# Politics and News > SOCIETY & humanities >  GAY WEDDING CAKE/Colorado Baker/SCOTUS

## Perianne

A baker in Colorado has refused to provide a wedding cake for the "marriage" of two homos.  A Colorado judge has ruled that the bakery is violating the homos' rights and will assess fines if the bakery continues to turn away gay couples who want to buy wedding cakes.

The cute couple:


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/12/06...gious-beliefs/

----------


## Muninn

I don't feel the need to force others to serve me. If a store or bakery doesn't wish to serve me and my partner, plenty of others will. I feel no need to cry foul and force them to do something that violates their beliefs.

----------

BleedingHeadKen (12-10-2013),Calypso Jones (12-10-2013),Old Ridge Runner (06-13-2014),Perianne (12-10-2013)

----------


## Perianne

> I don't feel the need to force others to serve me. If a store or bakery doesn't wish to serve me and my partner, plenty of others will. I feel no need to cry foul and force them to do something that violates their beliefs.


I assume you are gay?  I admire your stance about not being served.  It is people like the above that give gays a terrible name.  The couple should have just gone on down the road to the next bakery.

There is a chicken joint here in Lexington that is black owned and caters only to blacks.  While I have never been there, I have heard (from a black friend) that whites are NOT welcome.  I don't file a complaint; they don't want my business.... and I love chicken!

Every business should be able to do business with who they want.

----------


## Muninn

> I assume you are gay?  I admire your stance about not being served.  It is people like the above that give gays a terrible name.  The couple should have just gone on down the road to the next bakery.


Bi-sexual, but it kind of amounts to the same thing. 




> There is a chicken joint here in Lexington that is black owned and caters only to blacks.  While I have never been there, I have heard (from a black friend) that whites are NOT welcome.  I don't file a complaint; they don't want my business.... and I love chicken!
> 
> Every business should be able to do business with who they want.


Pretty much, there are plenty of restaurants that serve chicken who will gladly take money from scrawny white ass, why should I feel the need to force someone to serve me that doesn't want to. Thing is....if they don't want my business I don't want their services. *Shrugs*

----------

Trinnity (12-14-2013)

----------


## Calypso Jones

my sentiments exactly.

 Matter of fact I don't want to do business with people who actively work toward my enslavement by the gov't.

----------


## Katzndogz

Bakeries that have objections should just stop offering wedding cakes as a service to the general public.   If the baker knows you, he or she could be persuaded to bake your wedding cake.

A few years ago, maybe three or so, I was sued by a lesbian couple because I refused to paint their wedding portrait.  I won that case after five months of litigation.  The couple proved up every aspect of their case but they could not prove that I offered to paint portraits to the general public.   They could not prove that I painted any commissions at all.   Even though the couple did not win their case, the Judge still felt that I should be punished and sentenced me to community service.

It's a long story, suffice to say it started with my stealing a dog out of the shelter where I was performing that community service.  It all ended well.

----------

Old Ridge Runner (06-13-2014),Trinnity (12-14-2013)

----------


## Trinnity

The state (federal or state level) has no constitutional authority in the matter. None.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> Bakeries that have objections should just stop offering wedding cakes as a service to the general public.   If the baker knows you, he or she could be persuaded to bake your wedding cake.
> 
> A few years ago, maybe three or so, I was sued by a lesbian couple because I refused to paint their wedding portrait.  I won that case after five months of litigation.  The couple proved up every aspect of their case but they could not prove that I offered to paint portraits to the general public.   They could not prove that I painted any commissions at all.   Even though the couple did not win their case, the Judge still felt that I should be punished and sentenced me to community service.
> 
> It's a long story, suffice to say it started with my stealing a dog out of the shelter where I was performing that community service.  It all ended well.


 I forgot that part of it, if you had divulged it at that point.   Tell me about stealing the dog.     You really made yourself a nuisance and the community service recipient was glad to be rid of you if I remember correctly.    I know that pleased you.  It sure pleased me.   :Wink:     Now THAT is the way to be civilly disobedient.

----------

Trinnity (12-14-2013)

----------


## Calypso Jones

There is an update to this case.  Of course Mr. Phillips lost the case.   Just shows that the rights of homosexuals are going to be taking precedence over the rights of others.     Hundreds of Jack Phillips supporters showed up at his business in support of him and in opposition to Judge Spenser's ruling.     Someone should tell mr Phillips what he should do as far as wedding cakes are concerned.  Katz.

----------


## wist43

It doesn't matter how many people show in support of Mr. Phillips, what matters is that the radical left controls our institutions - controls the law, controls the bench. Just as they control our educational system and media. 

When communists take over a target country they are always a very small minority. During the Bolshevik Revolution communists only counted 1% of the population. What they are expert at is enlisting non-communists, even anti-communists into working for their own enslavement. Once they have sufficient power, they dispose of the "useful idiots".

Gays are in for a very rude awakening once the Constitution is scraped and political correctness has outlived its usefulness. Just as with the labor leaders in the Soviet Union who truly believed they were working for a "workers paradise" - when the reality set in, and they complained, they were lined up and shot.

The end game is not about "freedom" and a "civil society", the end game is about power - and power is always enforced at the end of a gun. In the end, that gay couple is as likely to be shot as Mr. Phillips is.

----------

Calypso Jones (12-14-2013),catfish (12-14-2013),Old Ridge Runner (06-13-2014)

----------


## Archer

> The state (federal or state level) has no constitutional authority in the matter. None.


Business in it? No. But they use the interstate commerece clause to step on the constitution just like, ATLANTA MOTEL v. UNITED STATES, 379 U.S. 241 (1964), whoch I had to write a brief on.

Now; it was a far stretch, but it was what got much of the state telling you, who you can serve, going.

----------


## Katzndogz

> I forgot that part of it, if you had divulged it at that point.   Tell me about stealing the dog.     You really made yourself a nuisance and the community service recipient was glad to be rid of you if I remember correctly.    I know that pleased you.  It sure pleased me.      Now THAT is the way to be civilly disobedient.


Although I had done nothing wrong worth a civil judgment, I was sufficient anti social to be taught a lesson so I had community service at the shelter where I stole a dog slated to be killed and groomed him for adoption.   The new judge, a criminal law judge, sentenced me to groom two dogs a month, free for adoption and start a program for groomer volunteers to do the same thing.    Then I moved to Nevada but my little program has gone county wide!   

I believe, firmly, that everyone has the duty to engage in a small act of rebellion every day.   Be creative in staying within the law, but some small act of rebellion by millions and millions of Americans would be enough to bring this regime to its knees.

Take a look at the number of resorts in Palm Springs that make it plain that they only allow gay men to stay at their resort.   They will never get told by a judge that they have to allow heterosexuals to stay there.

----------

Perianne (12-14-2013)

----------


## Katzndogz

> Business in it? No. But they use the interstate commerece clause to step on the constitution just like, ATLANTA MOTEL v. UNITED STATES, 379 U.S. 241 (1964), whoch I had to write a brief on.
> 
> Now; it was a far stretch, but it was what got much of the state telling you, who you can serve, going.


Phillips did not refuse to serve these gays.   They could go into his bakery and buy anything they wanted.     As a result of my civil disobedience and winning my case, a photographer in my art guild stopped doing wedding photography.   He still does as much wedding photography as he ever did.   He just doesn't advertise it.  If someone walks in off the street, they get informed that he doesn't photograph weddings and he tells them why.  He doesn't want to be sued.    By word of mouth, though, and for people that he knows, he still does as much as he ever did.

----------


## Archer

> Phillips did not refuse to serve these gays.   They could go into his bakery and buy anything they wanted.     As a result of my civil disobedience and winning my case, a photographer in my art guild stopped doing wedding photography.   He still does as much wedding photography as he ever did.   He just doesn't advertise it.  If someone walks in off the street, they get informed that he doesn't photograph weddings and he tells them why.  He doesn't want to be sued.    By word of mouth, though, and for people that he knows, he still does as much as he ever did.


But it should not matter. Servicing people should be about a person servicing who they choose to serve; or, who they choose not to serve.

----------


## Katzndogz

It should be and it is.   People just have to be more creative about how they live their lives.  It comes down to avoiding the inevitable complaint.   Think that every action, every word you speak might serve as the basis for a complaint for not being liberal.

The nation is dividing, has divided to a huge degree and is continuing to divide.    All gays can do is choose who to do business with, depending on who is willing to do business with them.   The only alternative left to an oppressive government is to federalize all bakers.  If you bake at all, if you have an oven, if you bake cookies, you will have to make wedding cakes too.  Federalize the photographers, federalize everybody.

Government oppression becomes like stamping on a balloon.   Squeeze it here and it expands there, then it must be squeezed there and will pop out somewhere else.   Eventually the balloon breaks.   Eventually government oppression becomes total until the people rise up and revolt.

----------


## Dos Equis

> I don't feel the need to force others to serve me. If a store or bakery doesn't wish to serve me and my partner, plenty of others will. I feel no need to cry foul and force them to do something that violates their beliefs.



What if they would not serve blacks?

----------


## Calypso Jones

http://hotair.com/archives/2014/05/3...-the-day-1746/  Court says he MUST BAKE CAKES FOR HOMOESEXUALS.   Baker says he's getting so many orders for cookies and brownies that he don't bake no cakes no mo'.   anyway.   he's got to report on himself for 2 years and tell them what his business is doing.

You watch.  Some homo will come in and demand he bake a cake for them.   He should.....and hire Network to pee in it.

----------


## Coolwalker

Whats a simple definition of slavery?:  submission to a dominating influence. If a person is forced to do  work against his will, then that person is a slave. Slavery has returned  to the United States, this time in the state of Colorado:
 Colorado's Civil Rights Commission on  Friday ordered a baker to make wedding cakes for same-sex couples,  finding his religious objections to the practice did not trump the  state's anti-discrimination statutes.

 The unanimous ruling from the  seven-member commission upheld an administrative law judge's finding in  December that Jack Phillips violated civil rights law when he refused to  make a wedding cake for a gay couple in 2012. The couple sued.
 What did we expect from a panel whose sole job is to root out  "discrimination" wherever it is found? No one was harmed in the refusal  to bake a cake for something that is illegal in Colorado. That's right.  Homosexual marriage is still illegal in Colorado. Of course, it wont be  long before some unelected judge changes that. The "couple" had been  married in Massachusetts and wanted to celebrate their biologically  untenable union in the anti-homosexual marriage state of Colorado.
 What if a panel of Nazis ordered a Jewish tailor to make patches for Jews to wear that identified them as Jews?
 What if a government commission ordered a black printer to print signs for a KKK rally?
 What if a government commission compelled a catering service owned by  homosexuals to supply food and beverages for an anti-homosexual  conference?

 One of the commissioners said, in defense of the ruling, I can  believe anything I want, but if I'm going to do business here, Id ought  to not discriminate against people.
 Jack Phillips is now a slave to the state of Colorado and any  homosexual customer who comes into his bakery and wants a  homosexual-themed cake or cookies. He is being compelled to do work for  somebody whose actions he finds morally compromising.
 Lets say a homosexual group wants him to do a pornographic cake for a  "gay" event. Will he be able to refuse the order? And yet, if a  heterosexual group ordered the same type of cake, and the bakery  refused, no ones rights would have been violated. Same type of cake,  but one protected class of people makes all the difference in the world.
 Phillips, a devout Christian who owns  the Masterpiece Cakeshop in the Denver suburb of Lakewood, said the  decision violates his First Amendment rights to free speech and free  exercise of his religion. I will stand by my convictions until somebody  shuts me down, he told reporters after the ruling.
 He added his bakery has been so  overwhelmed by supporters eager to buy cookies and brownies that he does  not currently make wedding cakes.
 Remember when we were told that laws protecting same-sex sexuality  and legalizing homosexual marriage would have no effect on people who  opposed such things? Live and let live, we were told. Yea, right.
 To show that Mr. Phillips is a slave to the state of Colorado, The  panel . . . ordered Phillips to stop discriminating against gay people  and to report quarterly for two years on staff anti-discrimination  training and any customers he refuses to serve. Not only is he a slave,  but he has to go through re-education and state-sanctioned  indoctrination to force him to comply with what the state mandates.  Clockwork Orange comes to mind.

Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/15752/g...q2WDcHUk53H.99

----------

DeadEye (06-03-2014),DonGlock26 (06-05-2014),sparsely (06-05-2014)

----------


## Sheldonna

> Whats a simple definition of slavery?:  submission to a dominating influence. If a person is forced to do  work against his will, then that person is a slave. Slavery has returned  to the United States, this time in the state of Colorado:
>  Colorado's Civil Rights Commission on  Friday ordered a baker to make wedding cakes for same-sex couples,  finding his religious objections to the practice did not trump the  state's anti-discrimination statutes.
> 
>  The unanimous ruling from the  seven-member commission upheld an administrative law judge's finding in  December that Jack Phillips violated civil rights law when he refused to  make a wedding cake for a gay couple in 2012. The couple sued.
>  What did we expect from a panel whose sole job is to root out  "discrimination" wherever it is found? No one was harmed in the refusal  to bake a cake for something that is illegal in Colorado. That's right.  Homosexual marriage is still illegal in Colorado. Of course, it wont be  long before some unelected judge changes that. The "couple" had been  married in Massachusetts and wanted to celebrate their biologically  untenable union in the anti-homosexual marriage state of Colorado.
>  What if a panel of Nazis ordered a Jewish tailor to make patches for Jews to wear that identified them as Jews?
>  What if a government commission ordered a black printer to print signs for a KKK rally?
>  What if a government commission compelled a catering service owned by  homosexuals to supply food and beverages for an anti-homosexual  conference?
> 
> ...


That baker needs to move to a state that hasn't been "commiefied".  Texas is right next door.

----------

DeadEye (06-03-2014),sparsely (06-05-2014)

----------


## Sentinel

Liberals are complete tyrants.  How can anyone have any doubt.

----------


## Ghost of Lunchboxxy

He needs to leave the state.

That state is really now only an extension of the Bay Area, and any sane person should vacate, immediately!

----------


## Katzndogz

Yet when a bakery refused to make a birthday cake for a child named Adolf Hitler the bakery was within its rights. 

It's all about political correctness.   That's the new law. 

The baker can solve his problem and has already done so by not offering wedding cakes as part of his services.    

A few years ago I was sued by a lesbian couple because I refused to paint their wedding portrait.   They lost.  They could not prove that I offered portrait painting as a service.   The fact that I did get paid as an artist was immaterial.   They could not produce a single verification that I offered to paint anything.  

If the baker does not offer wedding cakes to the public as a service he cannot be sued for refusing to make wedding cakes for homosexual couples.  He can still make all the wedding cakes he wants.

----------

Coolwalker (06-04-2014),Foghorn (06-04-2014),sparsely (06-05-2014)

----------


## Sled Dog

> That baker needs to move to a state that hasn't been "commiefied". Texas is right next door.


That baker needs to discover what an extra spoonful of baking soda will do to the flavor of his cakes.

He also needs to learn the difference between using confectioner's powdered sugar and granulated sugar in his butter cream recipe.

Then, of course, there's all that time and attention to the special details of a wedding cake.  

I owned a bakery once, did wedding cakes every damn week.   If someone FORCED me to make a cake, under threat of law, I'd make him a CAKE.

Just any old cake.  While taking absolutely no time to do it special, like wedding cakes deserve.   And I'd make damn sure they signed the waiver limiting MY financial responsiblity to the price of the cake only, a routine caterer's agreement.

Gays would stop buying my cakes, if they'd try to force me to provide them with service.

Slaves make no effort to excel.

What else?  There's good chocolate, Callebaut and many of the Swiss imports, and there's HERSHEYS.  Gays like to ride the...never mind...

There's quality cream cheese, there's stuff from the store.

Photography?   Depth of field is really tricky, sometimes.   Be a shame if the photo of that once in a lifetime special KISS was focused on the "bride's" flowers, with the kissy-poo smeared outside of the depth of field, wouldn't it?  And there's SO MANY chances to catch a funny face, isn't there?   And photography is also routinely protected by "cost only" waivers.

Oops, just made a mistake your honor. Honest.

----------

Sheldonna (06-04-2014),sparsely (06-05-2014)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Yet when a bakery refused to make a birthday cake for a child named Adolf Hitler the bakery was within its rights. 
> 
> It's all about political correctness. That's the new law. 
> 
> The baker can solve his problem and has already done so by not offering wedding cakes as part of his services. 
> 
> A few years ago I was sued by a lesbian couple because I refused to paint their wedding portrait. They lost. They could not prove that I offered portrait painting as a service. The fact that I did get paid as an artist was immaterial. They could not produce a single verification that I offered to paint anything. 
> 
> If the baker does not offer wedding cakes to the public as a service he cannot be sued for refusing to make wedding cakes for homosexual couples. He can still make all the wedding cakes he wants.


When I was selling wedding cakes...


....I didn't give a crap who was buying it.   Drug dealers paid cash, gays paid on time.   Getting paid, that's what it was all about.

I could pretend I don't understand what is wrong with people seeking to force themselves on others like that, but that would be a lie.  Those whiny gay bitches are using government force to get even....and what goes around will indeed come around again, and they, the 1%, are not going to like the backlash from what they do today.

There is no reason, none whatsoever, anyone denied service from any business at all, can't go back to the yellow pages and FIND SOMEONE ELSE.

They're doing it because they're bitches, and only because of that.

Just remember, you guys and guys, Clabbergirl baking powder came in five-pound tins...what's an extra spoon or two?

----------

sparsely (06-05-2014)

----------


## Foghorn

I wonder what Colorado would do in the following situation:

I walked into a tobacco shop the other day to buy a bunch of bananas, and was shocked, shocked I tell you to find that they didnt have a single banana for sale.  Im outraged!

----------


## Sheldonna

> That baker needs to discover what an extra spoonful of baking soda will do to the flavor of his cakes.
> 
> He also needs to learn the difference between using confectioner's powdered sugar and granulated sugar in his butter cream recipe.
> 
> Then, of course, there's all that time and attention to the special details of a wedding cake.  
> 
> I owned a bakery once, did wedding cakes every damn week.   If someone FORCED me to make a cake, under threat of law, I'd make him a CAKE.
> 
> Just any old cake.  While taking absolutely no time to do it special, like wedding cakes deserve.   And I'd make damn sure they signed the waiver limiting MY financial responsiblity to the price of the cake only, a routine caterer's agreement.
> ...


I suspect that such p_assive aggressive resistance_ to the new FFG form of slavery will become the norm, vs. the exception, in the Obamanation.  I foresee a LOT of freedom fighters fighting back in this manner.  Then again, I foresee a lot falling to more aggressive methods of fighting back, too.

----------


## Coolwalker

*They should just make their business "By Appointment Only" and have a screening call, listen carefully and then when they know they don't want to do business with that particular caller say "I'm so sorry, we are booked solid that week, but here's the number to another baker".*

----------


## Sentinel

> That baker needs to discover what an extra spoonful of baking soda will do to the flavor of his cakes.


If the bake made an inferior or adulterated cake, he'd go to jail for a hate crime.  I'd like to see him put a bride and groom on top of the cake and tell the fags/lesbos that he's treating them the same as everyone else and that this is his speech/expression.  Of course, the jewish judges would punish him, but maybe not the Supreme Court as long as one gentile doesn't join the for Jews/satanists.

Our freedoms will continue to evaporate, replaced by perversion and tyranny, as long as Christians protect/ignore the devils in robes who are shredding our constitution.

----------


## Sheldonna

> If the bake made an inferior or adulterated cake, he'd go to jail for a hate crime.  I'd like to see him put a bride and groom on top of the cake and tell the fags/lesbos that he's treating them the same as everyone else and that this is his speech/expression.  Of course, the jewish judges would punish him, but maybe not the Supreme Court as long as one gentile doesn't join the for Jews/satanists.
> 
> Our freedoms will continue to evaporate, replaced by perversion and tyranny, *as long as Christians protect/ignore the devils in robes* who are shredding our constitution.


Don't look to 'real' Christians to save the nation.  The very nature of Christianity is, in essence, passivity.  They believe in letting God sort it all out, since he is ultimately in control.  

Thankfully, I am not a 'real' Christian...since I don't believe in 'turning the other cheek'.  I say lets fight like Hell!

----------


## Sentinel

> Don't look to 'real' Christians to save the nation.  The very nature of Christianity is, in essence, passivity.  They believe in letting God sort it all out, since he is ultimately in control.


Jesus told his followers to carry swords.  And, carry they did, as shown by one them using a sword to cut off a soldier's ear.  Jesus said he didn't come to bring peace, but to bring a sword.  He may have been speaking spiritually, but the point still stands that Jesus didn't preach passivity.  The "Christian Right" in this country isn't being passive, either.  They're just being as completely misguided as satanically possible.  They need to be directing their energies against judges who are not upholding the constitution, rather than against Muslims.

----------

sparsely (06-05-2014)

----------


## Sheldonna

> Jesus told his followers to carry swords.  And, carry they did, as shown by one them using a sword to cut off a soldier's ear.  Jesus said he didn't come to bring peace, but to bring a sword.  He may have been speaking spiritually, but the point still stands that Jesus didn't preach passivity.  The "Christian Right" in this country isn't being passive, either.  They're just being as completely misguided as satanically possible.  They need to be directing their energies against judges who are not upholding the constitution, rather than against Muslims.


Well....it's nice that we have you to instruct us on what we need to be focused on.  [rolling eyes]

----------


## Fisher

> Jesus told his followers to carry swords.  And, carry they did, as shown by one them using a sword to cut off a soldier's ear.  Jesus said he didn't come to bring peace, but to bring a sword.  He may have been speaking spiritually, but the point still stands that Jesus didn't preach passivity.  The "Christian Right" in this country isn't being passive, either.  They're just being as completely misguided as satanically possible.  They need to be directing their energies against judges who are not upholding the constitution, rather than against Muslims.


I see your warrior Jesus post and raise you Sermon On The Mount.

----------


## Mordent

> That baker needs to discover what an extra spoonful of baking soda will do to the flavor of his cakes.
> 
> He also needs to learn the difference between using confectioner's powdered sugar and granulated sugar in his butter cream recipe.
> 
> Then, of course, there's all that time and attention to the special details of a wedding cake.  
> 
> I owned a bakery once, did wedding cakes every damn week.   If someone FORCED me to make a cake, under threat of law, I'd make him a CAKE.
> 
> Just any old cake.  While taking absolutely no time to do it special, like wedding cakes deserve.   And I'd make damn sure they signed the waiver limiting MY financial responsiblity to the price of the cake only, a routine caterer's agreement.
> ...


Who was it at PH that came up with the idea of informing the customer that the profits from their poorly made cake would go directly to anti-gay-marriage causes?

----------


## Sheldonna

> I see your warrior Jesus post and raise you Sermon On The Mount.





> *Jesus told his followers to carry swords*.  And, carry they did, as shown by one them using a sword to cut off a soldier's ear.  Jesus said he didn't come to bring peace, but to bring a sword.  He may have been speaking spiritually, but the point still stands that Jesus didn't preach passivity.  The "Christian Right" in this country isn't being passive, either.  They're just being as completely misguided as satanically possible.  They need to be directing their energies against judges who are not upholding the constitution, rather than against Muslims.


And I raise your Sermon On The Mount with my Revelation 19:15.  

Jesus will conquer Satan and his minions with the Word of God, not with a physical sword.

----------


## Mordent

> And I raise your Sermon On The Mount with my Revelation 19:15.  
> 
> Jesus will conquer Satan and his minions with the Word of God, not with a physical sword.


Who needs a sword when AIDS will do the trick?

----------


## Sheldonna

> Who needs a sword when AIDS will do the trick?


Aids isn't killing as many as it used to.  We have drugs that will control the disease or prolong the lives of those that have it.  Gays are living longer now, even with aids.  Most of the gays I knew in the 70's-80's died by the 90's.

----------


## Sled Dog

> I wonder what Colorado would do in the following situation:
> 
> I walked into a tobacco shop the other day to buy a bunch of bananas, and was shocked, shocked I tell you to find that they didn’t have a single banana for sale. I’m outraged!


Colorado stopped selling bananas when they legalized marijuana...they suddeny lacked appeal.

----------

Mordent (06-04-2014)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Who was it at PH that came up with the idea of informing the customer that the profits from their poorly made cake would go directly to anti-gay-marriage causes?


I don't know.   Good idea, though.  Sounds like something I'd suggest, along with tacking on a Under Duress and Protest Fee.

----------


## Sled Dog

> I suspect that such p_assive aggressive resistance_ to the new FFG form of slavery will become the norm, vs. the exception, in the Obamanation. I foresee a LOT of freedom fighters fighting back in this manner. Then again, I foresee a lot falling to more aggressive methods of fighting back, too.


I just see it as exceptional customers (customers I take exception to) getting exceptional service no other custmors (the ones I care about) would receive.

----------


## Sled Dog

> If the bake made an inferior or adulterated cake, he'd go to jail for a hate crime.


Oh, EVERYONE makes mistakes.   One time the wife made a batch of cookies and mistakenly scooped the sugar from the salt bin. 

They didn't taste very good. 

It's called an "accident".

There's a difference between exceptional care and so-so attention to detail, and it's easy to not give that extra level of scrutiny if the customer is just a friggin' pain in the ass.

The fascists can order the bakery to bake, given that the Constitution means nothing now.

The fascists can't order anyone to CARE.

Oops, we left on time, traffic was bad.   Couldn't go too fast, we had a cake in the van.

Oops, see where it says substitutions at the discretion of the bakery?  We substituted crisco creme for butter creme.  Real butter is so unhealthy, don't you think, and so anti-animal.




> I'd like to see him put a bride and groom on top of the cake and tell the fags/lesbos that he's treating them the same as everyone else and that this is his speech/expression. Of course, the jewish judges would punish him, but maybe not the Supreme Court as long as one gentile doesn't join the for Jews/satanists.


Is your insertion of religious bigotry needed in a discussion of the bigotry of the sexual deviants?




> Our freedoms will continue to evaporate, replaced by perversion and tyranny, as long as Christians protect/ignore the devils in robes who are shredding our constitution.


Said firmly to the forum's athiest.  Good for you.

----------

Mordent (06-04-2014),sparsely (06-05-2014)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Jesus told his followers to carry swords. And, carry they did, as shown by one them using a sword to cut off a soldier's ear. Jesus said he didn't come to bring peace, but to bring a sword. He may have been speaking spiritually, but the point still stands that Jesus didn't preach passivity. The "Christian Right" in this country isn't being passive, either. They're just being as completely misguided as satanically possible. They need to be directing their energies against judges who are not upholding the constitution, rather than against Muslims.


