Local bakery owner refuses to make gay couple's wedding cake

  • Thread starter Thread starter _Abyssinia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Brendan said:
The point is, it is NOT denying service to homosexuals. A homosexual could easily by rolls or a loaf of bread or a dozen cupcakes from the baker without issue.

What the baker is objecting to is the force support of an EVENT. Events are not persons.
Click to expand...
Does it deny wedding cakes to any other people getting married? If not, it’s discrimination against homosexuals.
 
I can see declining to participate in the ceremony for religious objections like being a celebrant or a cantor etc.

A cake is something morally neutral. Especially if the baker doesn’t include gender specific themes.
 
Looky:

Businesses should be able to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

Those in society who disagree: note that your local bakery could be forced to make cakes with the Confederate flag, Nazi symbols, or a picture of David Duke and if you refused, you would have to pay fines or be put in jail.

The knife cuts both ways, so ask yourself how much virtue-signaling is worth it.

Enjoy!

:tiphat:
 
Sophie_Lawrence said:
I can see declining to participate in the ceremony for religious objections like being a celebrant or a cantor etc.

A cake is something morally neutral. Especially if the baker doesn’t include gender specific themes.
Click to expand...
What about if it was a cake for a NAMBLA celebration?

And let’s say it was just a generic cake that didn’t have any specific theme–it just said, “We celebrate 50 years of NAMBLA in our community!” or something like that.
 
PRmerger said:
What about if it was a cake for a NAMBLA celebration?

And let’s say it was just a generic cake that didn’t have any specific theme–it just said, “We celebrate 50 years of NAMBLA in our community!” or something like that.
Click to expand...
Better check the hierarchy of victimhood on that.

It may depend on if there’s a Muslim child bride involved.
 
If I own a company that makes t-shirts, for example, I cannot decide not to make them for a whites-only group even if I find it to be abhorrent. Whites-only groups are not illegal. Pediphilia is, so NAMBLA is not apt here. If I make wedding cakes and same-sex marriage is legal, I cannot refuse to make wedding cakes for same-sex couples.
 
SuperLuigi said:
Looky:

Businesses should be able to refuse service to anyone for any reason.
Click to expand...
I have been changing my position towards this way of thinking also.

It is immoral to hold a gun to someone’s head and say, bake that damn cake.

The state in forcibly taking wealth from business owners and throwing them in jail if they refused to robbed is tantamount to that situation .
 
abucs said:
I have been changing my position towards this way of thinking also.

It is immoral to hold a gun to someone’s head and say, bake that damn cake.

The state in forcibly taking wealth from business owners and throwing them in jail if they refused to robbed is tantamount to that situation .
Click to expand...
Hardly.
 
PRmerger said:
What about if it was a cake for a NAMBLA celebration?

And let’s say it was just a generic cake that didn’t have any specific theme–it just said, “We celebrate 50 years of NAMBLA in our community!” or something like that.
Click to expand...
If it says NAMBLA on it it ceases to be a generic cake, I would think.

If a baker makes a three tiered vanilla cake with raspberry filling, white frosting, and some flowers on it, is it really directly participating with someone else’s sin?
 
abucs said:
I see your hardly and raise you two softlies.
Click to expand...
No one is forced to make a cake. But if one engages in commercial cake baking, you do not have the right to exercise invidious discrimination in your workplace. A better analogy is police throwing a baker in jail if he were found to be stealing flour.
 
dvdjs said:
No one is forced to make a cake. But if one engages in commercial cake baking, you do not have the right to exercise invidious discrimination in your workplace. A better analogy is police throwing a baker in jail if he were found to be stealing flour.
Click to expand...
Of course they are forced. The threat of taking someone else’s money and depriving them of their liberty unless they comply is force.

We are discussing what we each think the rights should be, not what they are at present.
 
abucs said:
I have been changing my position towards this way of thinking also.

It is immoral to hold a gun to someone’s head and say, bake that damn cake.

The state in forcibly taking wealth from business owners and throwing them in jail if they refused to robbed is tantamount to that situation .
Click to expand...
The business owners volunteered to follow the applicable business regulations where they’re licensed. If they didn’t want to be punished for discriminating against gay people they shouldn’t have agreed to not discriminate against gay people.
 
abucs said:
Of course they are forced. The threat of taking someone else’s money and depriving them of their liberty unless they comply is force.
We are discussing what rights should be, not what they are.
Click to expand...
There is no compulsion to be in the cake-baking business.

One that choice is made, one has to run the business in a manner that is complaint with the laws that regulate it. If a choice is made to flaut the law, then consequences are to be expected.

People engaged in commerce have no right to invidious discrimination in the conduct of their business. And that is how it should be. If that were not the case then we would likely return to an era of horrible injustice.
 
dvdjs said:
There is no compulsion to be in the cake-baking business.

One that choice is made, one has to run the business in a manner that is complaint with the laws that regulate it. If a choice is made to flaut the law, then consequences are to be expected.
Click to expand...
lmachine said:
The business owners volunteered to follow the applicable business regulations where they’re licensed. If they didn’t want to be punished for discriminating against gay people they shouldn’t have agreed to not discriminate against gay people.
Click to expand...
Again we are discussing what things should be with justice as our guide, not what they are at the moment due to recent court case decisions.

What this politically correct crusade is doing is creating a disrespect for the law and those who create it. This is not good going forward.
 
abucs said:
What this politically correct crusade is doing is creating a disrespect for the law and those who create it. This is not good going forward.
Click to expand...
I suppose that when Jim Crow practices were deemed illegal, there was considerable disrespect and contempt. Thankfully we got over it.
 
abucs said:
What this politically correct crusade is doing is creating a disrespect for the law and those who create it. This is not good going forward.
Click to expand...
The people disrespecting the law are the people unlawfully discriminating against gay people.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top