HuckFinn
8 years ago

The left still doesn't get it. These type of actions may play to the base, but every time a prog meltdown makes national news, more independents move to the right. I hope to see a growing number of these temper tantrums all the way through November. Also I want to hear more from Pelosi, Schumer, Warren and the Hollywierd elite. Every time they speak, Dems lose votes. Of course this time the loses will be blamed on Republicans colluding with North Korea.

David

Mrs. dpnewell wrote:


Stopped reading after "The left.."
View All Posts by User
RMAN4443
8 years ago

No. That's not tricky, right? Didn't the gay couple want the shop to make them a wedding cake?

You do see how that's pretty innocuous, right?
And the the baker's convictions? He has every right to refuse.

A Passover antisemitic cake?
Yeah, I think most bakers would refuse to bake that thing.
And undoubtedly some that would bake it for free.

Kosher?

HuckFinn wrote:


If you have to make one despite your personal beliefs. why wouldn't you have to bake the other?

what about an anti-Presbyterian, or an anti Cops cake, like a Blue Lives Don't Matter cakes
View All Posts by User
Speyside
8 years ago
Rick, you mention all hateful things. How would a gay couples wedding cake be hateful? Please don't hide behind personal beliefs. That simply confuses the issue. Your statements lack consistency. A gay wedding cake may be against your personal beliefs, but it does not equate to the hateful examples you offered.
View All Posts by User
victor809
8 years ago
Spey... You cant conflate discrimination with hate.

I'm allowed to hate people for being dumb. If someone says something so dumb that it makes the entire 10mile radius around them dumber, I'm allowed to hate them. Or in the case of cbid, I'd be allowed to agree with them. Hate, dismissiveness, disregard, anger are all acceptable reactions to someones action or words (as are supportive ones)

I'm even allowed to hate someone for being different. We can see that clearly that there are lots of people who hate someone for being different. And guess what, you're allowed to hate them for that hatred... Or dismiss them, or disregard them, or go March with them holding tiki torches.

What is not allowed is discriminating against an entire group based on gender or race or sexuality... (Still allowed to hate them)...(and lying to the American public on a daily basis is not a gender ... It may be a sexual orientation depending on how turned on it made her)

For what it's worth, my first comment was in regard to tail... Who always wants to pretend righty is being discriminated against....
View All Posts by User
victor809
8 years ago
To be fair... I'm not sure the supreme Court was wrong in the case of the cake. It would likely depend on how much input they were asking the cake Baker to put in...

If they wanted him to craft two detailed grooms... I'd likely side with him. If they were just asking him to put "steven and Frank" on the cake, then he's a d!ck
View All Posts by User
Speyside
8 years ago
Victor, I follow your point. But I am uncomfortable with a public business being able to discriminate against individuals for any reason. I would also present the counter point that if sexual orientation creates categories of people then there are also political categories of people. I do understand that this viewpoint has no legal bearing and is simply my point of view. If a buisiness can be taken to task by the public for discriminatory practices against gay people then I would argue that a buisiness should be taken to task for every discriminatory practice by the public.
View All Posts by User
RMAN4443
8 years ago

Rick, you mention all hateful things. How would a gay couples wedding cake be hateful? Please don't hide behind personal beliefs. That simply confuses the issue. Your statements lack consistency. A gay wedding cake may be against your personal beliefs, but it does not equate to the hateful examples you offered.

Speyside wrote:



Your correct, the analogy's are poor examples....I was going towards the having to do things against your beliefs, and the nanny state we have in this country....I don't think we need to go to court to get a cake made, when shop "A" says they don't want to make the cake, just go to shop "B", as simple as that...if Wedding band "a" doesn't want to play, just get band "b"....simple, no need for the million dollar court case over a cake...

I apologize if I appeared to be making it hateful(I really wasn't)...I have no issues with gay marriage...I just don't see why it's an issue if a business declines to participate...just take your money elsewhere and don't shop there again...

Here's a better example... What if a gay couple wanted cigars with specially printed bands for their wedding?
If they go to Don Joe to get them made, but he didn't want to make them due to his beliefs.....why wouldn't you just go down the street to Don Schmo's and have them made....why would you need to go to court and drag it out for years?

I should have thought a little more about the examples I used...Again, I'm sorry if I made it seem like I was equating Gay Marriage with Hitler....my bad
View All Posts by User
DrafterX
8 years ago
Hitler only had one ball... 😟
View All Posts by User
RMAN4443
8 years ago

Hitler only had one ball... 😟

DrafterX wrote:


Hmmm, only the one eh?:-k
View All Posts by User
Speyside
8 years ago
Rick, no need for an apology. I was pointing out something inconsistent in your analogy.

Last night I ended up arguing that religious freedom should not extend to a public business, and political affiliation should not extend to a public business.