Jesus glued the ear back on, didn't he?  Told the disciples to put away their swords?  Went meekly to the slaughter, didn't he?

----------


## Sheldonna

> I just see it as exceptional customers (customers I take exception to) getting exceptional service no other custmors (the ones I care about) would receive.


Uh.  Yeah.

That too.  lol

----------


## Sentinel

> Jesus glued the ear back on, didn't he?  Told the disciples to put away their swords?  Went meekly to the slaughter, didn't he?


First, I'm not one of these Damn Fools who think the Bible is license to start wars or commit other violence.  But, in fact, Jesus' follower did have a sword.  If Jesus had told his follower not to have swords, they wouldn't have had them.  It was Jesus' time to sacrifice himself, so he went meekly to the slaughter.  After surrender, combatants put down their arms.  

But, I'm not advocating picking up weapons and shooting government tyrants.  But, if these fools who are obsessed with hating Arabs are really Christian, they need to redirect their hate to activist judges, and the satanism (judaism) that motivates many of these activist judges.

----------


## Roadmaster

We do need to worry about what's going on in our country.

----------


## Rudy2D

> Thankfully, I am not a 'real' Christian...since I don't believe in 'turning the other cheek'.  I say lets fight like Hell!


"Turning the other cheek" accomplishes at least two things:  it demonstrates the love of God; and it keeps you out of the slammer.

----------


## Katzndogz

Muslim bakeries have the right idea, they always have.  When the bakery in Westwood was sold to Muslims they stopped making wedding cakes.   They refused to make wedding cakes for Christians.   If you want a wedding cake you will be directed to the display case where you can make a selection from a number of cakes.  What you do with the cake is up to you.   They just sell what cakes they have.  

If you know the owner, go to the same mosque, speak farsi, then you can get a specialty cake.  Otherwise, it's just what's offered for sale.

----------


## Sheldonna

> "Turning the other cheek" accomplishes at least two things:  it demonstrates the love of God; and it keeps you out of the slammer.


It also can get you dead.....since certain factions on this earth perceive that as weakness, which they are only too willing (gleeful, in fact) to take advantage of.

----------


## Roadmaster

> "Turning the other cheek" accomplishes at least two things:  it demonstrates the love of God; and it keeps you out of the slammer.


 If I am threatened or hit, I will fight back. Not hear to be walked on. Only turn the cheek to a sister in Christ.

----------


## Roadmaster

> Muslim bakeries have the right idea, they always have.  When the bakery in Westwood was sold to Muslims they stopped making wedding cakes.   They refused to make wedding cakes for Christians.   If you want a wedding cake you will be directed to the display case where you can make a selection from a number of cakes.  What you do with the cake is up to you.   They just sell what cakes they have.  
> 
> If you know the owner, go to the same mosque, speak farsi, then you can get a specialty cake.  Otherwise, it's just what's offered for sale.


That's a good idea.

----------


## Rudy2D

> It also can get you dead.....since certain factions on this earth perceive that as weakness, which they are only too willing (gleeful, in fact) to take advantage of.


Jesus often spoke in _generalities_.

----------


## sparsely

> If I am threatened or hit, I will fight back. Not hear to be walked on. Only turn the cheek to a sister in Christ.


but not your brothers, eh?

----------


## DonGlock26

> *Government Panel Rules that Baker Must become a Slave*


More progressive hope and change.

----------


## Sled Dog

> http://www.inquisitr.com/1282117/col...rights-battle/
> 
> The Colorado baker who recently lost a legal battle over the refusal to make a gay wedding cake says business
> is even better than usual. Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips vowed to not back away from his religious convictions about gay marriage and maintains that his First Amendment rights were violated in the case.
> Jack Phillips was the subject of a Colorado Civil Rights Commission complaint after refusing to bake and decorate a wedding cake for a gay marriage ceremony. As previously published by The Inquisitr, Dave Mullins and Charlie Craig filed the complaint with the support of the ACLU, after Phillip’s declined the gay wedding cake order in 2012.
> 
> During an interview earlier this week with The Blaze, the Colorado baker said that he will remain open for business but still has no intention of completing confectionary services for lesbian and gay weddings.
> “I’m not going to make cakes for same sex weddings. That violates my First Amendment speech and my duty as a Christian abiding by my savior,” Jack Phillips said.
> 
> The Masterpiece Cakeshop owner stopped accepting wedding cake orders in March – three months after Colorado Office of Administrative Court Judge Robert N. Spencer ruled against him in the Civil Rights case. Spencer noted in his decision that Phillips must “cease and desist from discriminating against same sex couples.”


That corrupt court has violated far more than the Religious Liberty Clause.

It shredded the whole Bill of Rights.

Here's what the fascist ACLU had to say:




> "We are all entitled to our religious beliefs and we fight for that. But someone’s personal religious beliefs don’t justify breaking the law by discriminating against others in the public sphere.”


Really?

Some podunk state law trumps the First Amendment...but only for gays?

----------

texmaster (07-19-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

Typical ACLU (All Communists Like Us) double speak. They've never heard of a 2nd amendment either.

----------


## Trinnity

tyranny

----------

DonGlock26 (06-06-2014)

----------


## Swedgin

While I understand and respect this man making a stand, he could have avoided all of this, fairly easy:

--"Oh, I'm sorry, I already have a day with my kids at the park, scheduled that weekend..."

--"Sorry, but, I am just booked up, that weekend."

OR.....


--Take their money, then, make them a cake so god awful that they will resent their choice.

----------


## Jim Scott

> What if they would not serve blacks?


Which is exactly why Civil Rights laws were enacted and enforced.  To protect racial minorities from discrimination in jobs, housing and yes, public services such as restaurants and bakeries.

Unfortunately, with no scientific proof, homosexual advocates successfully promoted the concept that being inclined to homosexual behavior was genetic and immutable, as one's race is.   That enabled them to demand that 'gays' be included in Civil Rights laws and were able to add some punishment provisions to existing laws that affected only 'gays'.  Liberal judges were eager to play along and now we have these state laws that force a Christian baker to make a 'wedding' cake for a 'gay' couple even though doing so violates his or her religious principles.  

One wonders how a Muslim baker would react to this kind of demand?  We'll probably never know as (a) Muslims are a tiny minority in the U.S. and, (b) Christianity is the target of the left, mocking it and minimizing it's influence however and whenever possible.

This makes refusal to bake a cake for a 'gay wedding' illegal and subject to fines and condemnation from leftist media, which is most of the media.  That is not likely to change so following_ Katzndogz_ advice to carry out your business 'underground', as it were, is the only solution one has at this time.

*Jim*

----------


## RMNIXON

How hard is it to understand that being told you must provide a cake for a Gay wedding is about a behavior? About a sanction of that behavior?

Not about a skin color, cultural identity, ethnicity, or any number of related PC terminology. 

This is not a proper Civil Rights battleground. 




Now if said business refuses a service of this kind, and the potential customer would like to make a freedom of speech complaint in a public forum, I find that acceptable. 

But there was no violation of the law in my opinion.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> How hard is it to understand that being told you must provide a cake for a Gay wedding is about a behavior? About a sanction of that behavior?
> 
> Not about a skin color, cultural identity, ethnicity, or any number of related PC terminology. 
> 
> This is not a proper Civil Rights battleground. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Disagreed on the civil rights angle, but that said, I agree with Rand Paul; the Federal government shouldn't be telling private businesses what to do.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/0...-act-comments/



> Paul has contended that while the legislation was correct in ending racial discrimination, he’s turned the question into a philosophical one over whether or not the federal government should be able to intrude on how a private business conducts itself.

----------

Archer (06-06-2014)

----------


## Reverend

At some point my church is probably going to stop performing wedding ceremonies. I think it's pretty much understood now, we just have to make it official.  If we do any weddings it will be for members in good standing only, people we know, just like Katzndogz said.

----------


## Karl

> At some point my church is probably going to stop performing wedding ceremonies. I think it's pretty much understood now, we just have to make it official.  If we do any weddings it will be for members in good standing only, people we know, just like Katzndogz said.


You already posted this a couple of days ago

----------

Max Rockatansky (06-07-2014)

----------


## Max Rockatansky

The First Amendment states it's a needless fear.  However, if the religious right wingers keep chipping away that the Constitution, the blowback could make that come true.

The road to Hell being paved with good intentions works both for Democrats and Republicans, both Liberals and Conservatives.

----------

Karl (06-07-2014)

----------


## Reverend

> You already posted this a couple of days ago


Did I? Well, there it is again.

----------


## Reverend

> However, if the religious right wingers keep chipping away that the Constitution...


What in Gehenna are you going on about now?

----------


## Karl

> What in Gehenna are you going on about now?


I once had a thread about Gehenna @Reverend and it went pretty well


http://thepoliticsforums.com/threads/9075-Gahenna

----------


## Reverend

> I once had a thread about Gehenna @Reverend and it went pretty well
> 
> 
> http://thepoliticsforums.com/threads/9075-Gahenna


You misspelled "Gehenna".

----------


## Karl

> You misspelled "Gehenna".


Well its the content that counts not the spelling rember that or are ya gonna be a grammar nazi all your life @Reverend?

----------


## Reverend

> Well its the content that counts not the spelling rember that or are ya gonna be a grammar nazi all your life @Reverend?


There wasn't any content @KarlChilders

----------


## Karl

> There wasn't any content @KarlChilders


Are you sure ?

----------


## Reverend

> Are you sure ?


Quit trying to highjack the thread.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> Well its the content that counts not the spelling rember that or are ya gonna be a grammar nazi all your life @Reverend?


Please, Karl.  Relax.  Some people only have hate, bitching and nitpicking to sustain themselves.  Those who have more than that should just let it go.  Kinda like seeing a bag lady pushing her cart down the road.  Sure, we can complain when she stops in the middle of the fucking road to sort through cans, but in the end we should just feel sorry for someone who is so pitiful.  

Grammar nazis are pitiful people because it's all they have.  If they had something better, they'd focus on that instead of _nitpikkin' 'bout spellin' errers_.  <---a gift for the grammar nazis.

----------


## Network

Gay Cake
title lolz

----------


## Reverend

> Please, Karl.  Relax.  Some people only have hate, bitching and nitpicking to sustain themselves.  Those who have more than that should just let it go.  Kinda like seeing a bag lady pushing her cart down the road.  Sure, we can complain when she stops in the middle of the fucking road to sort through cans, but in the end we should just feel sorry for someone who is so pitiful.  
> 
> Grammar nazis are pitiful people because it's all they have.  If they had something better, they'd focus on that instead of _nitpikkin' 'bout spellin' errers_.  <---a gift for the grammar nazis.


Attachment 4094

Thank you, Cliff Clavin. Have another beer and you'll make more sense.

----------


## Mordent

> Gay Cake
> title lolz


Gay cake or Fagpie, that is the question.

----------


## Mordent

I occasionally do the grammar nazi thing, not because I care about spelling, but because libs are so haughty about their education that I find it funny when they fuck up. I prefer to mock contextual misuse to typos, though. Everyone makes a typo now and then.

----------

Old Ridge Runner (06-13-2014),Reverend (06-13-2014)

----------


## Reverend

> I occasionally do the grammar nazi thing, not because I care about spelling, but because libs are so haughty about their education that I find it funny when they fuck up. I prefer to mock contextual misuse to typos, though. Everyone makes a typo now and then.


Aside from the need to be precise, the poster in question was obviously trying to highjack the thread. Naturally Mr. Know it All had to rush to the threadjacker's defense.

----------


## Old Ridge Runner

> I don't feel the need to force others to serve me. If a store or bakery doesn't wish to serve me and my partner, plenty of others will. I feel no need to cry foul and force them to do something that violates their beliefs.


When your business is open to public in general, you have no right to tell someone I will not provide the services I offer because your life style is against my beliefs.  If you are open to the public, you are open to the public.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> When your business is open to public in general, you have no right to tell someone I will not provide the services I offer because your life style is against my beliefs.  If you are open to the public, you are open to the public.


My feelings are mixed on this issue.  We've all seen "no shoes, no shirt, no service" signs.  Business owners can determine who is allowed into their businesses.  If it's a private business, mandatory who they must serve via the equivalent of morality police isn't good IMO.  This is what Rand Paul was addressing.  I think incentives should encourage private business owners to serve all Americans equally, but mandating that they do so crosses a line that shouldn't be crossed.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> I occasionally do the grammar nazi thing, not because I care about spelling, but because libs are so haughty about their education that I find it funny when they fuck up. I prefer to mock contextual misuse to typos, though. *Everyone makes a typo now and then.*


Agreed.  Unfortunately, the only argument some people have is to nitpick on such minor items because it's all they have to offer intellectually.  It goes with posters who habitually stalk others, name-call and flame.  In this case, being a grammar nazi fits in all of those categories.

----------


## Sentinel

> There is an update to this case.  Of course Mr. Phillips lost the case.   Just shows that the rights of homosexuals are going to be taking precedence over the rights of others.


Homosexuality is afforded no rights in the US Constitution.  Religion and speech rights are explicit in the US Constitution.  Yet, our courts (dominated by you know what in the Supreme Court) have decided that homosexuality has constitutional rights that trump religion and speech, even upon the property and with the service of those who wish to control their own expression of religion and speech.

It's kind of pointless to be a Liberal without imposing on everyone else.  Suicide just isn't the same if you're not dragging others down with you.

----------


## Old Ridge Runner

> My feelings are mixed on this issue.  We've all seen "no shoes, no shirt, no service" signs.  Business owners can determine who is allowed into their businesses.  If it's a private business, mandatory who they must serve via the equivalent of morality police isn't good IMO.  This is what Rand Paul was addressing.  I think incentives should encourage private business owners to serve all Americans equally, but mandating that they do so crosses a line that shouldn't be crossed.


Would that be the same line line that was crossed when the government forced restaurants to stop excluding Blacks?  If you can not exclude one segment of society because of race, why would you be able to exclude another segment because of religious beliefs?  Don't get me wrong,  I think that both sides are equally wrong in this, but if you are open to the general public, than you must provide your services to anyone who walks through your doors. That is my opinion on this matter.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> *Would that be the same line line that was crossed when the government forced restaurants to stop excluding Blacks?*  If you can not exclude one segment of society because of race, why would you be able to exclude another segment because of religious beliefs?  Don't get me wrong,  I think that both sides are equally wrong in this, but if you are open to the general public, than you must provide your services to anyone who walks through your doors. That is my opinion on this matter.


Yes.  That was the issue Rand Paul was addressing.  He was accused of being a racist, but that wasn't what he was advocating.  He was pointing out the line between private citizens and Federal government.

IMOH, a business owner who practices racial, sexual or any other prejudices has an idiot for an owner.  It's bad business.  OTOH, giving the Federal government the power to dictate morality, become the "thought police" is a really, really bad precedent.

A better alternative is for the Feds and/or State to give business owners incentives to adhere to Constitutional guidelines through tax breaks, business loans, government contracts, etc.  Don't want to abide?  No problem, but you're on your own.

----------


## RMNIXON

Lets be real clear what we are talking about.

No Shoes, No Shirt is a behavior within a business. And when you go into a bake shop and demand a cake for your Gay wedding that is an expression of behavior. Not I am a gay person who just happens to want a piece of cake and you sell cake.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> Lets be real clear what we are talking about.
> 
> No Shoes, No Shirt is a behavior within a business. And when you go into a bake shop and demand a cake for your Gay wedding that is an expression of behavior. Not I am a gay person who just happens to want a piece of cake and you sell cake.


Great.  So what?  It still boils down to the question of whether or not government should demand that you treat everyone equally and fairly regardless of your personal beliefs on race, religion, sex or anything else.

----------


## Old Ridge Runner

> Yes.  That was the issue Rand Paul was addressing.  He was accused of being a racist, but that wasn't what he was advocating.  He was pointing out the line between private citizens and Federal government.
> 
> IMOH, a business owner who practices racial, sexual or any other prejudices has an idiot for an owner.  It's bad business.  *OTOH, giving the Federal government the power to dictate morality, become the "thought police" is a really, really bad precedent.*
> 
> A better alternative is for the Feds and/or State to give business owners incentives to adhere to Constitutional guidelines through tax breaks, business loans, government contracts, etc.  Don't want to abide?  No problem, but you're on your own.


But is the Fed dictating morality?  I don't think that is the case, IMO, I think it is more the Fed, telling the business owner that if your business is open to the public you have no expatiation of freedom of association.  In affect, isn't that what the business owner in the OP saying to the homosexuals, I don't want to be associated with you because of your stance on sexuality, which does not conform to mine?

----------


## Katzndogz

The left is perpetuating a myth.  In fact, NO homosexual has been denied service when they go into any business.  If a homosexual goes into a bakery, they can buy anything they want, just like anyone else.  What they have been denied is the personal service and artistry of the cake decorator when performing that service conflicts with their moral and religious principles.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> But is the Fed dictating morality?  I don't think that is the case, IMO, I think it is more the Fed, telling the business owner that if your business is open to the public you have no expatiation of freedom of association.  In affect, isn't that what the business owner in the OP saying to the homosexuals, I don't want to be associated with you because of your stance on sexuality, which does not conform to mine?


The Fed is dictating behavior a person considers immoral.  While I disagree with the baker, or any businessman who does this, it's not the Fed's place, IMO, for them to legislate such morality.  If a Muslim doesn't want to serve a woman unaccompanied by a male relative, that's between them.  

Again, I'd rather government, both State and Federal, use incentives, not legislation, to encourage fair, Constitutional behavior for private citizens.  Government itself, regardless of level, should always conduct themselves IAW our Constitution.

----------


## Old Ridge Runner

> The Fed is dictating behavior a person considers immoral.  *While I disagree with the baker, or any businessman who does this, it's not the Fed's place, IMO, for them to legislate such morality.*  If a Muslim doesn't want to serve a woman unaccompanied by a male relative, that's between them.  
> 
> Again, I'd rather government, both State and Federal, use incentives, not legislation, to encourage fair, Constitutional behavior for private citizens.  Government itself, regardless of level, should always conduct themselves IAW our Constitution.


I would say that the government isn't legislating morality, all the government is saying regardless of your moral stance, if you are open to the public, you must serve the public as a whole, you can not pick and choose.

----------


## Katzndogz

> I would say that the government isn't legislating morality, all the government is saying regardless of your moral stance, if you are open to the public, you must serve the public as a whole, you can not pick and choose.


Then it's a good thing that nothing like that happened.

----------


## Old Ridge Runner

> Then it's a good thing that nothing like that happened.


What are you saying, that is all the government is saying.

----------


## Calypso Jones

Jack Phillips appealing order:

Via NRO
Colorado baker Jack Phillips, who refused to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding, is appealing an order from the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, according to CBN News.

The order requires Phillips to bake wedding cakes for gay couples and to reeducate his staff about the Anti-Discrimination Act. He also is required to file regular compliance reports and document for two years about any customers who were denied service, including the reason for the denial.

The commission said that Phillips violated the state’s public accommodation law that requires businesses to serve customers regardless of their sexual orientation; he has now asked asked the state court of appeals to reverse the ruling.

Phillips was sued by a gay couple in 2012 when he refused to bake a cake for their wedding, citing his religious beliefs. He said that baking the wedding cake would violate the Christian principles by which he runs his shop.

