of the government to limit opinions (which he was dead against) and the power of the government to limit actions. Here's a quote and a link;

Jefferson
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. "
https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html


Now, this case is from Ohio, so we need to look at what Ohio law has to say:

Ohio has a law covering "Unlawful Discriminatory Practices", here's a link to it - http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/4112.02. Scroll down to (G).


Just to help you, the term "public accommodation" Check out section 7 from the US Code - https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/12181. Now... there might be a legal argument over whether the home-based nature of the bakery means that it isn't a public accommodation. That would be an interesting case, and I'd enjoy arguing either side.

So, their only defence would be to argue that they were not a "public accommodation" - Certainly your apparent belief that the extent to which their services were "essential" or "not" doesn't appear to have any bearing on the matter at all.


_____________________________

Remember.... There's always somewhere on the planet where it's jackass o'clock.

(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 2:21:06 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
ORIGINAL: crazyml
ORIGINAL: Awareness
ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

Baker takes order for BIRTHDAY cake.

Baker than looks up client's facebook page, and finds that she is in a same-sex marriage.

Baker then texts her canceling the cake order, citing a refusal of services to same-sex couples.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ohio-bakery-gay-couple-cake_us_577eb60ae4b01edea78d1e2a

Entirely within their rights to do so. They don't provide an essential service and there's no legal basis for compelling them to engage with people whose lifestyle they do not support.



I think you're confused about the law.

Let me help you out.

The Colorado case was brought on the basis of a law banning public accommodations from refusing service based on factors such as race, sex, marital status or sexual orientation.

That means that it was illegal to refuse service. Here's a link that you might find useful:

Colorado Civil Rights Commission
http://aclu-co.org/court-cases/masterpiece-cakeshop/
“Longstanding Colorado state law prohibits public accommodations, including businesses such as Masterpiece Cakeshop, from refusing service based on factors such as race, sex, marital status or sexual orientation.”

Now, you may wish to argue that the anti-discrimination law is a breach of the 1st amendment, but your argument would fail. Because, the USSC has already ruled that the 1st Amendment protects opinions, not actions, and that the law of the land is superior to religious belief.

I've provided a link, and a snippet:

Reynolds vs US 1878
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/98/145/case.html
"So here, as a law of the organization of society under the exclusive dominion of the United States, it is provided that plural marriages shall not be allowed. Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief?
To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and, in effect, to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government could exist only in name under such circumstances."

One of the key sources is Jefferson, you may be aware that he was quite involved in the creation of the constitution, and his take was that there should be a distinction between the power of the government to limit opinions (which he was dead against) and the power of the government to limit actions. Here's a quote and a link;

Jefferson
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. "
https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html


Now, this case is from Ohio, so we need to look at what Ohio law has to say:

Ohio has a law covering "Unlawful Discriminatory Practices", here's a link to it - http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/4112.02. Scroll down to (G).


Just to help you, the term "public accommodation" Check out section 7 from the US Code - https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/12181. Now... there might be a legal argument over whether the home-based nature of the bakery means that it isn't a public accommodation. That would be an interesting case, and I'd enjoy arguing either side.

So, their only defence would be to argue that they were not a "public accommodation" - Certainly your apparent belief that the extent to which their services were "essential" or "not" doesn't appear to have any bearing on the matter at all.

Why are you so mean to stupid people?

(in reply to crazyml)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 2:21:49 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

Baker takes order for BIRTHDAY cake.

Baker than looks up client's facebook page, and finds that she is in a same-sex marriage.

Baker then texts her canceling the cake order, citing a refusal of services to same-sex couples.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ohio-bakery-gay-couple-cake_us_577eb60ae4b01edea78d1e2a



I think this is a good example of the world gone mad.

It shouldn't really be unthinkable that there will be some people in this world who don't want to serve other people because they're different in some way.

But, I think it's a sign of our times that some people need to find a cause in something. Most people in the Western world are comfortable, and probably bored in the sense that such a world doesn't offer them much in the way of political causes - and so they find one that isn't really there.

The argument goes that refusing someone in a shop is only the start. But, is it? It's not state sanctioned and there are other shops to buy cakes.

You won't find a world where everyone is agreeable. Surely refusing to bake a cake for someone is hardly plumbing the depths of genocide?


greg gutfeld recently said something very similar and is in part attributing what you've described to our life of luxury. he suggested that an immigrant from Rwanda for instance would find the things we seemingly get upset about, mind boggling.