My original argument was if people are willing to be enraged that a gay couple was denied service by a bakery owner because of their sexual orientation then people should be enraged that a straight white woman was denied service from a restaurant owner because of her political affiliation.
View All Posts by User
tailgater
8 years ago

If you can't tell the difference between "discrimination" due to a person doing or saying something stupid, and "discrimination" due to being born a different race, sexuality... Then maybe you shouldn't be having adult discussions.

Hell, people are even given a pass on their religion in civil rights protections... Something I don't think belongs, since it's a choice they make.

victor809 wrote:



So it's OK to ban the muslims?

View All Posts by User
tailgater
8 years ago

Stopped reading after "The left.."

HuckFinn wrote:



Then you missed it.

Had something to do with putting your foot in and shaking it all about.

Don't worry.
It was pretty hokey.

View All Posts by User
tailgater
8 years ago



For what it's worth, my first comment was in regard to tail... Who always wants to pretend righty is being discriminated against....

victor809 wrote:



Not even close to being accurate.

I don't care if righty is discriminated against.

I simply point out the media bias and hypocrisy.

Didn't mean to ruffle your feathers.
Or is that a boa?

View All Posts by User
HuckFinn
8 years ago

Then you missed it.

Had something to do with putting your foot in and shaking it all about.

Don't worry.
It was pretty hokey.

tailgater wrote:


Stopped reading after "Then.."
View All Posts by User
delta1
8 years ago

Then you missed it.

Had something to do with putting your foot in and shaking it all about.

Don't worry.
It was pretty hokey.

tailgater wrote:



there you go again, pokey...
View All Posts by User
RMAN4443
8 years ago

there you go again, pokey...

delta1 wrote:


I'm Gumby damnit!!!!!8-[
View All Posts by User
victor809
8 years ago
Tail... If it were applied "evenly" I wouldn't care that much about religion. I consider religion to be a choice, just like choosing to be a neonazi or any other choice people make. I don't personally see a difference between a religious person and an individual who stubbornly refuses to understand logical arguments,and as such says or does stupid and possibly damaging things because of it. In fact, that description can fit all religions and the trump talking heads.

However, our constitution protects religions in the same way it protects races. (Hell, it protected religion before it cared about women or brown people)... As long as it's in our constitution, then we have to protect religions and we have to do it in a manner that provide the same freedom to everyone.

If you want to take that out of the constitution... Just change it to something like "you want to be religious? You're on your own... If you're gonna be stupid you better be tough! " Then I'll support your movement. But till then, I support the fair and equitable application of our laws.

View All Posts by User
HuckFinn
8 years ago

Tail... If it were applied "evenly" I wouldn't care that much about religion. I consider religion to be a choice, just like choosing to be a neonazi or any other choice people make. I don't personally see a difference between a religious person and an individual who stubbornly refuses to understand logical arguments,and as such says or does stupid and possibly damaging things because of it. In fact, that description can fit all religions and the trump talking heads.

However, our constitution protects religions in the same way it protects races. (Hell, it protected religion before it cared about women or brown people)... As long as it's in our constitution, then we have to protect religions and we have to do it in a manner that provide the same freedom to everyone.

If you want to take that out of the constitution... Just change it to something like "you want to be religious? You're on your own... If you're gonna be stupid you better be tough! " Then I'll support your movement. But till then, I support the fair and equitable application of our laws.

victor809 wrote:


Don't entirely agree that people choose their religion. Kids sure don't.
And if you grow up in a strictly orthodox family/community the odds are you're inescapingly locked in for life.
Even intelligent people. Only a small percentage ever break with 'tradition' statistically.

Somewhere along the line I think it becomes permanently embedded .
No escape. No choice. And no difference between that level of brainwashing and skin color imo.

Just my take.
View All Posts by User
tailgater
8 years ago

Tail... If it were applied "evenly" I wouldn't care that much about religion. I consider religion to be a choice, just like choosing to be a neonazi or any other choice people make. I don't personally see a difference between a religious person and an individual who stubbornly refuses to understand logical arguments,and as such says or does stupid and possibly damaging things because of it. In fact, that description can fit all religions and the trump talking heads.

However, our constitution protects religions in the same way it protects races. (Hell, it protected religion before it cared about women or brown people)... As long as it's in our constitution, then we have to protect religions and we have to do it in a manner that provide the same freedom to everyone.

If you want to take that out of the constitution... Just change it to something like "you want to be religious? You're on your own... If you're gonna be stupid you better be tough! " Then I'll support your movement. But till then, I support the fair and equitable application of our laws.

victor809 wrote:





You used the term "religion" when referring to what you feel is just a stupid choice that should be fair game for discrimination.

What you meant to say was "Christianity".

Stop being obtuse.

View All Posts by User
tailgater
8 years ago
I think I used obtuse wrong.

Somebody correct me, please.

Thank you.

View All Posts by User
Users browsing this topic
Mobile! Terms | Privacy | Contact Us | Help | © 1998-2026, CigarBid.com