His attorneys claim that the commission’s decision violates Phillips’s First Amendment rights, arguing that bakers should not be forced to express views with which they disagree.

~~~~

This sure doesn't make me feel all accepting of the tyrannical homosexual lobby and their activist judges.

----------


## RMNIXON

> While I understand and respect this man making a stand, he could have avoided all of this, fairly easy:
> 
> --"Oh, I'm sorry, I already have a day with my kids at the park, scheduled that weekend..."
> 
> --"Sorry, but, I am just booked up, that weekend."
> 
> OR.....
> 
> 
> --Take their money, then, make them a cake so god awful that they will resent their choice.




Or the Gay couple could simply get a cake somewhere else!  :Geez: 

But that is not the Gay Rights message is it. 

Not tolerance but universal forced acceptance!

----------


## Roadmaster

They need to keep standing up to this government. Some think only non-religious people should have rights.

----------


## texmaster

Good for him.   I want him on camera being dragged off to jail for supporting a right he has that actually exists in the Constitution unlike gay marriage.

----------


## Dan40

> While I understand and respect this man making a stand, he could have avoided all of this, fairly easy:
> 
> --"Oh, I'm sorry, I already have a day with my kids at the park, scheduled that weekend..."
> 
> --"Sorry, but, I am just booked up, that weekend."
> 
> OR.....
> 
> 
> --Take their money, then, make them a cake so god awful that they will resent their choice.


I would bet that he was intentionally set up by the Fascists of Faggotry.

NO ONE!

No One.

Even the completely abnormal.

Spends their money with a merchant that declines their business.

----------

texmaster (07-19-2014)

----------


## Roadmaster

> I would bet that he was intentionally set up by the Fascists of Faggotry.


 It's all set up but has anyone noticed not another religion has been challenged.

----------


## Jim Scott

This was obviously a set-up and the baker, Jack Phillips, is correct to fight the ruling.

Anti-discrimination laws were enacted to protect racial minorities from being discriminated against in jobs, housing and other areas.  Being inclined to homosexual behavior has not been proven to be genetic but I will stipulate that it is a proclivity.  Same-sex marriage is a sham intended to Jiujitsu such laws into weapons to harass and intimidate those whose religion precludes assisting in a same-sex 'wedding'.  That includes catering, officiating or even baking a 'wedding' cake.  It's totalitarianism writ large and must be resisted.

I'm not an attorney but it would seem fairly clear that an American citizen has the right to honor his religious convictions by withholding a service that the offended people (gays) could easily obtain elsewhere.  I consider this ruling an assault on religion.  I also note that homosexuals are not seeking Muslim-owned businesses to try this on.  Islam, like most major religions, forbids homosexuality.  Good luck telling a Muslim he has to bake a 'wedding' cake for a same-sex 'marriage' or be subject to a Civil Rights sanction.  

I'm hardly surprised the ACLU, a subversive organization founded on communist principles with an annual budget of 100 million is leading this attack on religious freedom.  I commend bake shop owner Jack Phillips for fighting this and certainly hope and pray that he is successful.  This abuse of civil rights laws and infringement of citizens First Amendment rights has to be stopped.  If not, what constitutional rights will be abridged or curtailed next?  

*Jim*

----------


## Sled Dog

Those anti-discrimination laws are also unconstitutional when applied to privately owned businesses and are meaningful only when applied to government agencies and, possibly, businesses providing goods and services under government contract, and applicable then only to employees servicing the contracts.

The business owner has the right to be free from association and the right to control his property and his own body, and if the customer doesn't like that, the customer has the equal right to go find some other service provider.

The customer's rights do not trump the businessman's equal rights.

Oh.  And BTW, a man's religious convictions are not relevant to him having the freedom to tell another citizen to fuck off.   It's his unique right as a human being, as essential a human right as any other practice of liberty, whether it has a relgious basis or he just hates that guy for no reason at all.

There is NO RIGHT to be loved.  Affection has to be earned.

----------


## Katzndogz

The courts have already found the anti discrimination laws constitutional.  Once a person opens their business to the public there is no more freedom of association.  The business MUST  offer the same service to everyone who walks through the door.  The customer has the right to go somewhere else the business does not.  Trust me.  I went through five months of litigation before I won my case.  

If the baker does not want to bake wedding cakes for same sex couples he will have to remove wedding cakes from the services he offers.  Once he removes wedding cakes from the services he offers,  he is free to make wedding cakes only for those he chooses.

----------


## hoytmonger

So government courts find government legislation to be legal... who'da thunk!

----------

Mordent (07-20-2014),texmaster (07-19-2014)

----------


## texmaster

> The courts have already found the anti discrimination laws constitutional.  Once a person opens their business to the public there is no more freedom of association.  The business MUST  offer the same service to everyone who walks through the door.  The customer has the right to go somewhere else the business does not.  Trust me.  I went through five months of litigation before I won my case.  
> 
> If the baker does not want to bake wedding cakes for same sex couples he will have to remove wedding cakes from the services he offers.  Once he removes wedding cakes from the services he offers,  he is free to make wedding cakes only for those he chooses.


But can he question anyone who comes in to make sure he approves?

This is the stupidity in expanding the law beyond provable unaltering choices like race, gender and disability.

No one should get special rights because they held a press counfrence and made an announcement and have ZERO evidence proving their condition is genetic or natural.

I PRAY SCOTUS does not walk off that plank.

----------


## Katzndogz

He doesn't need to question anyone.  Two men  walk into a bakery and ask for a wedding cake for their wedding it's a pretty safe bet they are a same sex couple.  When two lesbians came into my shop showing me a wedding picture of the two of them I didn't question them when they asked me to do an oil painting.   I told them no.  Go somewhere else.   They insisted and I threw them out.

----------


## Sled Dog

> Colorado court: Ruling stands that baker can't cite religion
> DENVER (AP) — The Colorado Supreme Court on Monday declined to take up the case of a suburban Denver baker who refused to make a cake for a same-sex wedding, letting stand a previous ruling that the Masterpiece Cakeshop owner must provide service despite his Christian beliefs.
> 
> Charlie Craig and David Mullins, who were refused service by baker Jack Phillips in 2012, applauded the development.
> 
> 
> Craig said they persisted with the case throughout a complicated legal process because they felt it was important to set the precedent that discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation was not only wrong but illegal.
> 
> 
> "We didn't want anyone to have to go through what we did," Craig said.


Sooo....

....if We The People have not lost all faith in the US judicial system, when are we going to do so?

And what is the future of any society whose population has no faith in it's governing institutions?

Revolution is the historical option.

Only a matter of time.

BTW, can anyone tell the rest of us what those two fags had "to go through" that was so horrible?   I mean, was it really that difficult for them to call bakeries until they found one with the decency to refuse to serve fags?

----------

Frankenvoter (04-26-2016),Knightkore (04-26-2016),michaelr (04-26-2016),Old Ridge Runner (04-26-2016),Rickity Plumber (04-26-2016),Rita Marley (04-26-2016),Swedgin (04-26-2016),texmaster (04-26-2016)

----------


## Midgardian

More perverts will go through what this pervert "went through", which is nil.

Leftovution is insanity.

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016),Old Ridge Runner (04-26-2016),St James (04-26-2016)

----------


## Roadmaster

I would cite Romans 1 and wouldn't back down. These are washy washy Christians or pew sitters.

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016),michaelr (04-26-2016),Old Ridge Runner (04-26-2016),St James (04-26-2016)

----------


## Northern Rivers

> Sooo....
> 
> ....if We The People have not lost all faith in the US judicial system, when are we going to do so?
> 
> And what is the future of any society whose population has no faith in it's governing institutions?
> 
> Revolution is the historical option.
> 
> Only a matter of time.
> ...


They should have some Moslem bakery refuse to bake one and see what happens.

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016)

----------


## St James

> They should have some Moslem bakery refuse to bake one and see what happens.


akuba Allah!!!!!!!!!!!!!  POOF!!!!!!!!!   :Smiley ROFLMAO:

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016)

----------


## Old Ridge Runner

> Sooo....
> 
> ....if We The People have not lost all faith in the US judicial system, when are we going to do so?
> 
> And what is the future of any society whose population has no faith in it's governing institutions?
> 
> Revolution is the historical option.
> 
> Only a matter of time.
> ...


Have you seen "The Help"?  Bake a cake like the pie the maid baked, that will stop this crap in a hurry.

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016)

----------


## Trinnity

If the bakery was Muslim owned, they'd be exempt.

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016)

----------


## patrickt

A. This is what happens when Californians infect your state.
B. In the town where I worked we had a man in a wheelchair and a lawyer who partnered in a business of suing businesses for not complying with ADA rules. They didn't go to court but the businesses would usually settle for an amount cheaper than going to court and the lawyer and the guy in the wheelchair split it.

My father owned a small motel and was sued by some civil rights organization, SNCC, I think, for not renting a room to a black man. He came in smelling like liquor, acting drunk, and told my mother to send two whores to his room. Dad threw him out. The lawsuit dragged on for years. My father never settled a lawsuit. I know some claim they don't but he never did. It was in the third year when both sides submitted their lists of witnesses for depositions. My father's list was lengthy. The attorney for the extortionists said, "This is ridiculous. The only witnesses are Mr. Brown, and Mr. and Mrs. Kelly."

"Wrong. Those others are customers who were in town for the college graduation and they're all black."

Oops. The lawsuit went away and the extortionists admitted they were at the wrong motel. Mr. Brown had not gone to the one they wanted.

I'm sure these stupid lawsuits are the work of shysters. They find a gay couple, they find a baker or reception center or wedding planner or florist and they make an outrageous demand and they're off to the money.

It needs to be stopped. Now that we have only liberals running things we haven't heard the term "tort reform" in, what, eight years. We even had a man running for the nomination who wants more lawsuits.

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016)

----------


## TheWahoo

Liberals will readily cite the "establishment clause" to remove all visible references to religion, but they pay no attention to  the "free exercise" clause.   With court actions such as this, liberals have effectively voided the right of free exercise.

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016),michaelr (04-26-2016),Northern Rivers (04-26-2016)

----------


## Jeffrey

It is like I said, some laxative in  the cake should get the point across. Or some hot pepper sauce?

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016)

----------


## Rita Marley

There is no difference between a government that forces you to bake a cake and one that prevents you from baking a cake. gtfoh.

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016),patrickt (04-26-2016)

----------


## as seen on tv

I agree with the ruling.  I'd hate to encounters a muslim baker who claims the Koran prevents him from selling pastries to unescorted women, because we are unclean and inferior in the eyes of allah

----------


## Midgardian

> Sooo....
> 
> ....if We The People have not lost all faith in the US judicial system, when are we going to do so?
> 
> And what is the future of any society whose population has no faith in it's governing institutions?
> 
> Revolution is the historical option.
> 
> Only a matter of time.


"War is when the government tells the people who is the enemy, revolution is when the people decide for themselves."

- Anonymous

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016),Mainecoons (04-26-2016)

----------


## Rita Marley

> I agree with the ruling.  I'd hate to encounters a muslim baker who claims the Koran prevents him from selling pastries to unescorted women, because we are unclean and inferior in the eyes of allah


Why should he be forced to, and what's to stop anyone from opening a shop that caters to everyone or only women or anything else? Big Brother has lost his wisdom and needs to mind his own business.

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016),Mainecoons (04-26-2016),Midgardian (04-26-2016)

----------


## Knightkore

> I agree with the ruling.  I'd hate to encounters a muslim baker who claims the Koran prevents him from selling pastries to unescorted women, because we are unclean and inferior in the eyes of allah


So you agree with the same sexers to force THEIR beliefs on the baker?

Really?

----------

Rita Marley (04-26-2016)

----------


## Knightkore

> "War is when the government tells the people who is the enemy, revolution is when the people decide for themselves."
> 
> - Anonymous


It is indeed about time for a push back.....

Physical or otherwise.  Do I incite violence?  Well, BLM has been somewhat effective for the left.  Where are those who will stand up for what is actually right?  And with a well thought out, broad brushed state by state, country wide revolutionary plan.....call it.....the Freedom Spring.....

----------

Rita Marley (04-26-2016)

----------


## Katzndogz

> I agree with the ruling.  I'd hate to encounters a muslim baker who claims the Koran prevents him from selling pastries to unescorted women, because we are unclean and inferior in the eyes of allah


I once took myself to a muslim owned indian restaurant.   I sat for over an hour waiting for someone to take my order.  I finally complained only to find out that they would not serve a woman alone.   They didn't tell me to leave.  I just wouldn't be served.  After much wrangling  and arguing, the owner's wife came and sat with me so I wouldn't be alone.   

Not long ago I went to an Iranian restaurant in Marina Del Rey.  The manager came out and sat with me.   No one said anything.

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016)

----------


## Roadmaster

Certain groups have their customs. Get on a plane with Orthodox's and they will hold up a plane refusing to sit beside a female.

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016)

----------


## sooda

> Certain groups have their customs. Get on a plane with Orthodox's and they will hold up a plane refusing to sit beside a female.


Or zip themselves into body bags rather than fly over a cemetery ....

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016)

----------


## patrickt

> I agree with the ruling.  I'd hate to encounters a muslim baker who claims the Koran prevents him from selling pastries to unescorted women, because we are unclean and inferior in the eyes of allah


Really? You wouldn't walk down the street to another bakery but you would insist the jackass sell you pastries so you could give him your money. That doesn't seem quite bright to me.

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016),Mainecoons (04-26-2016),Sled Dog (04-26-2016)

----------


## Swedgin

There are only TWO ways we "save" the Old Republic:


#1.  A Convention of States, in which representatives, from the STATES, can combine to wrest control from the Washington Aristocracy.

OR,

#2.  Revolution.

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016)

----------


## TheWahoo

> There are only TWO ways we "save" the Old Republic:
> 
> 
> #1.  A Convention of States, in which representatives, from the STATES, can combine to wrest control from the Washington Aristocracy.
> 
> OR,
> 
> #2.  Revolution.


There is a third way-the States can reclaim their right to self governance through the 10th amendment.   We've seen an example of this when a majority of the States refused to establish exchanges via the ACA.   It took the Supreme Court to re-write the law to stop it.

----------

Knightkore (04-26-2016)

----------


## Knightkore

> There are only TWO ways we "save" the Old Republic:
> 
> 
> #1.  A Convention of States, in which representatives, from the STATES, can combine to wrest control from the Washington Aristocracy.
> 
> OR,
> 
> #2.  Revolution.


I actually like the second option.....

----------

Swedgin (04-26-2016)

----------


## Sled Dog

> I agree with the ruling.  I'd hate to encounters a muslim baker who claims the Koran prevents him from selling pastries to unescorted women, because we are unclean and inferior in the eyes of allah


Moose limbs have every right to refuse service to anyone.

SAME AS EVERYONE ELSE.

Untented women, queers and lesbos, men with beards, women with beards...if a businessmen does not want to serve them...

....it's THEIR business, not someone else's.

NOBODY has a "right to dessert".

EVERYONE has a right to say "I won't".

----------

Knightkore (04-27-2016)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Certain groups have their customs. Get on a plane with Orthodox's and they will hold up a plane refusing to sit beside a female.


Americans have a few customs of relevance.

Americans say "fuck off".

Americans punch people in the nose if they're too annoying.

Fine American customs, those.

----------

Knightkore (04-27-2016),Rita Marley (04-26-2016)

----------


## Montana

WATCH: Christian Baker Breaks Down After Govt Official Compares Him To Nazi For Not Servicing Gay Wedding | Daily Wire So his rights are less important than gay rights ? I think not.

----------

Roadmaster (09-07-2017),Rutabaga (09-07-2017)

----------


## Rutabaga

what they did to this man, his family and business is shameful...but progs have no shame..
their weakness sickens me...

----------


## Roadmaster

Ok the German population the majority rejected the sodomite agenda back in the 1930s as did America back then.  Not just a few were labeled Nazis, they all were.

----------


## patrickt

> what they did to this man, his family and business is shameful...but progs have no shame..
> their weakness sickens me...


When you have no sense of responsibility it's impossible to have a sense of shame. Liberals/progressives/socialists/Democrats refuse to accept responsibility for any of the harm they've done.

----------

Rutabaga (09-07-2017)

----------


## Calypso Jones

> When you have no sense of responsibility it's impossible to have a sense of shame. Liberals/progressives/socialists/Democrats refuse to accept responsibility for any of the harm they've done.


 I know I don't have to tell you this...things have a way of coming back around and biting you in the butt....and this will bite progs in the butt also.

----------

Rutabaga (09-07-2017)

----------


## Roadmaster

Christ is with us but we have to be bold and not ashamed of His word.

----------

East of the Beast (09-07-2017)

----------


## Jim Scott

> what they did to this man, his family and business is shameful...but progs have no shame..
> their weakness sickens me...


From the OP: Colorado Civil Rights Commissioner Diann Rice, got in on the slander in 2014, comparing Phillips to a slave owner and a WWII Nazi: _I would also like to reiterate what we said in  the last meeting_ _[concerning Jack Phillips]. Freedom of religion and religion has been_ _used to justify all kinds of discrimination throughout history, whether_ _it be slavery, whether it be the Holocaust.  I mean, we can list_ _hundreds of situations where freedom of religion has been used to_ _justify discrimination. And to me it is one of the most despicable_ _pieces of rhetoric that people can use  to use their religion to hurt_ _others.

_This stupid comment by some nincompoop on a state Civil Rights Commission is insulting and clearly ignores the facts of the case, most notably, that the baker (Jack Phillips) declined to bake a cake for a 'gay wedding' .  He did not discriminate against the homosexual 'couple' (they could buy anything they wanted from his bakery) but he could not, as Phillips stated, participate in an event that was a celebration of what his religion - Christianity (via the bible) - believes is sin (homosexual behavior).  

Jack Phillips has lost much of his income since the Colorado Human Rights Commission ruling against him and subsequent loss in court.  He has appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and the Court has agreed to accept the case for a hearing.  86 members of congress have signed a petition that supports Phillips in his fight against government tyranny that would force a Christian man to act against his strongly-held beliefs.  Again, Phillips does not refuse to sell bakery goods to 'gays'.  He simply declined to bake a cake for a 'gay wedding'.  Some arrogant fool on a state commission dismissing his freedom of religion right as simply camouflage for 'bigotry' and comparing Phillips to Nazis is beyond the pale.  Naturally, I hope the Supreme Court rules in Phillips favor. 

I only wish a Muslim would be accused of a civil rights violation based on his refusal to perform some service that is against his religion, specifically serving homosexuals.  Of course, that won't happen and if it did, I suspect either no complaint would be filed by the 'gays' involved or the civil rights commission would ignore it on some flimsy basis.

The often-subtle but steadily continuing assault against Christianity is becoming more evident with each passing year and cannot be ignored.  This case will bring much attention to the situation.  We know that if the Supreme Court rules for Phillips, the left will have a conniption and state that 'bigotry and hate have been given legal status by the Court' or similar nonsense.  Yet if the Court rules against Phillips, the leftmedia will smugly claim that 'bigotry and hate have been vanquished' by the Court.  All because a local baker declined to bake a cake for an ersatz 'wedding' of two males.  This is the sorry state of what passes for 'equality' and 'fairness' by sanctimonious liberals today.

*Jim*

----------

Dr. Felix Birdbiter (09-07-2017),Rutabaga (09-07-2017)

----------


## East of the Beast

The world is the world ..I’ve decided that although I am in it ,I am not of it.

----------

Roadmaster (09-07-2017)

----------


## Dr. Felix Birdbiter

> I know I don't have to tell you this...things have a way of coming back around and biting you in the butt....and this will bite progs in the butt also.



Most of them would like that.

----------


## Rutabaga

> From the OP: Colorado Civil Rights Commissioner Diann Rice, got in on the slander in 2014, comparing Phillips to a slave owner and a WWII Nazi: _I would also like to reiterate what we said in … the last meeting_ _[concerning Jack Phillips]. Freedom of religion and religion has been_ _used to justify all kinds of discrimination throughout history, whether_ _it be slavery, whether it be the Holocaust. … I mean, we can list_ _hundreds of situations where freedom of religion has been used to_ _justify discrimination. And to me it is one of the most despicable_ _pieces of rhetoric that people can use — to use their religion to hurt_ _others.
> 
> _This stupid comment by some nincompoop on a state Civil Rights Commission is insulting and clearly ignores the facts of the case, most notably, that the baker (Jack Phillips) declined to bake a cake for a 'gay wedding' .  He did not discriminate against the homosexual 'couple' (they could buy anything they wanted from his bakery) but he could not, as Phillips stated, participate in an event that was a celebration of what his religion - Christianity (via the bible) - believes is sin (homosexual behavior).  
> 
> Jack Phillips has lost much of his income since the Colorado Human Rights Commission ruling against him and subsequent loss in court.  He has appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and the Court has agreed to accept the case for a hearing.  86 members of congress have signed a petition that supports Phillips in his fight against government tyranny that would force a Christian man to act against his strongly-held beliefs.  Again, Phillips does not refuse to sell bakery goods to 'gays'.  He simply declined to bake a cake for a 'gay wedding'.  Some arrogant fool on a state commission dismissing his freedom of religion right as simply camouflage for 'bigotry' and comparing Phillips to Nazis is beyond the pale.  Naturally, I hope the Supreme Court rules in Phillips favor. 
> 
> I only wish a Muslim would be accused of a civil rights violation based on his refusal to perform some service that is against his religion, specifically serving homosexuals.  Of course, that won't happen and if it did, I suspect either no complaint would be filed by the 'gays' involved or the civil rights commission would ignore it on some flimsy basis.
> 
> The often-subtle but steadily continuing assault against Christianity is becoming more evident with each passing year and cannot be ignored.  This case will bring much attention to the situation.  We know that if the Supreme Court rules for Phillips, the left will have a conniption and state that 'bigotry and hate have been given legal status by the Court' or similar nonsense.  Yet if the Court rules against Phillips, the leftmedia will smugly claim that 'bigotry and hate have been vanquished' by the Court.  All because a local baker declined to bake a cake for an ersatz 'wedding' of two males.  This is the sorry state of what passes for 'equality' and 'fairness' by sanctimonious liberals today.
> ...


and the fact remains he was targeted by these despicable people BECAUSE he was a known christian baker...NOT because they wanted a cake,,,because they wanted HIM to bake it...there were many other bakeries in the area that HAD said they would bake it...

----------

Jim Scott (09-07-2017)

----------


## Dr. Felix Birdbiter

> From the OP: Colorado Civil Rights Commissioner Diann Rice, got in on the slander in 2014, comparing Phillips to a slave owner and a WWII Nazi: _I would also like to reiterate what we said in … the last meeting_ _[concerning Jack Phillips]. Freedom of religion and religion has been_ _used to justify all kinds of discrimination throughout history, whether_ _it be slavery, whether it be the Holocaust. … I mean, we can list_ _hundreds of situations where freedom of religion has been used to_ _justify discrimination. And to me it is one of the most despicable_ _pieces of rhetoric that people can use — to use their religion to hurt_ _others.
> 
> _This stupid comment by some nincompoop on a state Civil Rights Commission is insulting and clearly ignores the facts of the case, most notably, that the baker (Jack Phillips) declined to bake a cake for a 'gay wedding' .  He did not discriminate against the homosexual 'couple' (they could buy anything they wanted from his bakery) but he could not, as Phillips stated, participate in an event that was a celebration of what his religion - Christianity (via the bible) - believes is sin (homosexual behavior).  
> 
> Jack Phillips has lost much of his income since the Colorado Human Rights Commission ruling against him and subsequent loss in court.  He has appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and the Court has agreed to accept the case for a hearing.  86 members of congress have signed a petition that supports Phillips in his fight against government tyranny that would force a Christian man to act against his strongly-held beliefs.  Again, Phillips does not refuse to sell bakery goods to 'gays'.  He simply declined to bake a cake for a 'gay wedding'.  Some arrogant fool on a state commission dismissing his freedom of religion right as simply camouflage for 'bigotry' and comparing Phillips to Nazis is beyond the pale.  Naturally, I hope the Supreme Court rules in Phillips favor. 
> 
> I only wish a Muslim would be accused of a civil rights violation based on his refusal to perform some service that is against his religion, specifically serving homosexuals.  Of course, that won't happen and if it did, I suspect either no complaint would be filed by the 'gays' involved or the civil rights commission would ignore it on some flimsy basis.
> 
> The often-subtle but steadily continuing assault against Christianity is becoming more evident with each passing year and cannot be ignored.  This case will bring much attention to the situation.  We know that if the Supreme Court rules for Phillips, the left will have a conniption and state that 'bigotry and hate have been given legal status by the Court' or similar nonsense.  Yet if the Court rules against Phillips, the leftmedia will smugly claim that 'bigotry and hate have been vanquished' by the Court.  All because a local baker declined to bake a cake for an ersatz 'wedding' of two males.  This is the sorry state of what passes for 'equality' and 'fairness' by sanctimonious liberals today.
> ...



You gotta stop Jimbo, I'm running out of room in your folder!!!

----------

Jim Scott (09-07-2017)

----------


## Katzndogz

He shouldn't feel bad at all.  Everyone the left doesn't like is a nazi.  Ben Carson has been accused of being KKK.  The way to deal with the accusers is just laugh at them.  Start mocking and ridiculing.

----------

Jim Scott (09-08-2017)

----------


## Common

Jack Phillips of Lakewood, Colorado, is a Christian baker. And like  several Christian small business owners, Phillips is facing a civil  rights lawsuit for refusing  to provide his services for a same-sex wedding. The state of Colorado's  civil rights commission said that Phillips's refusal to bake a wedding  cake violated what is known as "public accommodations law," and that he  had discriminated against Charlie Craig and David Mullins based on their  sexual orientation.
As the Supreme Court is set to hear  Phillips's case in the coming months, President Trump's Department of  Justice (DOJ) has taken the side of the Colorado baker. The DOJ has  filed a brief with the Supreme Court explaining why the Colorado Court of Appeals' ruling should change.
The  DOJ's argument against the lower court's decision is that baking a cake  is considered an "expressive activity." Meaning, there is a message,  whether verbal or non-verbal, in the activity itself, and because a  message is present, the state cannot compel an individual to express  themselves in a particular manner. For example, Phillips should not be  forced to write a message he does not agree with on a cake, and he  should not be compelled to make a cake for an event he disagrees with as  it would be as if he were participating in it or endorsing it.
The brief states:
A  public accommodations law exacts a greater First Amendment toll if it  also compels participation in a ceremony or other expressive event. That  participation may be literal, as in the case of a wedding photographer  who attends and is actively involved with the wedding itself. Or that  participation may be figurative, as when a person designs and crafts a  custom-made wedding ring that performs an important expressive function  in the ceremony. Either way, such forced participation intensifies the  degree of governmental intrusion.

Trumps DOJ Sides With Christian Baker - Micah Rate

----------

Conservative Libertarian (09-09-2017),East of the Beast (09-09-2017),NORAD (09-09-2017),Old Ridge Runner (09-09-2017)

----------


## Old Ridge Runner

God help the Supreme Court on this one.  If the Court fines in favor of the baker, does that than mean that a baker that belongs to the KKK would not have to bake a cake for an inter-racial or inter-religious marriage?

----------

Common (09-09-2017)

----------


## 2cent

That's a proper and intelligent take on the subject.  I'd add, too, that compelling someone to do something against his religion is discrimination, itself.  

Furthermore, who in his right mind could go along w/a "public accommodations law?"  In my mind, this has always been a "private property" issue.  I guess not too many believe in that stuff anymore.  

Oh, what the heck.  Why should anyone?  Individual ownership of private property is only what set us apart from the rest of the world, and the underpinning of what helped this country rise to greatness in such a short amount of time.  
'Tis nothing really, so don't sweat it.

----------

Conservative Libertarian (09-09-2017),NORAD (09-09-2017),Rita Marley (09-09-2017),RMNIXON (09-09-2017)

----------


## 2cent

> God help the Supreme Court on this one.  If the Court fines in favor of the baker, does that than mean that a baker that belongs to the KKK would not have to bake a cake for an inter-racial or inter-religious marriage?


Of course it would.  And that is as it should be.

----------

Conservative Libertarian (09-09-2017),Mainecoons (09-09-2017),Rita Marley (09-09-2017)

----------


## Old Ridge Runner

> Of course it would.  And that is as it should be.


And I wanted to find a Muslim baker and force him to bake me a bacon cake.

----------

Conservative Libertarian (09-09-2017),Hillofbeans (09-09-2017),NORAD (09-09-2017),Old Navy (09-09-2017),Rita Marley (09-09-2017)

----------