(in reply to NorthernGent1)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 2:24:32 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
ORIGINAL: bounty44


greg gutfeld recently said something very similar and is in part attributing what you've described to our life of luxury. he suggested that an immigrant from Rwanda for instance would find the things we seemingly get upset about, mind boggling.

Is it possibe that you would find the things that upset him mind boggling also?

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 2:44:45 PM   
Wayward5oul


Posts: 3314
Joined: 11/9/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent1
But, I think it's a sign of our times that some people need to find a cause in something. Most people in the Western world are comfortable, and probably bored in the sense that such a world doesn't offer them much in the way of political causes - and so they find one that isn't really there.

You make it sound like the woman went out looking for a cause. She didn't. She went about her daily business, ordered a cake for her wife's birthday, and left the bakery believing all was well.

The bakery owner then, for reasons that are not given in the article, chose to look up the client on the internet and discovered that she was married to a woman.

The owner then contacted her and refused service.

At which point the client went and ordered a cake at another bakery.

In this day and age, there is no way that this kind of story is not going to make the news. But no one went out needing to "find a cause". They were mistreated, with zero provocation.

(in reply to NorthernGent1)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 2:54:42 PM   
Wayward5oul


Posts: 3314
Joined: 11/9/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
greg gutfeld recently said something very similar and is in part attributing what you've described to our life of luxury. he suggested that an immigrant from Rwanda for instance would find the things we seemingly get upset about, mind boggling.


I wouldn't put being personally told that because you are gay that you are a sinner and that someone wants nothing to do with you in the same category as 'getting upset over a "luxury". The bakery owner actively chose to investigate the woman and then text her that she couldn't do the cake because of their lifestyle.

That is highly personal and offensive.

However, I would say that stalking a client on facebook to discern whether or not they are worthy of a birthday cake (that you have already agreed to provide) from you is more than a trifle petty.

< Message edited by Wayward5oul -- 7/12/2016 2:55:08 PM >

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 4:08:10 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline 		your rendition of what im posted is way off the mark. there is no correct "getting upset over a 'luxury'" interpretation in either what gutfeld said, or in how I used it. especially given what I posted as a follow-up to northerngent using the word "comfortable" and "bored" and some people having a lack of political causes.

he (gutfeld) is saying that because we have luxury in life, and don't have to struggle for survival and basic needs or even large and deep matters of humanity, we are able to make issues out of such things.





(in reply to Wayward5oul)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 4:15:23 PM   
ThatDizzyChick


Posts: 5490
Status: offline 		FR
The obvious answer is for people to just bake their own damned cakes.

_____________________________

Not your average bimbo.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 4:28:52 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline 		my short answer here is people should be allowed to do business with whomever they want, and that on the whole, the marketplace can decide who "will out" so to speak.

(in reply to ThatDizzyChick)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 4:29:09 PM   
Wayward5oul


Posts: 3314
Joined: 11/9/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

your rendition of what im posted is way off the mark. there is no correct "getting upset over a 'luxury'" interpretation in either what gutfeld said, or in how I used it. especially given what I posted as a follow-up to northerngent using the word "comfortable" and "bored" and some people having a lack of political causes.

he (gutfeld) is saying that because we have luxury in life, and don't have to struggle for survival and basic needs or even large and deep matters of humanity, we are able to make issues out of such things.






I interpreted it exactly as you explained here.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 4:47:56 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline 		'getting upset over a "luxury" is not "exactly as I explained here."

she's not upset because she lives in America; rather she can get upset over this by virtue of the luxury living in America provides, as opposed to living in Rwanda.

that is NOT, "getting upset over a luxury."


(in reply to Wayward5oul)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 6:55:51 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline 		nm.

< Message edited by dcnovice -- 7/12/2016 6:57:01 PM >

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 7:03:55 PM   
ManOeuvre


Posts: 277
Joined: 3/2/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick
FR
The obvious answer is for people to just bake their own damned cakes.


Now that's progress!

(in reply to ThatDizzyChick)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimin... - 7/12/2016 7:11:21 PM   
Wayward5oul


Posts: 3314
Joined: 11/9/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

'getting upset over a "luxury" is not "exactly as I explained here."

she's not upset because she lives in America; rather she can get upset over this by virtue of the luxury living in America provides, as opposed to living in Rwanda.

that is NOT, "getting upset over a luxury."



Tell me bounty, what is your opinion on the actual topic?

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: That DAMN CAKE again-Religious Liberty or Discrimination? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109