## 2cent

> And I wanted to find a Muslim baker and force him to bake me a bacon cake.


It'd be pretty hard to force someone to sell you something that he doesn't have.

----------

Conservative Libertarian (09-09-2017),NORAD (09-09-2017)

----------


## Big Dummy

> And I wanted to find a Muslim baker and force him to bake me a bacon cake.


The thing is you would get a bacon and feces cake. The Baker named Mo would be smiling all the way to the bank.

----------

Old Ridge Runner (09-10-2017)

----------


## Hillofbeans

No shoes, no shirt, no cake, not much difference.

----------


## Rita Marley

> The thing is you would get a bacon and feces cake. The Baker named Mo would be smiling all the way to the bank.


Just as the gay couple might end up with a poop wedding cake...which they would probably enjoy.

I think any business should be able to turn away customers for whatever reason they want. It doesn't make them great businessmen, it makes them free people.

----------

Conservative Libertarian (09-09-2017),Dr. Felix Birdbiter (09-09-2017),Mainecoons (09-09-2017)

----------


## Conservative Libertarian

Fighting and insulting the people that prepare your food is just plain stupid no matter how you slice it.

----------

Common (09-09-2017),Mainecoons (09-09-2017),NORAD (09-09-2017),Rita Marley (09-09-2017)

----------


## 2cent

The bottom is; either you own your property, or the government does.  

It's also not always bad for business for some business owners to turn certain business away.  I tend to have more respect for those who care more about their convictions than they do for their wallets.

----------

Conservative Libertarian (09-09-2017),NORAD (09-09-2017),Rita Marley (09-09-2017)

----------


## StanAtStanFan

> Just as the gay couple might end up with a poop wedding cake...which they would probably enjoy.
> 
> I think any business should be able to turn away customers for whatever reason they want. It doesn't make them great businessmen, it makes them free people.


Whatever happened to the "we reserve the right to refuse service to anybody?" 
No business should be forced to serve person(s) for whatever reason they desire if they don't want to.

Are you telling us that in the entire nutty state of Colorado (California lite), two gay guys can't find a baker that can bake them a cakie? So, they go looking for a regular baker, and he disagrees with the LBGT community lifestyle, and decides not to serve their purpose, and that morphs into a lawsuit? 

As if America didn't have enough frivolous court cases tossed into the hopper everywhere for stupid liberal judges to rule upon, a damn cake? Just go to the local supermarket bakery section, pick one up, and ice your message on it yourself. I am sure the gays went to Bed-Bath & Beyond and picked out their silver service - they can't bake a ..........cake? .......Stan......

----------

NORAD (09-09-2017),Rita Marley (09-09-2017)

----------


## NORAD

> Whatever happened to the "we reserve the right to refuse service to anybody?" 
> No business should be forced to serve person(s) for whatever reason they desire if they don't want to.


eggzactly!




> A similar question along this line might be "Should a Jewish baker be required to make a cake for a jihadi group?"


^^^^swiped^^^^

----------



----------


## 2cent

Businesses refusing service - for whatever reason - should be as high on the radar of things to talk/report about, and worse, justices to actually have to decide! - as the hole I just wore in the knee of my jeans. 

Seriously, folks, it really is beginning to frost my backside that such a NON-issue is getting so much attention due to WHO is causing it!

----------

Rita Marley (09-09-2017)

----------


## Rita Marley

> Businesses refusing service - for whatever reason - should be as high on the radar of things to talk/report about, and worse, justices to actually have to decide! - as the hole I just wore in the knee of my jeans. 
> 
> Seriously, folks, it really is beginning to frost my backside that such a NON-issue is getting so much attention due to WHO is causing it!


This has been a core bitch of mine for a long time. Liberals have taken this beautiful document that grasps the highest ideals of man that is the Constitution and used it to force people to bake gay cakes and men to legally marry each other. They've perverted greatness by wiping their asses with it.

----------

2cent (09-09-2017)

----------


## Dr. Felix Birdbiter

> God help the Supreme Court on this one.  If the Court fines in favor of the baker, does that than mean that a baker that belongs to the KKK would not have to bake a cake for an inter-racial or inter-religious marriage?



Right, no one should be compelled to do business with anyone they don't wish to do business with.  What right should the  government have to tell you who you must or must not do business with?

----------

Old Ridge Runner (09-10-2017)

----------


## 2cent

> This has been a core bitch of mine for a long time. Liberals have taken this beautiful document that grasps the highest ideals of man that is the Constitution and used it to force people to bake gay cakes and men to legally marry each other. They've perverted greatness by wiping their asses with it.


Girl, you hit to the heart of the matter so well that I near cried - and screamed - for the truth of it!

NO one has said it better.

----------

Rita Marley (09-09-2017)

----------


## Sled Dog

The better legal argument would be that the faggots were asking for a service that the baker was unwilling to provide.  Thus the faggots went to court to force the bakers to provide the service.

Fuck state law, the 13th Amendment flatly forbids "involuntary servitude".

Period, end of argument.

Faggots, go find your own kind to make your stupid reception dessert.

----------

2cent (09-09-2017),Rita Marley (09-09-2017)

----------


## Sled Dog

> God help the Supreme Court on this one.  If the Court fines in favor of the baker, does that than mean that a baker that belongs to the KKK would not have to bake a cake for an inter-racial or inter-religious marriage?



It means that a baker who doesn't want to bake a cake does not have to bake a cake.

Since when is anyone required to give a reason to ANYONE else for their refusal to do something?

Their refusal is their personal business, and they have a right to say "no".

And they don't have to explain it.

----------

Rita Marley (09-09-2017)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Just as the gay couple might end up with a poop wedding cake...which they would probably enjoy.
> 
> I think any business should be able to turn away customers for whatever reason they want. It doesn't make them great businessmen, it makes them free people.


Exactly.

It's THEIR profits they're turning away and it's their business to choose to do.

It's what "theirs" means.

----------

Rita Marley (09-09-2017)

----------


## Sled Dog

> The bottom is; either you own your property, or the government does.  
> 
> It's also not always bad for business for some business owners to turn certain business away.  I tend to have more respect for those who care more about their convictions than they do for their wallets.



It's not about "property".

It's about individual rights and the freedom to say "no".

It's a personal liberty matter.

Corrupted Chief Justice Roberts side-stepped the unconstitutional mandates in MessiahCare by unlawfully re-writing the law to declare what were described as penalties (and hence unconstitutional) were actually "taxes" and thus valid under the tax authority granted the Congress under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.

Naturally, Article I, Section 8 does not allow Congress to establish health insurance or health care at any level, and by making it a tax that corrupt pig also threw MessiahCare into direct violation of Article I, Section 7, Clause 1, the "Originations Clause".

But the Constitution does not allow Congress to MANDATE anyone do anything.

----------


## Sled Dog

> Businesses refusing service - for whatever reason - should be as high on the radar of things to talk/report about, and worse, justices to actually have to decide! - as the hole I just wore in the knee of my jeans. 
> 
> Seriously, folks, it really is beginning to frost my backside that such a NON-issue is getting so much attention due to WHO is causing it!



It's NOT a "non-issue".

It's about one group of citizens, favored by the fascist political elites, being able, through the corruption of the courts, to FORCE services from other citizens who don't agree with them.

The question of whether our neighbors can force us to serve them against our wishes is one of the most important issues facing America today,

----------

RMNIXON (09-09-2017)

----------


## RMNIXON

The libertarian arguments are well made but missing the legal point.

Jack Phillips never refused Gays to come into his store and make a purchase of any bake goods behind the counter if they are well dressed and well mannered. The only request refused was the baking of a symbolic cake for a specific purpose. 

I would not expect a Muslim baker to prepare a cake for a Jewish wedding or vice versa!  :Geez: 

Have some common sense!



We are fast becoming a Totalitarian Left society over outrageous PC expectations.

----------


## 2cent

> It's NOT a "non-issue".
> 
> It's about one group of citizens, favored by the fascist political elites, being able, through the corruption of the courts, to FORCE services from other citizens who don't agree with them.
> 
> The question of whether our neighbors can force us to serve them against our wishes is one of the most important issues facing America today,


I said, "SHOULD be a non-issue."  Didn't say is wasn't an issue.

You do make a good point with involuntary servitude.  That goes along well with, "either we own our own bodies, or we do not."

----------


## Old Ridge Runner

> It'd be pretty hard to force someone to sell you something that he doesn't have.


He'd have to go out and buy the ingredients.

----------


## Old Ridge Runner

> It means that a baker who doesn't want to bake a cake does not have to bake a cake.
> 
> Since when is anyone required to give a reason to ANYONE else for their refusal to do something?
> 
> Their refusal is their personal business, and they have a right to say "no".
> 
> And they don't have to explain it.


Except if the one who wants you to do something for them is one of the protected minorities.

----------


## Frankenvoter

Cake Is His âArt.â So Can He Deny One to a Gay Couple?

There's a picture of the loving couple midway through the article that made me want to hurl, then I looked at it further and thought it was cocksucker Richard hatch from the original "survivor" (who I'm sure enjoyed his time in prison for not paying taxes on those winnings). But I think it is a case of THEY ALL LOOK ALIKE. So I'll summise:




> Its more than just a cake, he said at his bakery one recent morning. Its a piece of art in so many ways...............
> The couple he refused to serve, David Mullins and Charlie Craig, filed civil rights charges. They said they had been demeaned and humiliated as they sought to celebrate their union.


I'm pretty sure they "demeaned and humiliated" themselves, but aside from that fact much further down the story the blowmo lispily said this:




> The point isnt that we could get a cake elsewhere, Mr. Mullins said. Of course we could get a cake somewhere else. This was about us being turned away from and denied service at a business because of who we are and who we love.


Yeah, that's right MF'r, and so you WEREN'T denied service, you just had to shop around a little, but that's not good enough, you demand acceptance from everyone, and this wouldn't even be an issue if you had it right? Well I hate to tell you, no law will make me like you. It just wont. And work for you? double no.




> If a bakery has a free speech right to discriminate, gay groups contend, then so do all businesses that may be said to engage in expression, including florists, photographers, tailors, choreographers, hair salons, restaurants, jewelers, architects and lawyers. A ruling for Mr. Phillips, they say, would amount to a broad mandate for discrimination.


Or furnace guys. "Sorry, you're just a little too effeminate, if you know what I mean, and you already told me you and your "partner" were cold and wont make it until tomorrow morning but you're just gonna have to snuggle up with each other extra tight tonight because I aint coming, your house is a synaqouge of satan and your one of his disciples...........yeah, I know it's gonna be 20 below tonight.........sorry it says right on my van "I don't serve fags" got it?!?!? (that would be the extreme of this ruling going the right way).

Some more samplings of snifflings from the offended couple:




> . A ruling in favor of Mr. Phillips, they said, would mark the marriages of gay couples as second-class unions unworthy of legal protection.


sniffle




> Mr. Craig said the free speech argument was a smoke screen. Its not about the cake, he said. It is about discrimination.


You say tomato I say toe mah toe, yeah, I'm discriminating against you, simply because I don't like who you are.




> The couples meeting with Mr. Phillips five years ago was, both sides agree, short and unpleasant..........
> Mr. Phillips shut down the conversation as soon as he heard that a gay couple was getting married.........
> Ill make you birthday cakes, shower cakes, cookies, brownies, Mr. Phillips recalled saying. I just cant make a cake for a same-sex wedding.
> Mr. Mullins remembered being stunned.
> What followed was a horrible pregnant pause as what was happening really sunk in, he said. We were mortified and just felt degraded, and it was all the worse to have Charlies mom sitting there with us.


They are mommas boys aren't they? And I'd be willing to bet, this is just a hunch mind you, I bet when his mouth fell open when he was fully aware he wasn't getting his cake and that "pregnant pause" set in and he took a deep gulp, I'd be willing to bet that wasn't the only time that day his mouth was open, and taking a deep gulp as they were "consoling" each other later that evening.

I hope this ruling goes the right way so I don't have to start breaking the law, because I will, either way. Muslims and gays, BOTH very Nazi like in their demands for set asides and special treatment, both in the democratic party and neither at odds with each other because blowmo-ism is rampant in islam, but only man to boy, and I bet the blowmos in America just LOVE that idea, and figure a generation or two of westernization they'll have a whole new crew in the gay bar. The fucking faggots.

----------

Big Dummy (09-17-2017),Jim Scott (09-17-2017),Rutabaga (09-17-2017)

----------


## Hillofbeans

No shoes, no shirt, no gays, no service. Make me comes to mind, cause I'm not going to do it. I don't like it, don't have to like it, not going to like it, and not going to participate. Call it the "American Way", cause there was a time when Americans stood up for family values.

----------

Frankenvoter (09-17-2017)

----------


## Sundance



----------

Daily Bread (09-17-2017),Frankenvoter (09-17-2017),Rita Marley (09-17-2017)

----------


## Jim Scott

The Jack Phillips case _(Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission)_ that will be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court this fall is based on Phillips religious convictions that follow the Christian bible's view of homosexual behavior as sin.  

Phillips had sold individual bakery items to the two homosexuals before but refused to bake a cake for their upcoming 'wedding' as he considered it a contribution to their sin (not to mention the 'wedding' being a deliberate mockery of heterosexual marriage) that would violate his religious beliefs.

The homosexual men filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission and Phelps contested it in court.  He lost.  Now, on appeal, he is taking it to the U.S. Supreme Court, where it belongs.

Either we constitutionally have the freedom of the practice of our religion, or not.  The salient point in this case is that the baker (Jack Phillips) sold bakery products to homosexuals but refused to bake a custom cake that would be part of a celebration of their homosexual 'marriage'.  Phillips believes that would require him to be a participant in the celebration of what the bible terms a sin (a 'gay wedding') and, as a devout Christian, Phillips could not do that in good conscience.  The plaintiffs call that 'discrimination' and seek to force Phillips and anyone who opposes participating in a 'gay wedding' to supply their wares when asked to do so as part of a homosexual 'wedding'.  

Obviously, this will be a landmark decision by the Court.  If a devout person's religion condemns homosexual behavior (many religions do) and they are asked to supply their product in a celebration of a homosexual 'wedding' either they have the right to refuse under the First Amendment - or they do not.  If the Court rules for Phillips it will not automatically allow any merchant to refuse to serve homosexuals but will only allow a religious person to decline to sell their product or service for a homosexual 'wedding'.  That would be a fairly narrow stipulation and while the 'gay lobby' would howl for weeks about 'discrimination', most folks would see the logic and accept the decision.  Should the Court rule against Phillips, it will ignite a firestorm of resistance against the homosexual movement to force their sexual perversion down the throats of anyone who happens to reject it.

Frankly, for homosexuals, a decision for Phillips would serve them well, even if they don't realize it.  Tolerance for sexual perversity can only go so far and if a faithful Christian can be forced to see their product or service in celebration of an ersatz 'gay wedding' the limits of Americans tolerance for the homosexual agenda will find it's limits.

*Jim*

----------

Frankenvoter (09-17-2017),Rutabaga (09-17-2017)

----------


## Rutabaga

let them eat pie...

----------

Frankenvoter (09-17-2017)

----------


## Hillofbeans

Would be a good time for Ginsberg to take a nap, a really long one.

----------

Daily Bread (09-17-2017),Frankenvoter (09-17-2017)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Obviously, this will be a landmark decision by the Court.  If a devout person's religion condemns homosexual behavior (many religions do) and they are asked to supply their product in a celebration of a homosexual 'wedding' either they have the right to refuse under the First Amendment - or they do not.  If the Court rules for Phillips it will not automatically allow any merchant to refuse to serve homosexuals but will only allow a religious person to decline to sell their product or service for a homosexual 'wedding'.  That would be a fairly narrow stipulation and while the 'gay lobby' would howl for weeks about 'discrimination', most folks would see the logic and accept the decision.  Should the Court rule against Phillips, it will ignite a firestorm of resistance against the homosexual movement to force their sexual perversion down the throats of anyone who happens to reject it.



Ruth Buzzy Ginsberg must DIE!

Hopefully before this case is heard.

----------

Frankenvoter (09-17-2017)

----------


## Dan40

Gay wedding cake ingredients.  Flour, eggs, spit, piss, shortening, baking powder, sugar, salt, lots of salt, ants, rat droppings for sprinkles.

----------

Frankenvoter (09-17-2017)

----------


## Roadmaster

I make no excuses for what I believe. I am not going to say, "well they are nice people but I just don't agree with them". I will just quote the Bible with authority and let them think what they will.

----------

Frankenvoter (09-17-2017)

----------


## Mainecoons

My tolerance for the "gay" agenda hit its limits quite some time ago.

----------

Big Dummy (09-17-2017),Frankenvoter (09-18-2017)

----------


## Rita Marley

To be fair, homo bakers should not be forced to bake hetero wedding cakes.

----------


## patrickt

> Cake Is His âArt.â So Can He Deny One to a Gay Couple?
> 
> There's a picture of the loving couple midway through the article that made me want to hurl, then I looked at it further and thought it was cocksucker Richard hatch from the original "survivor" (who I'm sure enjoyed his time in prison for not paying taxes on those winnings). But I think it is a case of THEY ALL LOOK ALIKE. So I'll summise:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm pretty sure they "demeaned and humiliated" themselves, but aside from that fact much further down the story the blowmo lispily said this:
> 
> 
> ...


I couldn't finish your post but I did skip down to the last paragraph. What nonsense.

----------

Frankenvoter (09-18-2017)

----------


## Taxcutter

The courts hears arguments in the _Masterpiece Cakeshop vs. Colorado Civil Rights Commission_ case today.

  Thats the one where the bakery did not want to make a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage.

  Does Same-sex marriage supercede the First Amendment?

  No link.   At least not today.

----------

Knightkore (12-05-2017),Rutabaga (12-05-2017),Tennyson (12-05-2017)

----------


## Knightkore

> The courts hears arguments in the _Masterpiece Cakeshop vs. Colorado Civil Rights Commission_ case today.
> 
>   That’s the one where the bakery did not want to make a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage.
> 
>   Does Same-sex marriage supercede the First Amendment?
> 
>   No link.   At least not today.


NO.  Or rather let me put it this way, ones First Amendment freedom cannot cancel out anothers First Amendment freedom.

I hope that SCOTUS does right by God on this.

----------

Tennyson (12-05-2017)

----------


## Tennyson

Here is what at stake if the baker loses:

1. Statutory law will trump the Constitution. 

2. The free exercise of religion becomes null and void.

3. The government can compel speech.

----------

2cent (12-05-2017),Dave37 (12-05-2017),FirstGenCanadian (12-05-2017),Knightkore (12-05-2017),Kodiak (12-05-2017),Kurmugeon (12-05-2017),MedicineBow (12-05-2017)

----------


## Taxcutter

Oh no!   Not the funky trannie pronouns!

----------


## Knightkore

> Here is what at stake if the baker loses:
> 
> 1. Statutory law will trump the Constitution. 
> 
> 2. The free exercise of religion becomes null and void.
> 
> 3. The government can compel speech.


Can you imagine Hillary compelling speech?

----------


## HawkTheSlayer

> Here is what at stake if the baker loses:
> 
> 1. Statutory law will trump the Constitution. 
> 
> 2. The free exercise of religion becomes null and void.
> 
> 3. The government can compel speech.


Very serious issues to contemplate and very serious consequences.

----------

2cent (12-05-2017),FirstGenCanadian (12-05-2017),Knightkore (12-05-2017),RMNIXON (12-05-2017),Tennyson (12-05-2017)

----------


## Tennyson

> Can you imagine Hillary compelling speech?


In a nightmare.

----------

Knightkore (12-05-2017)

----------


## Crunch

I am so damn tired of this cake nonsense. What happened to adults being adults and if they can’t get a service they want at one private company they just go to another one? 


Our lives our choice but WE WILL DESTROY YOUR WHOLE LIFE if you refuse to bake us a cake. 



Sounds about right 


.

----------

Dave37 (12-05-2017),Knightkore (12-05-2017)

----------


## 2cent

> Can you imagine Hillary compelling speech?


It's unlikely that my mouth can get that foul.

On a more serious note, this may show us what Justice Gorsuch is made of.

----------

Hillofbeans (12-05-2017),Knightkore (12-05-2017)

----------


## goodpen

Have to ask, was this cake thing a set up?  I never did hear why they thought this was the only bakery for them.

----------

Knightkore (12-05-2017)

----------


## Hillofbeans

> Have to ask, was this cake thing a set up?  I never did hear why they thought this was the only bakery for them.


Probably. The women who sued the Circuit Court Clerk in KY over a gay marriage license were from Ohio. They went there looking for a fight.

----------

Knightkore (12-05-2017)

----------


## Roadmaster

They target Christian owned businesses. Just like they send their Christ rejecting people to other states to claim they are discriminated against because they can't get married. Or their injected sons and daughters trying to change their sex into schools.

----------

Knightkore (12-05-2017),RMNIXON (12-05-2017)

----------


## Kurmugeon

Unfortunately, a very large portion of the entire LGBT Agenda is just political extortion and abuse of official government powers to persecute those on the Anti-Left-political-enemies list.


Like the "Hate-Crimes" Laws, ... and the IRS audits in recent decades, 

... and the INS enforcement of immigration law, 

... and the acceptance for government assistance for medical care financial aid,

... and the enforcement of "Diversity" (You can have too many whites, but you can't have too few!),

... and the EPA being used to "protect" wetlands,

... and the protection of intimidation and violence free voting,

... and the police prevention and intervention of rioting, arson, and looting,

... and the ...


Unfortunately, since the impeachment of Bill Clinton, and his NOT being removed from office, hence the Lefties figured out how much power they really have...

Enforcement of the American In-JUSTICE system and laws is rife with double standards and biased, politically targeted enforcement!


The whole Gender / Sexual Orientation thang is just the tip of the iceburg!


-

----------


## RMNIXON

I hope the Court finds a clear distinction between the discrimination issues of the past and forced expression. 

It would be different if a bakery (or any business) held up a sign that said No Gays Allowed! There was no discrimination in the course of regular business. 

In this case they were asked to endorse a specific event and behavior. A cake prepared for a Gay Wedding. 

That has always been my problem when the LBGT crowd try to claim this is a Civil Rights issue that compares with racial discrimination. Behavior is clearly not the same as race.

----------

Knightkore (12-05-2017)

----------


## Frankenvoter

More LGBT issues loom as justices near wedding cake decision

And even if he doesn't, there's a plethora of deviant activist cases gerbiling thier way thru the court pipes (with or without lube)(probably without, militant gays like to jam it to the "normals" and make them pay whenever they get the chance) like this one:




> One case expected to reach the court this summer involves a Michigan funeral home that fired an employee who disclosed that she was transitioning from male to female and dressed as a woman.


Yeah, that's just what I want to see as I'm picking a box, some weirdo freakazoid who'll probably try to have sex with my dead body before shoving something up my ass for eternal safe keeping (the sex, just another deviancy with it's own letter on the alpha-bit scale, the item, probably incriminating pictures from his/hers trip to the key's last summer). 

or this one:




> In the past 13 months, federal appeals courts in Chicago and New York also have ruled that gay and lesbian employees are entitled to protection from discrimination under Title VII. Those courts overruled earlier decisions. Title VII does not specifically mention sexual orientation, but the courts said it was covered under the ban on sexbias.


Oh yeah, I'm sure that was another of those rights that activist judges always manage to "find" in the law while wearing thier special decoder glasses they got in the cracker jack box. They can read phrases like "shall not be infringed" and not see what it clearly says, and then "find" intent that bends the law the way they want it, whether that was the true "intent" of the law or not.

I believe in Gods plan over my plan, and what he sees in the big picture vs. what I want right now, and so it's gonna go the way he wants and not necessarily the way I want, as always and as it should be. 

But the more blurbs come out about this upcoming decision the less faith I have in it going the right way, and if Christian bakers are required to bake these cakes, look for an overwhelming sudden rush of snarky demands for cakes shaped like dicks or ballsack muffins, with an added layer of smug as they are interviewed by the "news" while awaiting their prize.

And of course, not one of the blowmos will go to a muslim baker and demand services from them, not one.

----------


## Frankenvoter



----------


## Quark

Communism and/or Islam coming to a community near you.

Justice can be a cruel mistress and these snowflakes will find out when they get crushed by one or the other in the near future.

----------


## Swedgin

And yet.....

--Performers refuse to play at certain events, based on nothing more than politics...  
--A Gay Coffee shop owner chases Christians out of his shop, because, well, he doesn't like Christians....

So, my question is this:  Is the Law of the Land to be enforced CONSISTENTLY on this issue, or, is this to be just more of the same arbitrary 'justice?'

----------


## patrickt

"Rule Of Law: The 7-to-2 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in favor of a Christian baker who refused to make a custom wedding cake for a same-sex wedding ceremony was a minor victory for religious rights, freedom of speech and freedom of commerce. But it didn't go far enough."
Supreme Court Half-Baked Decision On Rights Was Correct, But It Didnt Go Far Enough

Far enough? I wonder what far enough is? What this decision did was simply say that Colorado's blatantly biased civil rights commission went over the line in their decision against the baker. The members of the civil rights commission have been told that being biased, bigoted, and unfair is fine but keep your mouth shut.

As an atheist, I don't think it is a religious issue or should be a religious issue. We shouldn't have "victim groups" that get special treatment and businesses should be allowed to serve, or not, who they want as long as they don't have a government-supported monopoly.

Consider, if it is a religious issue then a Christian couple with a bed and breakfast could refuse to allow a gay couple a stay but a gay couple with a bed and breakfast could not deny a heterosexual customer a stay. 

The Constitution says, quite clearly, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...." I think it is significant that of the four issues in the First Amendment this one is first. It has been so twisted that the enforcement does not remotely respect the Constitution.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),MisterVeritis (06-05-2018),MrogersNhood (06-05-2018)

----------


## Ginger

Is this an op/ed? If not, may I merge it? There have been several threads on the topic.

----------


## midcan5

Revised American conservative Bible verse

"Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself unless of course that neighbor is gay or trans, or wants a cake made.  On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),Morning Star (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Revised American conservative Bible verse
> 
> "Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself unless of course that neighbor is gay or trans, or wants a cake made.  On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."


Well therein lies the problem, the religious want their religion protected, and the 1st amendment does that, it protects religion from the government, but not from private enterprise so in theory if I don't want to serve religious people in my business I shouldn't have to. Of course if I did this there would be the usual outcry of persecution. Yet in typical leftist and religious ideology there is nothing but hypocrisy in their ideology, the government is not allowed to discriminate against pickle puffers yet the baker has the religious right to be biased, bigoted, and unfair to homosexuals because their sky man says it is an abomination. 

So then how does the government protect the rights of pickle puffers against discrimination when it is also bound to protect the religious right to discriminate against pickle puffers. Even more hypocritical, the bible says not to judge and that the sin of one man is between him and "God" not between men. Yet every christian feels it is his right to judge pickle puffer's sins. Even more strange, this judgement is restricted to pickle puffers; I never heard of a baker refusing to bake a cake for an adulterer. I also can't imagine Jesus refusing to bake a cake for a pickle puffer when he was known to wash the feet of whores.

----------


## Knightkore

> "Rule Of Law: The 7-to-2 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in favor of a Christian baker who refused to make a custom wedding cake for a same-sex wedding ceremony was a minor victory for religious rights, freedom of speech and freedom of commerce. But it didn't go far enough."
> Supreme Court Half-Baked Decision On Rights Was Correct, But It Didnt Go Far Enough
> 
> Far enough? I wonder what far enough is? What this decision did was simply say that Colorado's blatantly biased civil rights commission went over the line in their decision against the baker. The members of the civil rights commission have been told that being biased, bigoted, and unfair is fine but keep your mouth shut.
> 
> As an atheist, I don't think it is a religious issue or should be a religious issue. We shouldn't have "victim groups" that get special treatment and businesses should be allowed to serve, or not, who they want as long as they don't have a government-supported monopoly.
> 
> Consider, if it is a religious issue then a Christian couple with a bed and breakfast could refuse to allow a gay couple a stay but a gay couple with a bed and breakfast could not deny a heterosexual customer a stay. 
> 
> The Constitution says, quite clearly, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...." I think it is significant that of the four issues in the First Amendment this one is first. It has been so twisted that the enforcement does not remotely respect the Constitution.


or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

{THIS is the part where atheists gloss over intentionally.  Another part?}

Congress shall make no law

{This only speaks of law makers.  That means the Senate and the House cannot make a law for or against religion.  Period.  Once again it limits ONE very important part of government.  Atheists ignore this too.}

Your unmitigated hatred of Christians is well known.

----------

MisterVeritis (06-05-2018),Thing 1 (06-06-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

"Far Enough" = The State Cannot Compel One Citizen to Provide Services To Another.

What's complicated about that?

Never read the Thirteenth Amendment?



This IS NOT about religion.

----------

nonsqtr (06-07-2018),Tennyson (06-05-2018),Thing 1 (06-06-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> Well therein lies the problem, the religious want their religion protected, and the 1st amendment does that, it protects religion from the government, but not from private enterprise so in theory if I don't want to serve religious people in my business I shouldn't have to. Of course if I did this there would be the usual outcry of persecution. Yet in typical leftist and religious ideology there is nothing but hypocrisy in their ideology, the government is not allowed to discriminate against pickle puffers yet the baker has the religious right to be biased, bigoted, and unfair to homosexuals because their sky man says it is an abomination. 
> 
> So then how does the government protect the rights of pickle puffers against discrimination when it is also bound to protect the religious right to discriminate against pickle puffers. Even more hypocritical, the bible says not to judge and that the sin of one man is between him and "God" not between men. Yet every christian feels it is his right to judge pickle puffer's sins. Even more strange, this judgement is restricted to pickle puffers; I never heard of a baker refusing to bake a cake for an adulterer. I also can't imagine Jesus refusing to bake a cake for a pickle puffer when he was known to wash the feet of whores.


the religious right to be biased, bigoted, and unfair to homosexuals because their sky man says it is an abomination

{So speaks the butthurt SJW atheist.}

I also can't imagine Jesus refusing to bake a cake for a pickle puffer when he was known to wash the feet of whores.

{Really?  PROVE it.  Or retract your disrespectful stance.  I'm tired of your bullying.  It stops on this thread.  Today.  You want to rumble.  It's on.}

<font color="#333333">

----------


## Morning Star

> the religious right to be biased, bigoted, and unfair to homosexuals because their sky man says it is an abomination
> 
> {So speaks the butthurt SJW atheist.}
> 
> I also can't imagine Jesus refusing to bake a cake for a pickle puffer when he was known to wash the feet of whores.
> 
> {Really?  PROVE it.  Or retract your disrespectful stance.  I'm tired of your bullying.  It stops on this thread.  Today.  You want to rumble.  It's on.}


1. How am I butt hurt? I have no dog in this fight, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy. 

2. You're right my bad, a whore washed Jesus's feet. So I guess Jesus would have let a pickle puffer bake him a wedding cake, if he got married. Same difference?

----------


## Knightkore

> 1. How am I butt hurt? I have no dog in this fight, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy. 
> 
> 2. You're right my bad, a whore washed Jesus's feet. So I guess Jesus would have let a pickle puffer bake him a wedding cake, if he got married. Same difference?


Far different.

No hypocrisy except from your leftist allies.  Whatever else, on this subject you and other atheists {not all} are on the same side of the leftist here.

----------


## patrickt

> Is this an op/ed? If not, may I merge it? There have been several threads on the topic.


My apologies. I looked and didn't find a post. Do as you need.

----------


## patrickt

[QUOTE=Knightkore;1802449]or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

{THIS is the part where atheists gloss over intentionally.  Another part?}

Congress shall make no law

{This only speaks of law makers.  That means the Senate and the House cannot make a law for or against religion.  Period.  Once again it limits ONE very important part of government.  Atheists ignore this too.}

Your unmitigated hatred of Christians is well known.[/Yoou

Your paranoia isn't my problem and I'm not the glosser. But, I'm glad to see you'll support female genital mutilation if it's based on a religious demand. I'm also glad you'll fight against a law prohibiting businesses from working on Sunday.

I certainly don't hate Christians. I don't even hate the ones who knock on my door or want to kill real witches and atheists. I leave the hatred to you and yours. I also, unlike Christians, don't hate other religions, either.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## MrMike

Christianity = a religion that is protected

vs

Sexuality = leave that gay crap in your bedroom

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),MrogersNhood (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Far different.
> 
> No hypocrisy except from your leftist allies.  Whatever else, on this subject you and other atheists {not all} are on the same side of the leftist here.


I'm on the side of not being a hypocrite. So then, since you Christians are always saying Atheism is a religion and the 1st Amendment protects my religious right to be a bigot you would have no problem if I refused to sell goods and services from my store to Christians right?

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> I'm on the side of not being a hypocrite. So then, since you Christians are always saying Atheism is a religion and the 1st Amendment protects my religious right to be a bigot you would have no problem if I refused to sell goods and services from my store to Christians right?


The baker sold to atheists and gays. He refused to decorate cakes with certain messages, including those celebrating divorces, Halloween, and gay marriages.

But he sold undecorated cakes to all and sundry.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),MrogersNhood (06-05-2018),patrickt (06-05-2018),Wiser Now (06-05-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> I'm on the side of not being a hypocrite. So then, since you Christians are always saying Atheism is a religion and the 1st Amendment protects my religious right to be a bigot you would have no problem if I refused to sell goods and services from my store to Christians right?


That would be your choice to run your business as YOU believe it should be run.

----------

MisterVeritis (06-05-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

[QUOTE=patrickt;1802477]


> or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
> 
> {THIS is the part where atheists gloss over intentionally.  Another part?}
> 
> Congress shall make no law
> 
> {This only speaks of law makers.  That means the Senate and the House cannot make a law for or against religion.  Period.  Once again it limits ONE very important part of government.  Atheists ignore this too.}
> 
> Your unmitigated hatred of Christians is well known.[/Yoou
> ...



 :Smiley ROFLMAO:

----------


## Morning Star

> That would be your choice to run your business as YOU believe it should be run.


Ok, then I don't see the issue, other than it is a little odd to justify bigotry with religion, given that the bible says to love one another and thou shall not judge. I would think the Christian thing to do would be to decorate the pickle puffers cake and pray for their salvation, leaving the judgement of their sinful ways to "God".

----------


## Rita Marley

> Ok, then I don't see the issue, other than it is a little odd to justify bigotry with religion, given that the bible says to love one another and thou shall not judge. I would think the Christian thing to do would be to decorate the pickle puffers cake and pray for their salvation, leaving the judgement of their sinful ways to "God".


He should participate and celebrate their sins with them, and leave the judgment to God. Good call.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),patrickt (06-05-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> Ok, then I don't see the issue, other than it is a little odd to justify bigotry with religion, given that the bible says to love one another and thou shall not judge. I would think the Christian thing to do would be to decorate the pickle puffers cake and pray for their salvation, leaving the judgement of their sinful ways to "God".


2 Corinthians 6:14-18 - Do Not Be Bound Together With Unbelievers

"And do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even  expose them." (Ephesians 5:11).

----------

Wiser Now (06-05-2018)

----------


## MrogersNhood

> He should participate and celebrate their sins with them, and leave the judgment to God. Good call.


Sarcasm doesn't translate well on the internet.

God also said that homosexuality is an abomination.

The penalty for it in 48 states used to be hanging.

True story.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),Rita Marley (06-05-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> Sarcasm doesn't translate well on the internet.
> 
> God also said that homosexuality is an abomination.
> 
> The penalty for it in 48 states used to be hanging.
> 
> True story.


His faith obviously means more to him than any earthly celebration.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

Decorating a cake is not participating or celebrating, it's just your job, but I can see how it could be spun that way to justify your bigotry.

That's the best part about leftist ideology like religion, it can be spun to mean anything you need it to mean for any given situation.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> Decorating a cake is not participating or celebrating, it's just your job, but I can see how it could be spun that way to justify your bigotry.
> 
> That's the best part about leftist ideology like religion, it can be spun to mean anything you need it to mean for any given situation.


Forced labor can be your motto.

----------

2cent (06-05-2018),Knightkore (06-05-2018),MrogersNhood (06-05-2018),patrickt (06-05-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> Decorating a cake is not participating or celebrating, it's just your job, but I can see how it could be spun that way to justify your bigotry.
> 
> That's the best part about leftist ideology like religion, it can be spun to mean anything you need it to mean for any given situation.


 :Geez:

----------


## Morning Star

> Forced labor can be your motto.


Who said anything about forcing labor? I don't want the baker to be forced to do anything, I would just expect a Christian to be better than a bigot who uses his "God" to justify his own hatred. At least as an atheist I don't have to hide my hatred behind some imaginary dogma. I hate pickle puffers all on my own accord.

----------


## MrogersNhood

> Who said anything about forcing labor? I don't want the baker to be forced to do anything, I would just expect a Christian to be better than a bigot who uses his "God" to justify his own hatred. At least as an atheist I don't have to hide my hatred behind some imaginary dogma. I hate pickle puffers all on my own accord.



You just said they should be forced to do something they don't want to. What does that mean?

It means forced labor, jackass.

----------

2cent (06-05-2018),Knightkore (06-05-2018),Rita Marley (06-05-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> Who said anything about forcing labor? I don't want the baker to be forced to do anything, I would just expect a Christian to be better than a bigot who uses his "God" to justify his own hatred. At least as an atheist I don't have to hide my hatred behind some imaginary dogma. I hate pickle puffers all on my own accord.


Your hatred is written for all the world to see.

The baker obviously hates no one. He simply refuses to participate in their sinful lives.

----------

2cent (06-05-2018),MrogersNhood (06-05-2018),patrickt (06-05-2018),Wiser Now (06-05-2018)

----------


## MrogersNhood

> Who said anything about forcing labor? I don't want the baker to be forced to do anything, I would just expect a Christian to be better than a bigot who uses his "God" to justify his own hatred. At least as an atheist I don't have to hide my hatred behind some imaginary dogma. I hate pickle puffers all on my own accord.



You just said they should be forced to do something they don't want to. What does that mean?

It means forced labor, jackass. I damn sure don't have to do any jobs I don't want to. What's different about being a baker?

(Besides having higher culinary skills)

----------

Rita Marley (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> You just said they should be forced to do something they don't want to. What does that mean?
> 
> It means forced labor, jackass. I damn sure don't have to do any jobs I don't want to. What's different about being a baker?
> 
> (Besides having higher culinary skills)


Where did I say he should be forced to?

----------


## Knightkore

> Decorating a cake is not participating or celebrating, it's just your job, but I can see how it could be spun that way to justify your bigotry.
> 
> That's the best part about leftist ideology like religion, it can be spun to mean anything you need it to mean for any given situation.


Okay, so then you don't mind having to being forced to pay of Husseincare and participating in the liberal "affordable care act" right?

The First Amendment addresses a freedom of conscience.  The Second Amendment makes sure that if government oversteps there is a necessary provision to through the corrupt government out.

The concept of America is that we stop whining like snowflakes and we grow up and exercise the freedom God gave us all to do what are consciences dictate as individuals.

----------

2cent (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Your hatred is written for all the world to see.
> 
> The baker obviously hates no one. He simply refuses to participate in their sinful lives.


My hatred has been written for the world to see hundreds of times and yes the baker is just as full of hate as everyone else is. Everyone hates, it's the nature of man.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> Where did I say he should be forced to?


Here:




> Decorating a cake is not participating or celebrating...

----------


## Rita Marley

> My hatred has been written for the world to see hundreds of times and yes the baker is just as full of hate as everyone else is. Everyone hates, it's the nature of man.


Perhaps you should be forced to participate in their honeymoon.

----------


## Morning Star

> Okay, so then you don't mind having to being forced to pay of Husseincare and participating in the liberal "affordable care act" right?
> 
> The First Amendment addresses a freedom of conscience.  The Second Amendment makes sure that if government oversteps there is a necessary provision to through the corrupt government out.
> 
> The concept of America is that we stop whining like snowflakes and we grow up and exercise the freedom God gave us all to do what are consciences dictate as individuals.


Since when does that matter, I pay for all kinds of things whether I like it or not. Believing in a sky man shouldn't make you special. 

No the 1st Amendment does not address freedom of conscience, high ideals, I agree, just don't pretend that your conscious is free from evil.

----------


## Knightkore

> My hatred has been written for the world to see hundreds of times and yes the baker is just as full of hate as everyone else is. Everyone hates, it's the nature of man.


So now you know for certain what is in the heart of another person?

----------

Rita Marley (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> _Decorating a cake is not participating or celebrating..._


How the hell do you get forced out of that?

----------


## Knightkore

> Since when does that matter, I pay for all kinds of things whether I like it or not. Believing in a sky man shouldn't make you special. 
> 
> No the 1st Amendment does not address freedom of conscience, high ideals, I agree, just don't pretend that your conscious is free from evil.



 :Wtf20:

----------


## Wiser Now

> Revised American conservative Bible verse
> 
> "Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself unless of course that neighbor is gay or trans, or wants a cake made.  On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."


Only adolescents define love as being given their own way all the time. As in "If you love me you will allow me to do what I want." Jesus didn't practice caving in to manipulative, demanding children. To the contrary, loving parents say "No" to unreasonable demands. At no time did Jesus ever allow the tolerance of, or condone sin of any kind. We can love gay people without _catering_ to what God has clearly called not just a sin, but an abominable sin.
The "free exercise" of religion couldn't be more clear. The individual decides what violates his conscience, nobody else, and certainly not government. By that definition an individual would be within his rights to deny a room to a gay couple since doing so would make the owner an accessory to the sin, which is also a sin.

We all understand perfectly that we cannot go to a Muslim bakery and request a gay or a Christian wedding cake. Jewish people believe the practice of any Christian ritual to be a sin, consequently in the film "Places in the Heart" Jewish actress Sally Field only pretends to be drinking wine from the Communion cup. Nobody has a problem with this. Society is going to have to allow Christians' the same right to refuse to participate in certain events the same way they already allow Muslims and Jews to refuse. Anything less is _unloving and religious bigotry.
_

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),Rita Marley (06-05-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> How the hell do you get forced out of that?


The queers tried and failed to force him into it.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> Since when does that matter, I pay for all kinds of things whether I like it or not. Believing in a sky man shouldn't make you special. 
> 
> No the 1st Amendment does not address freedom of conscience, high ideals, I agree, just don't pretend that your conscious is free from evil.


Let @Morning Star be on record.  He supports Husseincare and by proxy Nancy Pelosi and the mandates that came with it.  No repeal of Husseincare is desired by @Morning Star.

----------


## Morning Star

> So now you know for certain what is in the heart of another person?


Man is evil, always has been always will be. By your own "Word of God"  >>> The number of the beast 666, it is a HUMAN number. We were created evil.

... or as an atheist, read the history of man, we have always been and always will be at war, killing raping and committing every atrocity imaginable not only against ourselves but all of nature.

----------


## Knightkore

> Since when does that matter, I pay for all kinds of things whether I like it or not. Believing in a sky man shouldn't make you special. 
> 
> No the 1st Amendment does not address freedom of conscience, high ideals, I agree, just don't pretend that your conscious is free from evil.


Let @Morning Star be on record.  He supports Husseincare and by proxy Nancy Pelosi and the mandates that came with it.  No repeal of Husseincare is desired by @Morning Star.

----------


## Knightkore

> Man is evil, always has been always will be. By your own "Word of God"  >>> The number of the beast 666, it is a HUMAN number. We were created evil.
> 
> ... or as an atheist, read the history of man, we have always been and always will be at war, killing raping and committing every atrocity imaginable not only against ourselves but all of nature.


No.  We were NOT created evil.

----------


## Morning Star

> Let @Morning Star be on record.  He supports Husseincare and by proxy Nancy Pelosi and the mandates that came with it.  No repeal of Husseincare is desired by @Morning Star.


You spin and twist words like a leftist, no surprise there, religion has poisoned your mind. I do not support any of it, but I accept that I am paying for it, whether I like it or not is irrelevant. I just don't claim some special exemption because my belief in non-sense make me exempt while everyone else is not.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Taxcutter

The _Masterpiece_ decision sure does have the LBGTQWERTY community worked up.    They cannot imagine anything not being deemed subsidiary to their perversion/insanity.

A 7-2 decision means a quick reversal is not likely.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),Morning Star (06-05-2018),Rita Marley (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> No.  We were NOT created evil.


Then we shouldn't need saving.

----------


## Knightkore

> Then we shouldn't need saving.


 :Geez:

----------


## Wiser Now

> Well therein lies the problem, the religious want their religion protected, and the 1st amendment does that, it protects religion from the government, but not from private enterprise so in theory if I don't want to serve religious people in my business I shouldn't have to. Of course if I did this there would be the usual outcry of persecution. Yet in typical leftist and religious ideology there is nothing but hypocrisy in their ideology, the government is not allowed to discriminate against pickle puffers yet the baker has the religious right to be biased, bigoted, and unfair to homosexuals because their sky man says it is an abomination. 
> 
> So then how does the government protect the rights of pickle puffers against discrimination when it is also bound to protect the religious right to discriminate against pickle puffers. Even more hypocritical, the bible says not to judge and that the sin of one man is between him and "God" not between men. Yet every christian feels it is his right to judge pickle puffer's sins. Even more strange, this judgement is restricted to pickle puffers; I never heard of a baker refusing to bake a cake for an adulterer. I also can't imagine Jesus refusing to bake a cake for a pickle puffer when he was known to wash the feet of whores.


Except that God did not say we weren't to judge another man's sin. That isn't what that verse means and I can show you numerous verses where God tells Christians to avoid the things of this world and to openly shun obvious sinners so their sin doesn't infect and spread to others in the congregation. And Jesus did not wash the feet of whores either.
I have yet to meet an atheist who knew what he was talking about when it comes to the real Jesus.

----------

2cent (06-05-2018),Knightkore (06-05-2018),Rita Marley (06-05-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> You spin and twist words like a leftist, no surprise there, religion has poisoned your mind. I do not support any of it, but I accept that I am paying for it, whether I like it or not is irrelevant. I just don't claim some special exemption because my belief in non-sense make me exempt while everyone else is not.


"Acceptance" is nothing more than a passive aggressive way of a wussified way of tacit support.

----------


## Rita Marley

> Then we shouldn't need saving.


Man was created with free will. He still has it.

If you don't think you need to be saved, then you are free to ignore the message.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> "Acceptance" is nothing more than a passive aggressive way of a wussified way of tacit support.


I accept reality, the reality is my tax dollars are going to be spent on things I don't what them spent on. I don't try to make excuses for why I am special and should be exempted from the laws that everyone else is subjected to. When elections come I express my objections by voting against those that would continue spending my money on things I don't want them spent on. I have to make concessions however, because you will never find a candidate that agrees with you on every single topic, I accept that reality as well. There is no tacit support of any kind.

----------


## Morning Star

> Man was created with free will. He still has it.
> 
> If you don't think you need to be saved, then you are free to ignore the message.


As far as I can tell, the only one trying to kill me is "God".

----------


## Rita Marley

> As far as I can tell, the only one trying to kill me is "God".


No one survives this life. That should be a clue for you.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),MrogersNhood (06-05-2018),patrickt (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> No one survives this life. That should be a clue for you.


I have an eternal soul, therefore I can not die, unless "God" kills me.

----------


## Rita Marley

> I have an eternal soul, therefore I can not die, unless "God" kills me.


Where did you get your eternal soul in the first place.

You ain't getting out of this world alive. Perhaps your own faith will save you or kill you. Your free will decides the issue.

----------

MrogersNhood (06-05-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> I accept reality, the reality is my tax dollars are going to be spent on things I don't what them spent on. I don't try to make excuses for why I am special and should be exempted from the laws that everyone else is subjected to. When elections come I express my objections by voting against those that would continue spending my money on things I don't want them spent on. I have to make concessions however, because you will never find a candidate that agrees with you on every single topic, I accept that reality as well. There is no tacit support of any kind.


 :Puke:

----------


## patrickt

> Sarcasm doesn't translate well on the internet.
> 
> God also said that homosexuality is an abomination.
> 
> The penalty for it in 48 states used to be hanging.
> 
> True story.



The number of times the penalty was carried out is unknown. Records support two executions, and a number of more uncertain convections, such as "crimes against nature".[8]

Not a true story.
"Colonial America had the laws of the United Kingdom, and the revolutionary states took many of those laws as the basis of their own, in some cases verbatim.[8] The last law where the death penalty was on the statute books was South Carolina, the old British law wasn't repealed until 1873, twelve years after the mother country.[8]"
Death penalty for homosexuality - Wikipedia

----------


## patrickt

> My hatred has been written for the world to see hundreds of times and yes the baker is just as full of hate as everyone else is. Everyone hates, it's the nature of man.


You're established you hate but not that everyone does. I know many who don't.

----------

MrogersNhood (06-05-2018)

----------


## patrickt

> Man is evil, always has been always will be. By your own "Word of God"  >>> The number of the beast 666, it is a HUMAN number. We were Mcreated evil.
> 
> ... or as an atheist, read the history of man, we have always been and always will be at war, killing raping and committing every atrocity imaginable not only against ourselves but all of nature.


Man is not definitely evil. Christians believe that but not rational people.

----------

MrogersNhood (06-05-2018),Rita Marley (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> You're established you hate but not that everyone does. I know many who don't.


True, most delude themselves into believing that they don't hate, just everyone else, or everyone on the other side is filled with hate.

The reality is we all hate. Those who hate Nazis are just as hate filled as the Nazis.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## patrickt

> The _Masterpiece_ decision sure does have the LBGTQWERTY community worked up.    They cannot imagine anything not being deemed subsidiary to their perversion/insanity.
> 
> A 7-2 decision means a quick reversal is not likely.


What's to reverse? The court found the Colorado civil rights commission to be bigoted and biased based o their own words. If they'd kept their mouths' shut they could have hanged the baker.

----------


## patrickt

> "Acceptance" is nothing more than a passive aggressive way of a wussified way of tacit support.


Ridiculous. Acceptance simply means another person is free to do as he wishes even if you think it's wrong, irrational, or bad. I accept your beliefs although I give you no tacit support for your madness. I do support our Constitution but that isn't passive.

----------


## patrickt

> No one survives this life. That should be a clue for you.


That's true, Rita, although Christians try to convince people they can live forever. Every who is born, dies, but not all live. Some just sit.

Anyone who feels they need saving should change how they live.

----------

Rita Marley (06-05-2018)

----------


## patrickt

> I have an eternal soul, therefore I can not die, unless "God" kills me.


Another irrational belief. I'm shocked.

----------


## Knightkore

> True, most delude themselves into believing that they don't hate, just everyone else, or everyone on the other side is filled with hate.
> 
> The reality is we all hate. Those who hate Nazis are just as hate filled as the Nazis.


Damn it.....I hate you..... :Smiley ROFLMAO: 




{Perhaps you have a point on this.}

----------


## Tennyson

> "Far Enough" = The State Cannot Compel One Citizen to Provide Services To Another.
> 
> What's complicated about that?
> 
> Never read the Thirteenth Amendment?
> 
> 
> 
> This IS NOT about religion.


The state of Colorado was forcing the baker to make a statement. That is compelled speech. Just as speech is protected, being forced to make certain speech is just as protected.

----------


## Knightkore

> Ridiculous. Acceptance simply means another person is free to do as he wishes even if you think it's wrong, irrational, or bad. I accept your beliefs although I give you no tacit support for your madness. I do support our Constitution but that isn't passive.


Reasonable.  And I support your choice of beliefs or non-beliefs as the case may be.

----------


## patrickt

> True, most delude themselves into believing that they don't hate, just everyone else, or everyone on the other side is filled with hate.
> 
> The reality is we all hate. Those who hate Nazis are just as hate filled as the Nazis.


No, as a hater you are deluding  yourself to believe everyone hates. I was talking to a thief one day and he said, "Everyone will steal if they think they can get away with it." No, they don't but he's making quite clear that he will. Another man told me that all men cheat on their wives. No, they don't. Unless you accept the feminist position of going sixty seconds without serving a woman is cheating.

The Supreme Court decision is rather meaningless and the issue is still to be settled.
Christians are big on claiming privileges they wish to deny to everyone else.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Another irrational belief. I'm shocked.


I'm just going off the Christian belief. I don't believe I have a soul.

----------


## Morning Star

> No, as a hater you are deluding  yourself to believe everyone hates. I was talking to a thief one day and he said, "Everyone will steal if they think they can get away with it." No, they don't but he's making quite clear that he will. Another man told me that all men cheat on their wives. No, they don't. Unless you accept the feminist position of going sixty seconds without serving a woman is cheating.
> 
> The Supreme Court decision is rather meaningless and the issue is still to be settled.
> Christians are big on claiming privileges they wish to deny to everyone else.


Not the same thing, stealing and cheating are acts, hate is part of your psyche and everyone hates something. It is in fact a survival mechanism in it's purest form.

----------


## Tennyson

> I'm on the side of not being a hypocrite. So then, since you Christians are always saying Atheism is a religion and the 1st Amendment protects my religious right to be a bigot you would have no problem if I refused to sell goods and services from my store to Christians right?


Liberty in the Fifth Amendment is negative liberality, which means under property rights a business can do what ever they want regarding who they do business with. All of the rights in the first ten amendments are based on "life, liberty, and property." Property is one of those rights.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Liberty in the Fifth Amendment is negative liberality, which means under property rights a business can do what ever they want regarding who they do business with. All of the rights in the first ten amendments are based on "life, liberty, and property." Property is one of those rights.


This statement was meant as a test for hypocrisy, since he agreed to my statement I was able to conclude, on his part at least, there was no hypocrisy.

----------


## Tennyson

> This statement was meant as a test for hypocrisy, since he agreed to my statement I was able to conclude, on his part at least, there was no hypocrisy.


I am not addressing that argument. I am just pointing out that there is more to this than religion and the baker's argument was more than religion. 

In my opinion; when the case was appealed to the Supreme Court, it should have been rejected for lack of jurisdiction. That would have been following the Constitution.

----------


## Morning Star

> it should have been rejected for lack of jurisdiction.


Because the SC has no authority over the rights of property or religion? Can you clarify this.

----------


## Tennyson

> Because the SC has no authority over the rights of property or religion? Can you clarify this.


The First Congress rejected Madison's proposal to give courts jurisdiction over the first ten amendments; there is no Article III jurisdiction over the amendments; there is no Article III federal question jurisdiction, which was brought up by the Founders; and the reason that the First Amendment's reads " Congress shall make no law" rather than "The federal government shall make no law" was because there is no Article II or Article III power over the first ten amendments or state laws other than a conflict with an Article I power.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> The First Congress rejected Madison's proposal to give courts jurisdiction over the first ten amendments; there is no Article III jurisdiction over the amendments; there is no Article III federal question jurisdiction, which was brought up by the Founders; and the reason that the First Amendment's reads " Congress shall make no law" rather than "The federal government shall make no law" was because there is no Article II or Article III power over the first ten amendments or state laws other than a conflict with an Article I power.


Interesting does that then include all federal gun laws?

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Tennyson

> Interesting does that then include all federal gun laws?


Yes.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),Morning Star (06-05-2018)

----------


## Tennyson

> Interesting does that then include all federal gun laws?


This is how it started. Madison wanted to insert the amendments into the body of the Constitution where they applied. This is the reason for the order they are in.

Madison on June 8, 1789, regarding the amendments he proposed: 

 If they are incorporated into the constitution, independent tribunals of justice will consider themselves in a peculiar manner the guardians of those rights; they will be an impenetrable bulwark against every assumption of power in the legislative or executive; they will be naturally led to resist every encroachment upon rights expressly stipulated for in the constitution by the declaration of rights.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),MrogersNhood (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

One thing is for sure, the FF seriously underestimated those that would subvert the constitution. IMO they should have made it so that any violation of ones constitutional oath is treason and punishable by an expeditious death.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## MrogersNhood

> No one survives this life. That should be a clue for you.


Sho 'nuff dont!  :Thumbsup20: 

Make the best of whatcha got.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),Rita Marley (06-05-2018)

----------


## MrogersNhood

> Interesting does that then include all federal gun laws?


Damn sure does. People should be allowed to have whatever they want, as far as that's concerned.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),Morning Star (06-05-2018)

----------


## MrogersNhood

> Where did I say he should be forced to?



Bake a cake when they didn't want to, under penalty of law.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Bake a cake when they didn't want to, under penalty of law.


I never said that.

----------


## Wiser Now

> Decorating a cake is not participating or celebrating, it's just your job, but I can see how it could be spun that way to justify your bigotry.
> 
> That's the best part about leftist ideology like religion, it can be spun to mean anything you need it to mean for any given situation.


Providing food or any service IS participation. If you have o be present at the venue during any part of the party, you are a participant.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),MrogersNhood (06-05-2018)

----------


## Wiser Now

> Man is evil, always has been always will be. By your own "Word of God"  >>> The number of the beast 666, it is a HUMAN number. We were created evil.
> 
> ... or as an atheist, read the history of man, we have always been and always will be at war, killing raping and committing every atrocity imaginable not only against ourselves but all of nature.


No, man was not created evil. Evil IS THE ABSENCE OF GOD.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),MrogersNhood (06-05-2018)

----------


## Wiser Now

> Then we shouldn't need saving.


Man chose to become evil. So did Satan for that matter. Yes, we need saving, we brought this on ourselves. Just like the five year old kid who takes a pack of gum from the store when Mom wasn't looking, we chose to sin. The kid knew it was wrong, and did it anyway. A wise parent will take the child back to the store to apologize to the manager.
This argument is really about  gays, and women who want abortions wanting to be allowed to believe they are not sinning by forcing society, and especially Christians, to remain silent.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),MrogersNhood (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Providing food or any service IS participation. If you have o be present at the venue during any part of the party, you are a participant.


Decorating a cake is not being present at or participating in the event.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Wiser Now

> I'm just going off the Christian belief. I don't believe I have a soul.


You thoughts, your emotions, the hatred you are so proud of are all the product of your soul. But, in a way, you are correct: "You do not have a soul. You ARE a soul. You have a body." CS Lewis. Your soul is eternal, it does not die. If you choose to spend eternity away from God, He will not force you to do otherwise. If you haven't read Lewis's "Mere Christianity", I recommend you do so.

----------


## Morning Star

> No, man was not created evil. Evil IS THE ABSENCE OF GOD.


God is Evil as much as he is Good, God is all things.

----------


## MrogersNhood

> Man chose to become evil. So did Satan for that matter. Yes, we need saving, we brought this on ourselves. Just like the five year old kid who takes a pack of gum from the store when Mom wasn't looking, we chose to sin. The kid knew it was wrong, and did it anyway. A wise parent will take the child back to the store to apologize to the manager.
> This argument is really about  gays, and women who want abortions wanting to be allowed to believe they are not sinning by forcing society, and especially Christians, to remain silent.


IMO, it's more like homosexuals forcing normal people to accept them using the law to do it with.

It's like this:

I don't care what you do in your bedroom.

Don't be faggoty in front of children.

Hell no I don't have to participate in your bullshit or regard it as normal, because it isn't, I can't do that, sorry.

----------

Sled Dog (06-05-2018)

----------


## Wiser Now

> Decorating a cake is not being present at or participating in the event.


Wedding cakes are heavy and put together in sections. They are almost always delivered to the venue as a result of their construction. Providing food is absolutely participation.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> This argument is really about gays, and women who want abortions wanting to be allowed to believe they are not sinning by forcing society, and especially Christians, to remain silent.


No what it is really about (From a much higher perspective) is people that don't care if they sin, don't care about Christians judgments and would rather they mind their own business. That being said in this specific argument these people should just find another baker that does not have an issue with baking them a cake and not make a federal case out of it or force them to go against their beliefs. Let's just not pretend their is no hypocrisy or hatred under the hood.

----------


## Knightkore

> Decorating a cake is not being present at or participating in the event.


What is YOUR definition of participation?

*legal          Definition of participation*                                                                                                                                                                                     1                                                       *:* the action or state of taking part in something: as      
                                                        a                                                       *:* association with  others in a relationship (as a partnership) or an enterprise usually on a  formal basis with specified rights and obligations                               
a loan made directly or in participation with a bank

                                             b                                                       *:* profit sharing 

                                                  2 a                                                       *:* something in which shares are taken by more than one party      
                                             b                                                       *:* something that results in a share (as of a distribution)      

Participation | Definition of Participation by Merriam-Webster

*Definition of participation for Students* *:* the act of joining with others in doing something                              
Class _participation_ counts toward your grade.


             {If a student is absent from class but can still make say their science project.  They have participated.  No need to be there.}

----------


## Morning Star

> Wedding cakes are heavy and put together in sections. They are almost always delivered to the venue as a result of their construction. Providing food is absolutely participation.


Delivering a cake is not participating in the wedding when the pizza delivery boy delivers my pizza is he participating in my dinner?

----------


## Knightkore

> No what it is really about (From a much higher perspective) is people that don't care if they sin, don't care about Christians judgments and would rather they mind their own business. That being said in this specific argument these people should just find another baker that does not have an issue with baking them a cake and not make a federal case out of it or force them to go against their beliefs. Let's just not pretend their is no hypocrisy or hatred under the hood.


I get it.  You stand with the plight of the LGBTQ people who hold that Christians hate them.


This is your heavy handed implication.

----------


## Knightkore

> Delivering a cake is not participating in the wedding when the pizza delivery boy delivers my pizza is he participating in my dinner?


Uh yeah.  He is.

----------

Wiser Now (06-05-2018)

----------


## Wiser Now

> God is Evil as much as he is Good, God is all things.


NO, God cannot be evil. EVIL IS THE ABSENCE OF GOD.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Uh yeah.  He is.


No he's not. Not at all. I swear the lengths you Christians will go through to twist the reality of the situation is astonishing. I suppose that the delivery guy that dropped off my washer and drier set is participating in doing my laundry then? The mechanic that changed my oil is participating in my daily commute? The mail man is participating in paying my bills?

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> NO, God cannot be evil. EVIL IS THE ABSENCE OF GOD.


Without God there is nothing, therefore "God" is all things, both good and evil.

Are you going to argue that evil exists without "God"? Evil created itself and created all that is evil independent of "God"? Satan is the creator.

----------


## Knightkore

> No he's not. Not at all. I swear the lengths you Christians will go through to twist the reality of the situation is astonishing. I suppose that the delivery guy that dropped off my washer and drier set is participating in doing my laundry then? The mechanic that changed my oil is participating in my daily commute? The mail man is participating in paying my bills?


Without their provision you cannot wash laundry.  Change oil.  OR pay bills.

They are providing you with the means to do what you do.  That is a form of participation.

----------


## Morning Star

> I get it.  You stand with the plight of the LGBTQ people who hold that Christians hate them.
> This is your heavy handed implication.


I made no such statement, I am saying Christians hate them. I could not care less about their plight.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Wiser Now

> No what it is really about (From a much higher perspective) is people that don't care if they sin, don't care about Christians judgments and would rather they mind their own business. That being said in this specific argument these people should just find another baker that does not have an issue with baking them a cake and not make a federal case out of it or force them to go against their beliefs. Let's just not pretend their is no hypocrisy or hatred under the hood.


This isn't about obtaining a wedding cake. It IS about forcing Christians to bow to the will of the gays. It IS about the silencing of Christians so the gays can believe they aren't sinning. And in the end, this IS about the left eradicating Christianity altogether. That is their ultimate goal.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018),Sled Dog (06-05-2018)

----------


## Wiser Now

> Delivering a cake is not participating in the wedding when the pizza delivery boy delivers my pizza is he participating in my dinner?


Yes he is. Without his  participation you have NO dinner.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Without their provision you cannot wash laundry.  Change oil.  OR pay bills.
> 
> They are providing you with the means to do what you do.  That is a form of participation.


What a load of crap. If that is the case then everyone participates in everything everyone else does.

----------


## Morning Star

> This isn't about obtaining a wedding cake. It IS about forcing Christians to bow to the will of the gays. It IS about the silencing of Christians so the gays can believe they aren't sinning. And in the end, this IS about the left eradicating Christianity altogether. That is their ultimate goal.


tinfoil.jpg

----------


## Knightkore

> Without God there is nothing, therefore "God" is all things, both good and evil.
> 
> Are you going to argue that evil exists without "God"? Evil created itself and created all that is evil independent of "God"? Satan is the creator.


Evil exists did not "create" itself.  Evil is a choice to go against God.  Evil is a perverts that which is good.  Or tries to.  Evil cannot create.  But it can have the free will to choose to go against God.  Against good.

God did not "create" evil.

And NO there is no evil in God.

----------

Wiser Now (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Yes he is. Without his  participation you have NO dinner.


So if you are a mechanic you participated in the pickle puffer wedding too because without the car the baker couldn't drive the cake to the wedding.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> What a load of crap. If that is the case then everyone participates in everything everyone else does.


In one way or another.....we are our brother's keeper.  Yes.

----------


## Wiser Now

> No he's not. Not at all. I swear the lengths you Christians will go through to twist the reality of the situation is astonishing. I suppose that the delivery guy that dropped off my washer and drier set is participating in doing my laundry then? The mechanic that changed my oil is participating in my daily commute? The mail man is participating in paying my bills?


Can you do your laundry without the washer and dryer? Drive without oil? Pay your bills without the mail? You can do the bills electronically, yes.

The point is that by providing goods and services to others WE ARE ALL PARTICIPATING IN EACH OTHER'S LIVES. YES.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> I made no such statement, I am saying Christians hate them. I could not care less about their plight.


 :Lame:

----------


## Knightkore

> I made no such statement, I am saying Christians hate them. I could not care less about their plight.


As you wait to come out of the closet.....we do not hate you.

----------


## Wiser Now

> In one way or another.....we are our brother's keeper.  Yes.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Evil exists did not "create" itself.  Evil is a choice to go against God.  Evil is a perverts that which is good.  Or tries to.  Evil cannot create.  But it can have the free will to choose to go against God.  Against good.
> 
> God did not "create" evil.
> 
> And NO there is no evil in God.


Evil just exists huh? It did not have to be created. Interesting.

There is no evil in "God"? Jealousy is evil "I am a jealous "God". Envy is evil "Thou shalt not have any "God" before me. Hatred is evil "God" hates sinners. Genocide is evil "God" wiped out millions of men and all the animals on Earth save 2 of each. Holding one man accountable for the sins of another is evil. "God" holds all men to the sin of Adam, original sin. I could go on and on.

----------

Knightkore (06-05-2018)

----------


## Wiser Now

> I made no such statement, I am saying Christians hate them. I could not care less about their plight.


Christians hate the sin in obedience to God, who also hates sin. When we ask God to overlook our sin, we make God an accessory to the sin He hates. We do not hate the sinner, and we will not make ourselves an accessory to sin if we can avoid it. If you want to hate us for that, then so be it.

----------


## Morning Star

> As you wait to come out of the closet.....we do not hate you.


.... and now you bare false witness against me. I point out the truth, that there is hatred in all of us, and your hatred of this truth drives you to sin. Interesting.

----------


## Knightkore

> Evil just exists huh? It did not have to be created. Interesting.
> 
> There is no evil in "God"? Jealousy is evil "I am a jealous "God". Envy is evil "Thou shalt not have any "God" before me. Hatred is evil "God" hates sinners. Genocide is evil "God" wiped out millions of men and all the animals on Earth save 2 of each. Holding one man accountable for the sins of another is evil. "God" holds all men to the sin of Adam, original sin. I could go on and on.


Now you're projecting your own flawed and sinful humanity upon God.  Based on what?  Certain translations of the Bible?  Perhaps learn what those words mean in the ORIGINAL language.  

I find it fascinating that you......oh never mind.

So, out of the closet yet?

----------


## Knightkore

> .... and now you bare false witness against me. I point out the truth, that there is hatred in all of us, and your hatred of this truth drives you to sin. Interesting.


What false witness?  You've been pointing the fingers at ALL Christians accusing us all of hating those lost in the sin of homosexuality.  I'm just having some cruel fun with a fly ripping its wings off.  Just before I get a magnifying glass to burn it.

----------


## Wiser Now

> Evil just exists huh? It did not have to be created. Interesting.
> 
> There is no evil in "God"? Jealousy is evil "I am a jealous "God". Envy is evil "Thou shalt not have any "God" before me. Hatred is evil "God" hates sinners. Genocide is evil "God" wiped out millions of men and all the animals on Earth save 2 of each. Holding one man accountable for the sins of another is evil. "God" holds all men to the sin of Adam, original sin. I could go on and on.


EVIL IS THE ABSENCE OF GOD. "You shall have no other god's before me." Don't waste your time praying to useless idols made from metal or wood. How is that evil?

God Hates sin. He has given us a way to atone for it.

----------

Rita Marley (06-05-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

{Okay @Morning Star.....just for you.  A peace offering.  And funny as hell.}

----------


## Morning Star

> Now you're projecting your own flawed and sinful humanity upon God.  Based on what?  Certain translations of the Bible?  Perhaps learn what to those words mean in the ORIGINAL language.  
> 
> I find it fascinating that you......oh never mind.
> 
> So, out of the closet yet?


 :Smiley ROFLMAO:  Everything about religion is projecting human qualities on the "God" it created, right down to the petty emotions that rules our pathetic lives. Do you really think an all knowing, all powerful, omnipotent "God" would really succumb to petty jealousy? Over what? He is the only "God" there is, so he's jealous of his creation worshiping  some made up pretend image of a "God" instead? Knowing full well the creation is far too stupid to really understand anything in the first place?

----------


## Morning Star

> {Okay @Morning Star.....just for you.  A peace offering.  And funny as hell.}


I'm just in it for the debate, I have no malice towards Christians.

----------


## Knightkore



----------


## Rita Marley

> Everything about religion is projecting human qualities on the "God" it created, right down to the petty emotions that rules our pathetic lives. Do you really think an all knowing, all powerful, omnipotent "God" would really succumb to petty jealousy? Over what? He is the only "God" there is, so he's jealous of his creation worshiping  some made up pretend image of a "God" instead? Knowing full well the creation is far too stupid to really understand anything in the first place?


Since He is real, He wants us to believe the truth. Would I be your true friend if I led you to Baal?

And are you really too stupid to understand? We may be making progress.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Your paranoia isn't my problem and I'm not the glosser. But, I'm glad to see you'll support female genital mutilation if it's based on a religious demand. I'm also glad you'll fight against a law prohibiting businesses from working on Sunday.
> 
> I certainly don't hate Christians. I don't even hate the ones who knock on my door or want to kill real witches and atheists. I leave the hatred to you and yours. I also, unlike Christians, don't hate other religions, either.



what's your stance on male genital mutilation?

----------


## Sled Dog

> He should participate and celebrate their sins with them, and leave the judgment to God. Good call.



There's sarcasm in there.

The baker should bake the cake, or not, as he pleases, for whatever reason makes him happy.

If the baker doesn't like homos, he doesn't have to participate in their weddings, or sell them ANYTHING.

If the baker doesn't like black people...no "kwanzaaaaaa" kakes.

If the baker doesn't like muslims, he can make all the cakes celebrating the Rape of Alishya as he desires, and keep them in the front window, too.


What's anyone's religion got to do with it?

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018),Rita Marley (06-05-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Decorating a cake is not participating or celebrating, it's just your job, but I can see how it could be spun that way to justify your bigotry.
> 
> That's the best part about leftist ideology like religion, it can be spun to mean anything you need it to mean for any given situation.



If the baker believed that putting his art into a wedding cake for a pair of fags was in some way his celebration of the event, who the hell are you to argue otherwise?

Discuss the 13th Amendment, @Morning Star.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> There's sarcasm in there.
> 
> The baker should bake the cake, or not, as he pleases, for whatever reason makes him happy.
> 
> If the baker doesn't like homos, he doesn't have to participate in their weddings, or sell them ANYTHING.
> 
> If the baker doesn't like black people...no "kwanzaaaaaa" kakes.
> 
> If the baker doesn't like muslims, he can make all the cakes celebrating the Rape of Alishya as he desires, and keep them in the front window, too.
> ...


Maybe he just finds the homos disgusting. You don't have to be religious to agree.

----------


## Sled Dog

> So now you know for certain what is in the heart of another person?


Some people have artificial valves.

ALL of them have blood.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

> No.  We were NOT created evil.


God is the source of evil in the world.

----------


## Sled Dog

> The _Masterpiece_ decision sure does have the LBGTQWERTY community worked up.    They cannot imagine anything not being deemed subsidiary to their perversion/insanity.
> 
> A 7-2 decision means a quick reversal is not likely.


The problem is the decision essentially claims that the state's mistake was making it's pro-fag / anti-Christian bigotry OBVIOUS.

Which means the same shit is going to continue to happen, but without the overt attacks on religious liberty.

----------


## Sled Dog

> Man is not definitely evil. Christians believe that but not rational people.



I guess you'll have to define "evil" and then "rational".

----------


## Rita Marley

Man is both good and evil. All of us have been both. Get with the program, people.

----------


## Sled Dog

> The state of Colorado was forcing the baker to make a statement. That is compelled speech. Just as speech is protected, being forced to make certain speech is just as protected.



Let's see....forcing a man to serve another is...


...a violation of religious liberty if the man has religious objections...

...a violation of freedom of speech, if, as you say, he's forced to make a statement of any sort....

...a definite violation of the Thirteenth Amendment...

...and a most severe violation of his Right of Refusal, which is embedded in the Ninth Amendment.

----------


## Sled Dog

> One thing is for sure, the FF seriously underestimated those that would subvert the constitution. IMO they should have made it so that any violation of ones constitutional oath is treason and punishable by an expeditious death.



Not really.

It's taken the Rodents more than two centuries to get to this point.

----------


## Sled Dog

> Decorating a cake is not being present at or participating in the event.



Ummm......you're full of it.

I owned a bakery for almost a decade and delivered THOUSANDS of gigantic desserts.

The wedding reception is RUINED if the cake is ugly.

The baker is participating in the celebration of the wedding as the third most visible feature in the room, and the only feature everyone else will get to taste.

How many wedding receptions have YOU attended?

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Wedding cakes are heavy and put together in sections. They are almost always delivered to the venue as a result of their construction. Providing food is absolutely participation.


CHEESECAKES.....super heavy, can be more than 50 lbs per tier.


I once assembled a wedding cake at the local Mormon Temple.

Samoans.  (No, not the Girls Scout Cookie.)

Turn out that EACH family in wedding party provides a FULL suite of food from drinks and appetizers to dessert.

Our client wanted really tall cake.

Eleven freaking tiers.

When it was assembled...and those families are WATCHING...the top tier was higher than the nearby basketball hoop.

The reception was in a gym.

Scariest cake I ever did, in the summer of 99.

Yeah, I friggin' PARTICIPATED in that reception.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018),Wiser Now (06-06-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Delivering a cake is not participating in the wedding when the pizza delivery boy delivers my pizza is he participating in my dinner?



Yes.


Unless you were having pizza for breakfast.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

> So if you are a mechanic you participated in the pickle puffer wedding too because without the car the baker couldn't drive the cake to the wedding.



No, the mechanic simply repaired/maintained a multi-purpose tool and has no knowledge of it's intended use or need to have such knowledge to complete his task.

A guy delivering a pizza is performing a specific task, delivering food.   He is thus component of your meal because he has knowledge of your intentions and desires.

And you don't know squat about the baking industry.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018),Wiser Now (06-06-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Maybe he just finds the homos disgusting. You don't have to be religious to agree.


I find the laser-like focus on only the religious aspect of this issue a distressingly successful ploy by the Rodents to plaster over their real objectives.

Their hysteria about the religious views prevents any discussion by the medea (who are in agreement with the Rodents, of course) and by the politicians, about the core issue.

The government of this country, under the Constitution, CANNOT MANDATE behaviors.

Congress can raise an Army by the draft...but that's not expressly stated in the Constitution and can be argued.

But there the ban on slavery in the Thirteenth Amendment, and you could just imagine what the damn slave-driving Rodents with their negroes safely on the Vote Rodent plantation would say if anyone visible shined the focus of this discussion on the premier anti-slavery amendment in the Constitution.

----------


## Sled Dog

> Man is both good and evil. All of us have been both. Get with the program, people.



Both "good" and "evil" are terms coined by people to judge the behaviors of others, and themselves, if they're honest and objective.

"Evil" acts are acts people don't want performed on themselves and don't wish them performed on others.

Abortion is one of the Ultimate Evil acts.

But not to someone stupid enough to vote Rodent.   To them, opposing the murder of innocent babies is the Ultimate Evil.

There is NO objective definition of "evil", nor of "good".

----------


## Frankenvoter

Two men take a knee at Donald Trump event

Lefty always seems to have an odd or an end at the ready to protest whatever the issue du jour is, and so at the event yesterday after putting thier gerbils away for safe keeping these two guys who had access to the event for whatever reason used that access to help the wife beating dog fighting kneelers out with their issue, and feel better about thier own having gotten the "news" attention (as if leftists need anything more than any generic demand for that to happen).

These guys will be found to be gay lovers, "married" at the moment and sniffling over not being able to get a Christian cake for thier reception (not just any cake will do for a gay "wedding", it has to be a Christian made cake, a cake that was FORCED to be baked, it tastes so much sweeter knowing they jammed thier fingers in the eye of the baker (and who knows where those fingers have been).

But alas it didn't go thier way, there was no mass lineups of "married couples" at the doors of Christian bakers the very next day with smug smirks requesting X-rated cakes of all varieties, and because they couldn't get thier smug on, they got thier protest on, to try and have a little of what they consider happiness in thier dark Godless world. 

That's my guess as to the backgrounds of these two guys, they might not know each other at all, they might be married with kids who knows, but what it appears to be, and appearances are everything these days, is two blowmos getting thier protest on by globbing on to anothers grievance because they had the access on this one. Who knows, #BLDM might be there for them down the road (as if).

----------


## Frankenvoter



----------


## Knightkore

> God is the source of evil in the world.


God is the source of good.  The devil is the source of evil.

----------


## Morning Star

> God is the source of good.  The devil is the source of evil.


So the Devil created himself, he is a "God" too?

----------


## Morning Star

> And you don't know squat about the baking industry.


True but I know an asinine argument when I hear one. The pizza man knows nothing of my intentions or desires. What if after the Christian Pizza man drops off my pizza I use the grease to lube up my boyfriend's ass, does that make the Pizza man complicit in my anal sin?

----------


## Knightkore

> So the Devil created himself, he is a "God" too?


 :Geez: 

That doesn't even make sense.

And you expect us to take you seriously on evolution when a simple concept like this you intentionally get wrong?

Your credibility is about as shot as Sooda.

----------


## Dr. Felix Birdbiter

> So the Devil created himself, he is a "God" too?



Satan was a fallen angel who defied God and wanted to be as powerful as God.  The Devil did not create himself, he was created by God but went astray.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> True but I know an asinine argument when I hear one. The pizza man knows nothing of my intentions or desires. What if after the Christian Pizza man drops off my pizza I use the grease to lube up my boyfriend's ass, does that make the Pizza man complicit in my anal sin?


A slight difference.  The same sex couple did not hide behind closed doors.  They were loud and proud as they say to want to get married and want the Christian bakery to bake them a cake.  Intentions FULLY known.

No excuse after that.

You DO get the difference?  I don't have crayons and construction paper to draw you a picture book.

----------


## Morning Star

> Satan was a fallen angel who defied God and wanted to be as powerful as God.  The Devil did not create himself, he was created by God but went astray.


God created Satan, therefore "God" created evil.

----------


## Dr. Felix Birdbiter

Another name for Lucifer is Morning Star.  Does Morning Star consider himself a God?

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> A slight difference.  The same sex couple did not hide behind closed doors.  They were loud and proud as they say to want to get married and want the Christian bakery to bake them a cake.  Intentions FULLY known.
> 
> No excuse after that.
> 
> You DO get the difference?  I don't have crayons and construction paper to draw you a picture book.


So if I call a Christian pizza place and order a pizza for me and my gay lover they should refuse to deliver my pizza?

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Another name for Lucifer is Morning Star.  Does Morning Star consider himself a God?


Yes.

----------


## Rita Marley

> God created Satan, therefore "God" created evil.


The angels were given free will also, just like you. That some chose evil is on them. Just like us.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018),Wiser Now (06-06-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> So if I call a Christian pizza place and order a pizza for me and my gay lover they should refuse to deliver my pizza?


If you tell them you are gay.  Then again, what would be the point other that stirring trouble up letting a pizza place know your gay?  That kind bullshit is what liberals do.  Really fascinating that you think a LOT like them.  Scary actually.

Is that closet door a bit more open today?

----------


## Wiser Now

> God is the source of evil in the world.


It is impossible for God to be the source of evil when evil is the ABSENCE of God.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> So if I call a Christian pizza place and order a pizza for me and my gay lover they should refuse to deliver my pizza?


The baker won't bake you a Halloween cake or a cake celebrating your divorce, either.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018),Wiser Now (06-06-2018)

----------


## Wiser Now

> CHEESECAKES.....super heavy, can be more than 50 lbs per tier.
> 
> 
> I once assembled a wedding cake at the local Mormon Temple.
> 
> Samoans.  (No, not the Girls Scout Cookie.)
> 
> Turn out that EACH family in wedding party provides a FULL suite of food from drinks and appetizers to dessert.
> 
> ...


Wow! I would love to have seen that. Yes, you absolutely participated in that reception.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018)

----------


## Pork Chop

If there is no definition of good and evil, there is no right and wrong, which is a liberal argument. God gave free will and also a Biblical choice. It is up to each to decide which path they choose.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018),Rita Marley (06-06-2018),Wiser Now (06-06-2018)

----------


## Wiser Now

> So the Devil created himself, he is a "God" too?


No. God created Satan with a free will, which Satan used to rebel against God. Satan wants nothing to do with God, ergo evil is by definition the absence of God. In fact, Satan wanted to exalt himself above God, which again results in the absence of God.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018),Rita Marley (06-06-2018)

----------


## patrickt

Religious fanatics aside, I don't believe the plethora of gays finding Christian bakers who won't bake unique cakes is an accident. I often wonder how many bakers the couples, and their attorney, had to visit to find one that would refuse service.

Now, for the record and for the fanatics, I support the Constitution and I don't hate people because of their religion. I see no reason a majority group like Christians should become a "protected class" like gays, women, and the handicapped.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018)

----------


## Wiser Now

> God created Satan, therefore "God" created evil.


No, because GOD did not cause Satan to rebel and exalt himself. That was Satan's choice, to reject God. Again, the undeniable conclusion that evil is the absence of God. God created Satan with the same free will He gave you. Satan chose to reject God, it was his choice alone. God did not force Satan to reject Him, anymore than God has forced YOU to reject Him. You have done that of your own free will.

----------


## Morning Star

> No. God created Satan with a free will, which Satan used to rebel against God. Satan wants nothing to do with God, ergo evil is by definition the absence of God. In fact, Satan wanted to exalt himself above God, which again results in the absence of God.


This is an illogical statement. If Satan is exalted above God there is no absence of God. God would still exist but would be beneath Satan.

----------


## Wiser Now

> Another name for Lucifer is Morning Star.  Does Morning Star consider himself a God?


While Isaiah did refer to Satan "oh star of the morning" the "MorningStar" is Jesus:

[ _The Final Invitation ] I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you and to give you assurance of these things for the churches. I am the Root (the Source, the Life) and the Offspring of David, the radiant and bright Morning Star.   Revelation 22:16_

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018),Morning Star (06-06-2018)

----------


## Wiser Now

> So if I call a Christian pizza place and order a pizza for me and my gay lover they should refuse to deliver my pizza?


They should have the right to do that, if they believe it is a violation of their beliefs.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018)

----------


## dinosaur

> So if I call a Christian pizza place and order a pizza for me and my gay lover they should refuse to deliver my pizza?


"Hello, this is Luigi's Pizzeria.  How may we help you?"

"Hi this is Morning Star.  Please deliver to me a pepperoni pizza with fiery hot sauce."

"Morning Star?  THE Morning Star"?

"Yes, I am the ONE."

"Sorry, all of our drivers are scared for their lives.  You will have to pick up yourself."

San Francisco  San Francisco Citizen

Luigi's doesn't care if you and your bud are gay, but you have have a scary avatar.  Don't worry, you are not being singled out, Luigi's won't deliver to Sled Dog either; his avatar is too scary too!   :Cool20:

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018),Morning Star (06-06-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> No, because GOD did not cause Satan to rebel and exalt himself. That was Satan's choice, to reject God. Again, the undeniable conclusion that evil is the absence of God. God created Satan with the same free will He gave you. Satan chose to reject God, it was his choice alone. God did not force Satan to reject Him, anymore than God has forced YOU to reject Him. You have done that of your own free will.


In this case "Evil" is not a thing in and of itself. It is a choice. Choice does not exist without existence. Therefore when God created existence he created evil and when he created free will he created the ability to choose. God created all things, all things good and all things evil and the ability to choose. The result of that choice is life or death. Ergo Jesus: "I am the way the truth and the light, the way of eternal life" This is the choice of faith or not. Somehow I find it absurd to believe that the choice hinges on who you bake cakes for.

----------


## Wiser Now

> This is an illogical statement. If Satan is exalted above God there is no absence of God. God would still exist but would be beneath Satan.


I didn't say Satan succeeded. I said he wanted to. He tried. He is still trying, through humans filled with hatred of God. Satan has NOT be exalted above God.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018),Morning Star (06-06-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> I didn't say Satan succeeded. I said he wanted to. He tried. He is still trying, through humans filled with hatred of God. Satan has NOT be exalted above God.


No, I'm not saying he succeeded, I'm saying if he did, there would still be no such thing as absence of God. God can not be absent.

----------


## Wiser Now

> In this case "Evil" is not a thing in and of itself. It is a choice. Choice does not exist without existence. Therefore when God created existence he created evil and when he created free will he created the ability to choose. God created all things, all things good and all things evil and the ability to choose. The result of that choice is life or death. Ergo Jesus: "I am the way the truth and the light, the way of eternal life" This is the choice of faith or not. Somehow I find it absurd to believe that the choice hinges on who you bake cakes for.


Talk about an illogical argument. God cannot create something He has no part of. Evil is the absence of God, He has no part of it. But you have taught us all something. Atheists desperately need to believe God created evil so they can use that lie to justify their hatred of God. It is Satan's second oldest lie, the first being "Did God really say you will surely die (if you eat that fruit)?"

----------

Rita Marley (06-06-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> In this case "Evil" is not a thing in and of itself. It is a choice. Choice does not exist without existence. Therefore when God created existence he created evil and when he created free will he created the ability to choose. God created all things, all things good and all things evil and the ability to choose. The result of that choice is life or death. Ergo Jesus: "I am the way the truth and the light, the way of eternal life" This is the choice of faith or not. Somehow I find it absurd to believe that the choice hinges on who you bake cakes for.


You think people should be forced to bake cakes? Maybe you think Satan should be forced to follow God.

If you were God, life would be much different.

----------


## patrickt

> This is an illogical statement. If Satan is exalted above God there is no absence of God. God would still exist but would be beneath Satan.


If you're going to require logic, evidence, facts, and proof then there can be no discussion of religion.

----------


## Rita Marley

> No, I'm not saying he succeeded, I'm saying if he did, there would still be no such thing as absence of God. God can not be absent.


His entire creation can be.

----------


## patrickt

> You think people should be forced to bake cakes? Maybe you think Satan should be forced to follow God.
> 
> If you were God, life would be much different.


I don't think bakers should be force to bake cakes whether it involves gays, Christians, Muslims, or Wookies. I think any business, that doesn't have a government-supported monopoly, should not be prohibited from telling any customer that they don't want his business.

At the same time, Christians should deal with the same rules and regulations as everyone else. Should a Christian be allowed to not serve a gay customer but a Muslim not? How about someone who is not religious but simply hates gays or blacks or the handicapped?

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> You think people should be forced to bake cakes? Maybe you think Satan should be forced to follow God.
> 
> If you were God, life would be much different.


I never said people should be forced to bake cakes, if you read and comprehend what I post what I am saying is there is no real reason not to bake a cake for any reason when your business is baking cakes. Religion is being used as an excuse to mask a hatred. Which I really do not oppose either, I have no issue with hate, my issue is the hypocrisy behind trying to deny it. The baker should just say, I hate fags and I dont bake cakes for fags. Hiding behind religion is just a way to save face, and yes it is hate on the fags part to purposefully choose a christian baker to expose it. Hate is what makes man's world go around. Man is evil, it is what we do. Just admit it, embrace it and move on.

----------


## Morning Star

> If you're going to require logic, evidence, facts, and proof then there can be no discussion of religion.


True. Religion holds no place in logic, evidence, facts or proof.

----------


## Morning Star

> His entire creation can be.


True

----------


## Morning Star

> Talk about an illogical argument. God cannot create something He has no part of. Evil is the absence of God, He has no part of it. But you have taught us all something. Atheists desperately need to believe God created evil so they can use that lie to justify their hatred of God. It is Satan's second oldest lie, the first being "Did God really say you will surely die (if you eat that fruit)?"


Logic, God created everything, nothing would exist without God.

If that is the logic, then it is illogical to say evil exists without having been created by God. The absence of God would be non-existence. In which case evil would not exist either.

----------


## Rita Marley

> I don't think bakers should be force to bake cakes whether it involves gays, Christians, Muslims, or Wookies. *I think any business, that doesn't have a government-supported monopoly, should be prohibited from telling any customer that they don't want his business.*
> 
> At the same time, Christians should deal with the same rules and regulations as everyone else. Should a Christian be allowed to not serve a gay customer but a Muslim not? How about someone who is not religious but simply hates gays or blacks or the handicapped?


Cool. Cant wait to order BLT's from a Jewish deli, followed by a ham sandwich from the muslims. 

I am against forced labor. If you don't want to sell to anybody for any reason, you shouldn't be forced to. Dats slavery right dere.

----------

Dr. Felix Birdbiter (06-06-2018),Knightkore (06-06-2018),Wiser Now (06-06-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> I never said people should be forced to bake cakes, if you read and comprehend what I post what I am saying is there is no real reason not to bake a cake for any reason when your business is baking cakes. Religion is being used as an excuse to mask a hatred. Which I really do not oppose either, I have no issue with hate, my issue is the hypocrisy behind trying to deny it. The baker should just say, I hate fags and I dont bake cakes for fags. Hiding behind religion is just a way to save face, and yes it is hate on the fags part to purposefully choose a christian baker to expose it. Hate is what makes man's world go around. Man is evil, it is what we do. Just admit it, embrace it and move on.


The baker bakes cakes for all and sundry. He refuses to decorate those that force him to blaspheme his own beliefs.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018)

----------


## Wiser Now

> No, I'm not saying he succeeded, I'm saying if he did, there would still be no such thing as absence of God. God can not be absent.


He an be ,and is, absent in people's lives.

----------


## Wiser Now

> Logic, God created everything, nothing would exist without God.
> 
> If that is the logic, then it is illogical to say evil exists without having been created by God. The absence of God would be non-existence. In which case evil would not exist either.


You exist without the presence of God in your life.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> You exist without the presence of God in your life.


If "God" exists he is still present I just don't believe it.

----------


## Dr. Felix Birdbiter

> The baker won't bake you a Halloween cake or a cake celebrating your divorce, either.



What if you got a divorce on Halloween?

----------

Rita Marley (06-06-2018)

----------


## patrickt

> Cool. Cant wait to order BLT's from a Jewish deli, followed by a ham sandwich from the muslims. 
> 
> I am against forced labor. If you don't want to sell to anybody for any reason, you shouldn't be forced to. Dats slavery right dere.


Rita, you're smarter than that. Would you order music for your wedding reception from the Christian baker? Why would a Jewish deli have BLTs but if they did you can bet your bippy they'd be selling them. Why would they have something they don't sell on the menu. And, why would you go in to a Italian restaurant and expect to order tacos?

As a business owner, any business that isn't a government-approved monopoly, should be allowed to serve, or not serve, whomever they want.

And, with equal protection under the law as the law of the land, why would any rational person support "victim groups" that makes sure people are not equal under the law?

----------


## Rita Marley

> Rita, you're smarter than that. Would you order music for your wedding reception from the Christian baker? Why would a Jewish deli have BLTs but if they did you can bet your bippy they'd be selling them. Why would they have something they don't sell on the menu. And, why would you go in to a Italian restaurant and expect to order tacos?
> 
> As a business owner, any business that isn't a government-approved monopoly, should be allowed to serve, or not serve, whomever they want.
> 
> And, with equal protection under the law as the law of the land, why would any rational person support "victim groups" that makes sure people are not equal under the law?


Because it's the same argument. Jewish delis sell sandwiches, but not certain kinds because of their religion.

This guy sells cakes, but not certain kinds because of his religion.

----------

Dr. Felix Birdbiter (06-06-2018),Knightkore (06-06-2018),Wiser Now (06-06-2018)

----------


## Wiser Now

> Logic, God created everything, nothing would exist without God.
> 
> If that is the logic, then it is illogical to say evil exists without having been created by God. The absence of God would be non-existence. In which case evil would not exist either.



"The absence of God would be non-existence." Only in the beginning. Since it is quite obvious that God does exist, and so do we, you cannot say the absence of God is non-existence. The absence of God in someone's life usually results in evil. God did not create evil. man did.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018)

----------


## Wiser Now

> If "God" exists he is still present I just don't believe it.


He is present in the lives of others. He is not present in your life unless you request Him to be.

----------

Knightkore (06-06-2018),Rita Marley (06-06-2018)

----------


## Pork Chop

If I am forced to sell to others, Muslims for example, then I demand the Muslims sell bacon to me and not refuse on religious grounds.  :Smile:

----------

Rita Marley (06-06-2018)

----------


## Dan40

> "Far Enough" = The State Cannot Compel One Citizen to Provide Services To Another.
> 
> What's complicated about that?
> 
> Never read the Thirteenth Amendment?
> 
> 
> 
> This IS NOT about religion.


The local paper said that is was a CLOSE decision.

7 to 2.

Anyone that wonders what liberal biased reporting looks like, there is is.

7/2 was a close decision.

----------


## Sled Dog

> God is the source of good.  The devil is the source of evil.


Oh.  

I didn't realize.

Help me to understand.  Where did the devil come from?

----------


## Sled Dog

> True but I know an asinine argument when I hear one. The pizza man knows nothing of my intentions or desires. What if after the Christian Pizza man drops off my pizza I use the grease to lube up my boyfriend's ass, does that make the Pizza man complicit in my anal sin?



I'll say "Yes for 1000, Alex" because I don't like retarded arguments.

And you still don't know squat about the wedding business.

----------


## Sled Dog

> Satan was a fallen angel who defied God and wanted to be as powerful as God.  The Devil did not create himself, he was created by God but went astray.



Oh.

So God created the devil.

And the devil is evil.

That means God created evil.

You are trained in logic, aren't you?

----------


## Sled Dog

> Another name for Lucifer is Morning Star.


Actually, "Lucifer" means "The Shining One", or since the root of Lucifer is "lux" in latin, "light".

God did say "let there be light", didn't they?





> Does Morning Star consider himself a God?


Who knows what imaginary beings think.  Who cares?

What's important is what do you think.

And the question is relevant.

Is Lucifer an independent being with free will which his Creator cannot control?

Then the following apply:

a) Lucifer is the very first Frankenstein's Monster ever.

And b) God is not all powerful.

We'll throw (a) away as an irrelevant talking point, saved for a later literary discussion.

Point (b) is important.

If you agree with (b), that God is not all powerful, then he can't do everything he wishes.

He has LIMITS.

If God IS omnipotent, then he's a monster, for he created his children in a garden KNOWING there were deadly snakes there and did not warn the innocent children about those hazards.    He's a Bad Parent.

We're getting a little far from the OP, ain't we?

----------


## Rita Marley

> Oh.
> 
> So God created the devil.
> 
> And the devil is evil.
> 
> That means God created evil.
> 
> You are trained in logic, aren't you?


Yes. Because you couldn't have free will if you had nothing to choose from.

----------


## Sled Dog

> So if I call a Christian pizza place and order a pizza for me and my gay lover they should refuse to deliver my pizza?


They can if they want to.

When does their property become your property, in a technical accounting sense of the term?

Until it becomes your property, regardless of when that happens, it's their property and what rights attach you to their property?

----------


## Sled Dog

> It is impossible for God to be the source of evil when evil is the ABSENCE of God.


But God is everywhere.

Isn't She?

I mean, God is all powerful, so who has the power to kick Him out of their hearts?

----------


## Rita Marley

> But God is everywhere.
> 
> Isn't She?
> 
> I mean, God is all powerful, so who has the power to kick Him out of their hearts?


Everyone with free will.

----------


## Sled Dog

> Wow! I would love to have seen that. Yes, you absolutely participated in that reception.



It was TERRIFYING.

The top tier was a 5-inch tier, with the little people on top, and by that time I was hanging onto the step-ladder with my right hand with the cake balanced on spatula in my left, reaching waaaaay over to set the tier.    I had to set the spatula flat onto the plastic platform and give it tiny little tugs to get my spatula back.   

I was afraid of falling into the cake and afraid of pulling the cake over.

Sooooo glad to collect the check for that one.

I'd have to dig through a large box of old photos, but it's probably around somewhere...

----------


## Sled Dog

> Everyone with free will.


If God is perfect and all powerful and all knowing, nobody has free will.

Which of the three Holy Attributes just listed are you going to erase or corrupt to retain your fantasy of free-will?

----------


## Rita Marley

> If God is perfect and all powerful and all knowing, nobody has free will.
> 
> Which of the three Holy Attributes just listed are you going to erase or corrupt to retain your fantasy of free-will?


He is all of those things. 

Some people reject Him, which proves they have free will to do so.

----------


## Sled Dog

> If there is no definition of good and evil, there is no right and wrong, which is a liberal argument. God gave free will and also a Biblical choice. It is up to each to decide which path they choose.



No, right and wrong are not the same as good and evil.

Those are four different words with four different meanings.

The SHADES of the words "good" and "right" overlap.

It's good to follow the law.

The law of Leviticus, I believe it's Leviticus, says that people who wear clothing of two different threads should be put to death.   No polyester/wool blends for the ancient Hebrews.

And it's evil to disobey the law, isn't it?

So thus it must be good to stone bi-threaded persons.

God made that law, not me, take it up with Her.

----------


## Sled Dog

> Religious fanatics aside, I don't believe the plethora of gays finding Christian bakers who won't bake unique cakes is an accident. I often wonder how many bakers the couples, and their attorney, had to visit to find one that would refuse service.
> 
> Now, for the record and for the fanatics, I support the Constitution and I don't hate people because of their religion. I see no reason a majority group like Christians should become a "protected class" like gays, women, and the handicapped.



Oh, no, that was clearly a deliberate act of Faggot Terrorism.

----------


## Sled Dog

> While Isaiah did refer to Satan "oh star of the morning" the "MorningStar" is Jesus:
> 
> [ _The Final Invitation ] I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you and to give you assurance of these things for the churches. I am the Root (the Source, the Life) and the Offspring of David, the radiant and bright Morning Star.   Revelation 22:16_



No.

For a long time people believed the Morning Star and the Evening Star to be two different objects.

Then again, the ancient Hebrews weren't very good at astronomy.

----------


## Sled Dog

> He is all of those things. 
> 
> Some people reject Him, which proves they have free will to do so.



Nope.

If he's all those things, there's no free will.


Here:  
The Logical Meaning of Sin

----------


## Thing 1

> "Rule Of Law: The 7-to-2 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in favor of a Christian baker who refused to make a custom wedding cake for a same-sex wedding ceremony was a minor victory for religious rights, freedom of speech and freedom of commerce. But it didn't go far enough."
> Supreme Court Half-Baked Decision On Rights Was Correct, But It Didnt Go Far Enough
> 
> Far enough? I wonder what far enough is? What this decision did was simply say that Colorado's blatantly biased civil rights commission went over the line in their decision against the baker. The members of the civil rights commission have been told that being biased, bigoted, and unfair is fine but keep your mouth shut.
> 
> As an atheist, I don't think it is a religious issue or should be a religious issue. We shouldn't have "victim groups" that get special treatment and businesses should be allowed to serve, or not, who they want as long as they don't have a government-supported monopoly.
> 
> Consider, if it is a religious issue then a Christian couple with a bed and breakfast could refuse to allow a gay couple a stay but a gay couple with a bed and breakfast could not deny a heterosexual customer a stay. 
> 
> The Constitution says, quite clearly, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...." I think it is significant that of the four issues in the First Amendment this one is first. It has been so twisted that the enforcement does not remotely respect the Constitution.


Your analysis is flawed Patrick. The baker did not refuse to serve gays, he refused to bake a cake for an immoral ceremony.  Whether you agree that the ceremony is immoral is irrelevant. The constitution allows for freedom of conscience, and making someone opposed to providing for a "homosexual wedding" do something against their will is involuntary servitude , prohibited by the 13th Amendment. But whites can't be slaves or oppressed, right?

----------


## Thing 1

> Well therein lies the problem, the religious want their religion protected, and the 1st amendment does that, it protects religion from the government, but not from private enterprise so in theory if I don't want to serve religious people in my business I shouldn't have to. Of course if I did this there would be the usual outcry of persecution. Yet in typical leftist and religious ideology there is nothing but hypocrisy in their ideology, the government is not allowed to discriminate against pickle puffers yet the baker has the religious right to be biased, bigoted, and unfair to homosexuals because their sky man says it is an abomination. 
> 
> So then how does the government protect the rights of pickle puffers against discrimination when it is also bound to protect the religious right to discriminate against pickle puffers. Even more hypocritical, the bible says not to judge and that the sin of one man is between him and "God" not between men. Yet every christian feels it is his right to judge pickle puffer's sins. Even more strange, this judgement is restricted to pickle puffers; I never heard of a baker refusing to bake a cake for an adulterer. I also can't imagine Jesus refusing to bake a cake for a pickle puffer when he was known to wash the feet of whores.


Can you explain how laws against murder are not religiously based?

----------


## Thing 1

> or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
> 
> {THIS is the part where atheists gloss over intentionally.  Another part?}
> 
> Congress shall make no law
> 
> {This only speaks of law makers.  That means the Senate and the House cannot make a law for or against religion.  Period.  Once again it limits ONE very important part of government.  Atheists ignore this too.}
> 
> Your unmitigated hatred of Christians is well known.


BUT, he claims to be a conservative. 

I can think of another conservative pretender with a canine based name. This guy thinks that_ I_ am a Rodent.

----------


## Thing 1

> "Far Enough" = The State Cannot Compel One Citizen to Provide Services To Another.
> 
> What's complicated about that?
> 
> Never read the Thirteenth Amendment?
> 
> 
> 
> This IS NOT about religion.


In that case Atheists should quit making it about religion. Are you a "moderate atheist"?

----------


## Thing 1

> the religious right to be biased, bigoted, and unfair to homosexuals because their sky man says it is an abomination
> 
> {So speaks the butthurt SJW atheist.}
> 
> I also can't imagine Jesus refusing to bake a cake for a pickle puffer when he was known to wash the feet of whores.
> 
> {Really?  PROVE it.  Or retract your disrespectful stance.  I'm tired of your bullying.  It stops on this thread.  Today.  You want to rumble.  It's on.}
> 
> <font color="#333333">


What is a "pickle puffer"? A queer? Jesus would build them a house or do any kind of carpentry job that his business provided. 

Jesus would never endorse (or provide a service) for a queer ceremony.

----------


## patrickt

> Can you explain how laws against murder are not religiously based?


Laws prohibiting businesses from being open on Sunday or Saturday may be religiously based. Laws prohibiting plural marriages may be. Laws saying members of certain religions can't hold public office would be. 

Laws against murder, against robbery, against rape, are not religiously based. Laws against fraud are obviously not based on any religion. These laws are simply necessary to maintain a civil society.  

If you want to see a society with religion dominating the law, visit Yemen. Or, when we get time travel, you could go back to 1692 and enjoy the trials in Salem.

----------

Morning Star (06-07-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Can you explain how laws against murder are not religiously based?


They say there are no stupid questions, but you just proved that there is. You seriously think everyone would just run around killing other people and no one would care if it wasn't for the belief in an imaginary sky man?

----------


## Morning Star

> In that case Atheists should quit making it about religion. Are you a "moderate atheist"?


This entire debate is about religion because you religious types made it about religion.

----------


## patrickt

Please note, Thing, that the baker in this case did not argue that businesses should be allowed to serve who they choose. That's the position I take.

He argued that his religious belief supersede the law. He made it about religion which should delight you. He is perfectly okay with atheists being forced to provide service to customers they don't want but not him.

In a Denver suburb they passed an ordinance prohibiting regularly scheduled meetings in homes more than once a month. A group that had prayer meetings every Wednesday night objected. They didn't object that the law was stupid, which it is, and oppressive, which it is, but they argued that Christians should be exempt. That's what we usually see.

----------

Knightkore (06-07-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> Please note, Thing, that the baker in this case did not argue that businesses should be allowed to serve who they choose. That's the position I take.
> 
> He argued that his religious belief supersede the law. He made it about religion which should delight you. He is perfectly okay with atheists being forced to provide service to customers they don't want but not him.
> 
> In a Denver suburb they passed an ordinance prohibiting regularly scheduled meetings in homes more than once a month. A group that had prayer meetings every Wednesday night objected. They didn't object that the law was stupid, which it is, and oppressive, which it is, but they argued that Christians should be exempt. That's what we usually see.


It's called the First Amendment.  Understand it.  Read it.  Re-read it.

The First Amendment supersedes any other "law" that forces false equality.  Period.

Unless you're telling me transgender gender fluid he/she/it is equal to YOU.

----------

MisterVeritis (06-07-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> In a Denver suburb they passed an ordinance prohibiting regularly scheduled meetings in homes more than once a month. A group that had prayer meetings every Wednesday night objected. They didn't object that the law was stupid, which it is, and oppressive, which it is, but they argued that Christians should be exempt. That's what we usually see.


Because believing in a sky man makes you special and above the law, got it.

Everyone else has to live under this stupid law but not Christians, cause we special.  :Moron: 
What's next reparations for Christians? Affirmative action? Taking a knee at sporting events?

----------

Knightkore (06-07-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> Nope.
> 
> If he's all those things, there's no free will.
> 
> 
> Here:  
> The Logical Meaning of Sin


Then there is no evil nor good. Nor God.

These things you believe by faith. Because you have the free will to believe them.

----------

Knightkore (06-07-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> Because believing in a sky man makes you special and above the law, got it.
> 
> Everyone else has to live under this stupid law but not Christians, cause we special. 
> What's next reparations for Christians? Affirmative action? Taking a knee at sporting events?


IT IS CALLED THE FIRST AMENDMENT!  PERIOD.  End of story.

And you want to make up laws against christians.....the government during Daniel's day did that.  Threw him in the lions den.  He didn't get eaten.  It was the ones that made the law.  God WILL protect His people.  You're walking a land mine field at this point.

I pray that God forgives you.

----------


## Knightkore

> Because believing in a sky man makes you special and above the law, got it.
> 
> Everyone else has to live under this stupid law but not Christians, cause we special. 
> What's next reparations for Christians? Affirmative action? Taking a knee at sporting events?


Subverting the freedom of assembly that is guaranteed in the First Amendment.  Gee, Hitler.....did you write your own Mein Kampf too?

You better appreciate christians will FIGHT these unConstitutional laws.  Once we stop, islam or liberalism gets all of America.

----------


## nonsqtr

> "Far Enough" = The State Cannot Compel One Citizen to Provide Services To Another.
> 
> What's complicated about that?
> 
> Never read the Thirteenth Amendment?
> 
> 
> 
> This IS NOT about religion.


Agreed. The federal government has NO AUTHORITY to compel anyone to enter into a private contract.

----------

Knightkore (06-07-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Subverting the freedom of assembly that is guaranteed in the First Amendment.  Gee, Hitler.....did you write your own Mein Kampf too?
> 
> You better appreciate christians will FIGHT these unConstitutional laws.  Once we stop, islam or liberalism gets all of America.


You miss the point, I am not supporting any of these laws, I'm asking why do you Christians always feel like your special and everyone else isn't? You Christians never say these laws are wrong for everyone, just wrong for Christians to be subject to them because you have ....

----------

Knightkore (06-07-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> You miss the point, I am not supporting any of these laws, I'm asking why do you Christians always feel like your special and everyone else isn't? You Christians never say these laws are wrong for everyone, just wrong for Christians to be subject to them because you have ....


Maybe some do.  I don't.  But then again.....when in atheism there is no wrong or right, no good or evil.....how does one decide about an unjust law?

Either way.....YOU and others get the benefit of christians setting things right through the proper legal system.

Eventually.....there may come a day.....where we say screw it.  What's the point?  Let islam/liberalism take over.  We are protected by God either way.  Now THAT would be selfish.  But you keep pressing on christians as you do......

Well.....there will be consequences.

----------


## Rita Marley

> You miss the point, I am not supporting any of these laws, I'm asking why do you Christians always feel like your special and everyone else isn't? You Christians never say these laws are wrong for everyone, just wrong for Christians to be subject to them because you have ....


I made the same argument against Jewish delis being forced to make BLT's with delicious bacon.

----------

Knightkore (06-07-2018),Morning Star (06-07-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> I made the same argument against Jewish delis being forced to make BLT's with delicious bacon.


Now THAT is just wrong!

----------

Knightkore (06-07-2018),Rita Marley (06-07-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Maybe some do. I don't. But then again.....when in atheism there is no wrong or right, no good or evil.....how does one decide about an unjust law?


That is a good question, for me, I look to the constitution.

Other than that right, wrong, good, evil, it is highly subjective I suppose.

----------

Knightkore (06-07-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Please note, Thing, that the baker in this case did not argue that businesses should be allowed to serve who they choose. That's the position I take.
> 
> He argued that his religious belief supersede the law. He made it about religion which should delight you. He is perfectly okay with atheists being forced to provide service to customers they don't want but not him.
> 
> In a Denver suburb they passed an ordinance prohibiting regularly scheduled meetings in homes more than once a month. A group that had prayer meetings every Wednesday night objected. They didn't object that the law was stupid, which it is, and oppressive, which it is, but they argued that Christians should be exempt. That's what we usually see.



He didn't argue that his religious beliefs superseded the law.

He argued that the First Amendment was superior to any and every state law, and federal law, too, for that matter.

----------


## Sled Dog

> Then there is no evil nor good. Nor God.
> 
> These things you believe by faith. Because you have the free will to believe them.


There is no good or evil excepts measured by each individual using their own scale of judgement.

And of course there's no god.   I know that because I have free will.

----------


## Sled Dog

> Subverting the freedom of assembly that is guaranteed in the First Amendment.  Gee, Hitler.....did you write your own Mein Kampf too?
> 
> You better appreciate christians will FIGHT these unConstitutional laws.  Once we stop, islam or liberalism gets all of America.



Actually, a ordinance banning frequent meetings in private residences is not unreasonable, depending, of course, on the size of the meeting.

I'd bitch up a storm if a neighbor took up all the parking with a weekly party and barbeque for all his pals.     It begins to infringe on my rights to live in a peaceful neighborhood.

But, we don't know the details of the law mentioned or of the gathering that prompted the lawsuit.

----------


## Sled Dog

> Agreed. The federal government has NO AUTHORITY to compel anyone to enter into a private contract.


Nor do state governments.

----------

Morning Star (06-07-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> There is no good or evil excepts measured by each individual using their own scale of judgement.
> 
> And of course there's no god.   I know that because I have free will.


You have faith that there is no God.

----------


## Morning Star

> Agreed. The federal government has NO AUTHORITY to compel anyone to enter into a private contract.


You mean like the individual mandate?

----------


## Sled Dog

> You have faith that there is no God.


No.

I state the obvious based on the evidence.

There's no need to invent a magic sky pixie to explain what we see.

----------


## patrickt

> You have faith that there is no God.


I'm an atheist and I have no such faith. I do recognize, as a rational human being, that there is no evidence of a god existing and the proof we hear about is nonsense.

I do have faith in some things that I realize can't be proven. I have faith in mankind. I believe people are basically good and organizations aren't.

----------


## Morning Star

> You have faith that there is no God.


Basically this argument is the same as saying, you are as stupid as I am. I'm still don't get how the religious think this is a winning argument to make.

----------


## tiny1

patrickt




> I'm an atheist and I have no such faith. I do recognize, as a rational human being, that there is no evidence of a god existing and the proof we hear about is nonsense.


I am a Christian, and I do have such Faith.  I do recognize, as an intelligent being, that there is  No evidence that there is NO God, and the proof we hear about is nonsense.


> I do have faith in some things that I realize can't be proven. I have faith in mankind. I believe people are basically good and organizations aren't.


Well, after 10000 years of recorded History, mankind has solved very few problems.  Simple problems, and they cannot be solved.
I have no faith in mankind.  We fail miserably all the time.  Dishonest by nature, and predatory by instinct.  
Sheesh.

----------

Rita Marley (06-08-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> patrickt
> 
> 
> I am a Christian, and I do have such Faith.  I do recognize, as an intelligent being, that there is  No evidence that there is NO God, and the proof we hear about is nonsense.
> .


A negative can not be proven so the statement "There is no evidence that there is no God" is patently absurd, if you claim that a unicorn exists the burden of proff is on you, it is impossible to prove a unicorn does not exist.

----------


## Rita Marley

> Basically this argument is the same as saying, you are as stupid as I am. I'm still don't get how the religious think this is a winning argument to make.


It explains that your faith is not based on anything other than your beliefs. Because there is no empirical proof either way.

Neither does your faith answer the great philosophical questions. It's like faith for pre-schoolers.

----------


## fmw

It is a mystery.  Humanity has yet to explain where everything came from.  Some people like a big bang where nothing was converted to matter, space and time.  But the big bang itself had to come from somewhere or something.  Some people like an intelligent being creating things.  We don't know.  It is a mystery.  It may always be a mystery.  I agree that there is no credible evidence for god.  But there aren't any settled scientific answers either.

----------


## Morning Star

> Some people like a big bang where nothing was converted to matter, space and time.  But the big bang itself had to come from somewhere or something.


There is no such thing as nothing. Nothing as we once understood it turns out to be something, an extra-dimensional something that we have yet to understand. Yet again there is an order that we can discern in this nothing, but still no hint of an intelligence.

----------


## Stonewall

> Well therein lies the problem, the religious want their religion protected, and the 1st amendment does that, it protects religion from the government, but not from private enterprise so in theory if I don't want to serve religious people in my business I shouldn't have to. Of course if I did this there would be the usual outcry of persecution. Yet in typical leftist and religious ideology there is nothing but hypocrisy in their ideology, the government is not allowed to discriminate against pickle puffers yet the baker has the religious right to be biased, bigoted, and unfair to homosexuals because their sky man says it is an abomination. 
> 
> So then how does the government protect the rights of pickle puffers against discrimination when it is also bound to protect the religious right to discriminate against pickle puffers. Even more hypocritical, the bible says not to judge and that the sin of one man is between him and "God" not between men. Yet every christian feels it is his right to judge pickle puffer's sins. Even more strange, this judgement is restricted to pickle puffers; I never heard of a baker refusing to bake a cake for an adulterer. I also can't imagine Jesus refusing to bake a cake for a pickle puffer when he was known to wash the feet of whores.


This baker has a belief. He considers himself an artist. His personal beliefs would not allow him to engage in creating art that was against his firmly held beliefs.

It is certainly the latest craze to suddenly believe that being against gay marriage makes a person a bigot and hateful and just outside of a normal belief. It is actually a new idea that this is even remotely sane behavior.  

We are certainly living in a wonderful time. A great experiment. Nothing is true and nothing is sacred. Do not feel too special though because this experiment began back in the 60's and it's roots are older. 

So far the folks who kicked this off are winning... Big. 

Government power over the people.

----------

Knightkore (06-11-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> There is no such thing as nothing. Nothing as we once understood it turns out to be something, an extra-dimensional something that we have yet to understand. Yet again there is an order that we can discern in this nothing, but still no hint of an intelligence.


You ain't gonna get order out of undirected randomness.

If you believe that.....you believe liberals make sense.

----------


## Rita Marley

> Basically this argument is the same as saying, you are as stupid as I am. I'm still don't get how the religious think this is a winning argument to make.


I'm not arguing anything, nor trying to win anything.

Since no one knows for sure, no matter what you believe is a matter of faith.

----------


## tiny1

> A negative can not be proven so the statement "There is no evidence that there is no God" is patently absurd, if you claim that a unicorn exists the burden of proff is on you, it is impossible to prove a unicorn does not exist.


Look, you are the one claiming that there is no God.  We are not talking about concrete evidence, since neither of us can prove our assertion.  We are talking about "belief".  I believe there is a God.  You believe there is no God.  You can sit here and make all the fun of us you want to, it just proves what a prick you are.  Until you SHOW me that there is positively, absolutely, No God, your assertion is no smarter nor stupider than mine.  It is simply YOUR belief.
You atheists like to act like we are stupid for our beliefs, when you can no more prove YOUR beliefs, than I can mine.  Makes for a small individual, to make fun of someone's religious beliefs.  In fact, it really is pathetic.  I mean, how intelligent is it to ridicule someone for what they think, feel want or believe?  That type of person is nothing more than a punk.  In fact, I'd bet you a dollar to a piece of bubble gum, that you do not have the courage to face me straight up, and ridicule my beliefs.  
I'd fight and die for your right to your own beliefs.  We don't make fun of you because you and a snail have the same destiny.  We don't make fun of you because you choose to believe in nothing, and expect us to respect your intelligence to the point we believe you over the Scriptures.  
But, you azzheads like to make fun of people for what they believe.  Sad.  I would think someone of your alleged intelligence could find another avenue of release, than picking on people's beliefs.  But, I guess it solidifies what Christians think of Atheists.  Bullies.  Well, I cannot be bullied.  
So, keep your beliefs, and I'll keep mine.  Bully us, and I'll change.

----------

Knightkore (06-11-2018)

----------


## Traddles

If y'all will forgive my hijacking your threadjacking (  :Sofa:  ) ... I hadn't heard of this aspect of this court ruling:

Was a Colorado Christian Activist the Unsung Hero of the Jack Phillips Supreme Court Victory?




> A man often cited in the ruling was Bill Jack, a Christian activist from Colorado who filed a complaint against multiple bakeries, most notably Azucar Bakery of Denver, for refusing to make a cake with Bible verses noting that homosexuality is a sin.
> 
> In 2015, the same state that punished Phillips for refusing to make the gay wedding cake ruled against Jack, saying that the bakeries had a right to refuse his request. The apparent contradiction received much attention in the Masterpiece ruling.
> 
> In an interview with The Christian Post on Friday morning, Jack explained he was glad to learn that his efforts appeared to influence the Supreme Court's decision.
> 
> "I was pleased that what I did had an effect and that it showed the justices that there was hypocrisy in the application of the law and the actions of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission," said Jack.
> ...
> Echoing comments he gave to CP back in Jan. 2015, Jack reiterated that despite the complaint, ultimately he believed that Azucar and other bakeries should have the right to reject his request to make a cake with a message they disagree with.
> ...


The whole Masterpiece Bakery thing was a planned attack on a Christian businessman. Bill Jack's actions were a planned attack on regulocrats' hypocrisy.

----------


## Traddles

This is interesting, also:

Jack Phillips' Masterpiece Cakeshop Sees 3 Times More Customers Since Supreme Court Victory




> Jack Phillips told The Christian Post on Thursday that his bakery, Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, Colorado, has seen three times more customers since his Supreme Court victory.
> 
> "We have had so many people coming by to support us as the case has gone on, and there has been an outpouring of love and support since the decision came down. The state's targeting of my beliefs cost me 40 percent of my business and forced me from 10 employees down to four. But we're so happy to be busy doing what we do best at our shop," the Christian baker told CP in an email. 
> 
> "We're also eager to start designing custom wedding cakes again," Phillips added.
> "A cake is a canvas, and I'm really looking forward to creating beautiful art that celebrates such a special day."

----------


## RMNIXON

*Colorado baker back in court over 2nd LGBT bias allegation*





*Attorneys for a Colorado baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple on religious grounds  a stand partially upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court  argued in federal court Tuesday that the state is punishing him again over his refusal to bake a cake celebrating a gender transition.
*
*Lawyers for Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in suburban Denver, are suing to try to stop the state from taking action against him over the new discrimination allegation. They say the state is treating Phillips with hostility because of his Christian faith and pressing a complaint that they call an "obvious setup."
*
"At this point, he's just a guy who is trying to get back to life. The problem is the state of Colorado won't let him," Jim Campbell, an attorney for the Alliance Defending Freedom, said after the hearing. The conservative Christian nonprofit law firm is representing Phillips.

State officials argued for the case to be dismissed, but the judge said he was inclined to let the case move forward and would issue a written ruling later.

*The Colorado Civil Rights Commission said Phillips discriminated against Denver attorney Autumn Scardina because she's transgender. Phillips' shop refused to make a cake last year that was blue on the outside and pink on the inside after Scardina revealed she wanted it to celebrate her transition from male to female.
*
*She asked for the cake on the same day the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would consider Phillips' appeal of the previous commission ruling against him. In that 2012 case, he refused to make a wedding cake for same-sex couple Charlie Craig and Dave Mullins.
*
The Supreme Court ruled in June that the Colorado commission showed anti-religious bias when it sanctioned Phillips for refusing to make the cake, voting 7-2 that it violated Phillips' First Amendment rights.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/colorado-...ias-allegation




It is an obvious set up, and an attorney who abuses the law in this way should be disbarred!  :Geez:

----------

Big Dummy (12-19-2018),Frankenvoter (12-19-2018),Jim Scott (12-19-2018),Knightkore (12-19-2018),Kris P Bacon (12-19-2018),Lone Gunman (12-20-2018),MisterVeritis (12-19-2018),Molly Pitcher (12-20-2018),navigator2 (12-20-2018),NORAD (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-19-2018)

----------


## Daily Bread

Shouldn't be hard to sue the "thing" for harassment and abuse of power . 
If that doesn't work than shoot it .


I use to accept - I used to be benevolent . Now these freaks can all die in the gutter , I've lost all tolerance.

----------

Big Dummy (12-19-2018),Don29palms (12-19-2018),Frankenvoter (12-19-2018),Knightkore (12-19-2018),Lone Gunman (12-20-2018),Molly Pitcher (12-20-2018),navigator2 (12-20-2018),zeke501 (12-19-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

This guy is just plain stupid. How many times do you have to put your hand on the stove and get burnt before you learn to just STFU. Does it really matter if he is right or wrong at this point? Hasn't he ruined his life enough already? Maybe it's time to find another job where his festering hatred of faggots won't get him in to any more trouble.

----------


## Sled Dog

Maybe the damn lawyers will make a Thirteenth Amendment argument this time?

----------


## Sled Dog

> This guy is just plain stupid. How many times do you have to put your hand on the stove and get burnt before you learn to just STFU. Does it really matter if he is right or wrong at this point? Hasn't he ruined his life enough already? Maybe it's time to find another job where his festering hatred of faggots won't get him in to any more trouble.


Fascist in our midst, I see.

The man not only has a right to say "no", he has a right to say "because fags are disgusting", "mind your own damned business" and "Fuck off and die" to ANYONE who wants to know why.

What part of freedom is most distressing to you?

----------

Don29palms (12-19-2018),Frankenvoter (12-19-2018),Jim Scott (12-19-2018),MisterVeritis (12-19-2018),OneDumbBlonde (12-21-2018),Rita Marley (12-19-2018),zeke501 (12-19-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Shouldn't be hard to sue the "thing" for harassment and abuse of power . 
> If that doesn't work than shoot it .
> 
> 
> I use to accept - I used to be benevolence . Now these freaks can all die in the gutter , I've lost all tolerance.


The time for live-and-let-live is long past.

The time of live-and-let-die has ended.  

We are the Americans.  We have to make the United States the Extermi-Nation to survive as Americans.

----------

Big Dummy (12-19-2018),Daily Bread (12-20-2018),Don29palms (12-19-2018),Frankenvoter (12-19-2018),NORAD (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Fascist in our midst, I see.
> 
> The man not only has a right to say "no", he has a right to say "because fags are disgusting", "mind your own damned business" and "Fuck off and die" to ANYONE who wants to know why.
> 
> What part of freedom is most distressing to you?


I agree, but if that is the hill he want's to die on don't come whining and complaining about what comes of it.

Wouldn't it be easier to just write what ever the hell the customer wants and collect the cash?

----------


## Abbey

If people know he won't bake certain cakes, there's only one reason they're going to his establishment.

 It's so obvious.

----------

Dr. Felix Birdbiter (12-19-2018),Frankenvoter (12-19-2018),Jim Scott (12-19-2018),Knightkore (12-19-2018),Kris P Bacon (12-19-2018),RMNIXON (12-19-2018),Sled Dog (12-20-2018),zeke501 (12-19-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

> This guy is just plain stupid. How many times do you have to put your hand on the stove and get burnt before you learn to just STFU. Does it really matter if he is right or wrong at this point? Hasn't he ruined his life enough already? Maybe it's time to find another job where his festering hatred of faggots won't get him in to any more trouble.


Where did he ever say that he hates faggots? You made that up. It is the festering hatred of Christians, ably demonstrated by yourself which is the problem.

----------

Abbey (12-19-2018),Dr. Felix Birdbiter (12-19-2018),Frankenvoter (12-19-2018),Jim Scott (12-19-2018),Knightkore (12-19-2018),Rita Marley (12-19-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

Why would anyone want to force someone to make them a cake. I mean, think about it.

----------

darroll (12-19-2018),Knightkore (12-19-2018),NORAD (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-19-2018),RMNIXON (12-19-2018),zeke501 (12-19-2018)

----------


## Abbey

> I agree, but if that is the hill he want's to die on don't come whining and complaining about what comes of it.
> 
> Wouldn't it be easier to just write what ever the hell the customer wants and collect the cash?


 But, he shouldn't be MADE, to just shut up and do it.

 Do you want to be told you HAVE to do something with which you don't agree or, goes against your beliefs?

----------

Knightkore (12-19-2018),Rita Marley (12-19-2018),Midgardian/Shane Ryan (12-19-2018)

----------


## Big Dummy

> I agree, but if that is the hill he want's to die on don't come whining and complaining about what comes of it.
> 
> Wouldn't it be easier to just write what ever the hell the customer wants and collect the cash?


It would be easier to not write it and say sorry I got it wrong. Now that will be $99.99 for your cake Shim.

----------

Daily Bread (12-20-2018),Knightkore (12-19-2018)

----------


## Abbey

> Why would anyone want to force someone to make them a cake. I mean, think about it.


 So they can sue them for discrimination later.

----------

Knightkore (12-19-2018),NORAD (12-20-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

Baker: I don't want to make you a cake.

Gay Nazi - Well, you have to.

Baker (to himself) - Where did I hide that bottle of axle grease?

----------

Knightkore (12-19-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Where did he ever say that he hates faggots? You made that up. It is the festering hatred of Christians, ably demonstrated by yourself which is the problem.


He hates faggots or he would have just baked the cake. You cant hide behind "God" to justify your hatred. Your hatred is yours. 

I hate faggots and I wouldn't bake them a cake either, but it's because I hate them not because "God" hates them.

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

> I agree, but if that is the hill he want's to die on don't come whining and complaining about what comes of it.
> 
> Wouldn't it be easier to just write what ever the hell the customer wants and collect the cash?


You agree, but you are siding with the STATE?

----------

Knightkore (12-19-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> But, he shouldn't be MADE, to just shut up and do it.
> 
>  Do you want to be told you HAVE to do something with which you don't agree or, goes against your beliefs?


I shouldn't be made to have a drivers license to drive my car, so what? We all have to do things we don't agree with, it's just you Christians think your extra special because you believe in stupid.

Having a job isn't about what you want, or what you believe in, it's about doing your damn job. Paint the damn sign no matter wjhat it says or get a different job. No one is forcing him to decorate cakes.

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

Morning Star: "General Washington, it sure is cold here at Valley Forge. Why don't we forget about crossing the river and attacking Trenton, and just surrender to the Redcoats?"

----------

Jim Scott (12-19-2018),Knightkore (12-19-2018)

----------


## Abbey

> This guy is just plain stupid. How many times do you have to put your hand on the stove and get burnt before you learn to just STFU. Does it really matter if he is right or wrong at this point? Hasn't he ruined his life enough already? Maybe it's time to find another job where his festering hatred of faggots won't get him in to any more trouble.


 He isn't the one causing the trouble, it's the people who are dead set on ruining this guy because of his beliefs.

 I wouldn't be at all surprised if the mentally ill thing was sent to that particular bakery by those degenerates who can't stand that this Baker lives by his principals.

----------

Jim Scott (12-19-2018),Knightkore (12-19-2018),Rita Marley (12-19-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

> I agree, but if that is the hill he want's to die on don't come whining and complaining about what comes of it.
> 
> Wouldn't it be easier to just write what ever the hell the customer wants and collect the cash?


But he's an American, not some spineless pussy.

I can name one of those, now.

----------

Don29palms (12-19-2018),Rita Marley (12-19-2018)

----------


## Traddles

> This guy is just plain stupid. How many times do you have to put your hand on the stove and get burnt before you learn to just STFU. Does it really matter if he is right or wrong at this point? Hasn't he ruined his life enough already? Maybe it's time to find another job where his festering hatred of faggots won't get him in to any more trouble.


Maybe he's doing this because the Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment means something in his daily life. And the lives of 10s of millions of other religious people in the US.

----------

Brat (12-19-2018),Jim Scott (12-19-2018),Knightkore (12-19-2018),Rita Marley (12-19-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> You agree, but you are siding with the STATE?


That State agreed with him. I'm saying it isn't worth all this BS for him. This is all self-inflicted. .... and for what? An imaginary friend that hates fags so he has to hate them too? That's the ground you think he should defend, knowing damn well the tide has turned against homo bigotry a long time ago?

----------


## Abbey

> He hates faggots or he would have just baked the cake. You cant hide behind "God" to justify your hatred. Your hatred is yours. 
> 
> I hate faggots and I wouldn't bake them a cake either, but it's because I hate them not because "God" hates them.


 He never said he hated 'faggots' nor did he say he hated them because God hated them.

 Then, you say, YOU hate faggots, so, you're no better than the people you're bashing, here.

 Oh, and, you have no idea what I am, Christian or, otherwise.

----------

Jim Scott (12-19-2018),Knightkore (12-19-2018),NORAD (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-19-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

> That State agreed with him.


When has the state of Colorado agreed with Phillips?

----------

Knightkore (12-19-2018)

----------


## wbslws

I would bake the cake and make sure it was the most disgusting tasting cake ever.  :Smiley ROFLMAO:

----------

Knightkore (12-19-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

> He hates faggots or he would have just baked the cake. You cant hide behind "God" to justify your hatred. Your hatred is yours. 
> 
> I hate faggots and I wouldn't bake them a cake either, but it's because I hate them not because "God" hates them.


The man has no problem baking a cake for homosexuals. None of these baker/t-shirt makers/ what have you have ever said they will not serve homosexuals. What they object to is participating in a ceremony against their conscience.

----------

Knightkore (12-19-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

Here it is real simple:

Homosexual: I want a cake, and I am "gay".

Baker - No problem

………………………..

Jim - I want a cake. You see, me and my "fiancé John are getting married.

Baker - Sorry, I can't do that. Have a good day.

----------

Knightkore (12-19-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

@Morning Star seems to love a big, intrusive government dictating how people live their lives. He wants to turn the U.S. into a totalitarian state. Maybe he ought to move to one - like North Korea.

----------

Knightkore (12-19-2018)

----------


## Dr. Felix Birdbiter

Lets change this to him being Jewish and a group of Nazi's come in and want him to bake a cake for Hitler's birthday.  Should he have the right to find that offensive and say no?  Would that mean he has a "festering hatred" of this group?

----------

Jim Scott (12-19-2018),Knightkore (12-19-2018),NORAD (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-19-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Why would anyone want to force someone to make them a cake. I mean, think about it.


I owned a bakery.

If someone tried to FORCE me to provide them a product after I'd refused, I would have a sudden change of heart and take their money.  Standard contract.

Let's say they had one of those fake weddings and wanted someone who hates them provide the dessert?  Okay.  The standard contract says that I cannot be held liable for more than the cost of providing the dessert.  They can only get refunded what they paid me, I cannot be held liable for the failure of their party.


Accidentally using too much baking soda in the cake batter...doesn't taste good.  And piping decorations while drunk...oh, so sorry.. 

...there are just too many things that can go wrong in the kitchen that won't actually violate any food safety laws...

...sure, I'll sell them their dessert.  The basic wedding cake can cost the baker...eighty bucks, if it's  a big one, even if the cake sold for a couple thousand...huge profit margins in edible art.

A hundred bucks ...  be well worth it.

----------


## Big Dummy

So no one sees my form of protest as being un-prosecutable?

----------

Knightkore (12-19-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Lets change this to him being Jewish and a group of Nazi's come in and want his to bake a cake for Hitler's birthday.  Should he have the right to find that offensive and say no?  Would that mean he has a "festering hatred" of this group?


Errr ... they ain't called the Gaystapo for nothing...

----------

Big Dummy (12-19-2018)

----------


## Abbey

No one is going to force me to do anything I don't want to, either.

 If it's something I don't agree with, don't believe in, or, goes against my beliefs... I won't do it either.

 If I can't do something in good faith/ conscience, if it's gonna bug me forever....I don't do it.

 I applaud this baker, actually, for not just, giving in.

----------

Jim Scott (12-19-2018),Knightkore (12-19-2018),Rita Marley (12-19-2018)

----------


## MisterVeritis

> This guy is just plain stupid. How many times do you have to put your hand on the stove and get burnt before you learn to just STFU. Does it really matter if he is right or wrong at this point? Hasn't he ruined his life enough already? Maybe it's time to find another job where his festering hatred of faggots won't get him in to any more trouble.


There is just something about you that sets me off.

Shall we knuckle under to tyranny? It is clear you have.

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

> I shouldn't be made to have a drivers license to drive my car, so what? We all have to do things we don't agree with, it's just you Christians think your extra special because you believe in stupid.
> 
> Having a job isn't about what you want, or what you believe in, it's about doing your damn job. Paint the damn sign no matter wjhat it says or get a different job. No one is forcing him to decorate cakes.


Why can't the homosexuals go down the street and get a cake from someone who will bake it for them. 

This isn't about "gay rights", it is about bashing Christians - and you love doing that, don't you?

----------

Jim Scott (12-19-2018),Knightkore (12-19-2018),NORAD (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> Fascist in our midst, I see.
> 
> The man not only has a right to say "no", he has a right to say "because fags are disgusting", "mind your own damned business" and "Fuck off and die" to ANYONE who wants to know why.
> 
> What part of freedom is most distressing to you?


Exactly!

----------


## Big Dummy

Here is your damn cake. I call it the Micheal Obama.

F02A8D0C-3FCC-4ACC-9DE9-A7950074A10E.jpeg

----------

Rita Marley (12-19-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> I agree, but if that is the hill he want's to die on don't come whining and complaining about what comes of it.
> 
> Wouldn't it be easier to just write what ever the hell the customer wants and collect the cash?



No.  Hell no.  HELL TO THE NO.


Have you EVER backed down & given ground when I have argued for the Bible?  Wouldn't it be easier for you to tell me "Yes, sirree Mr. Knightkore anything you say & bow to my unwavering ideology?  Hmmmm.....

No?

Why not?

----------

MisterVeritis (12-19-2018),Midgardian/Shane Ryan (12-19-2018),Sled Dog (12-19-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> He hates faggots or he would have just baked the cake. You cant hide behind "God" to justify your hatred. Your hatred is yours. 
> 
> I hate faggots and I wouldn't bake them a cake either, but it's because I hate them not because "God" hates them.



True enough.  You have never hid behind your hatred of Christians.

----------


## Knightkore

> Why can't the homosexuals go down the street and get a cake from someone who will bake it for them. 
> 
> This isn't about "gay rights", it is about bashing Christians - and you love doing that, don't you?


This isn't about that.  He is pulling your leg.  @Morning Star is being intentionally arrogant, ignorant & combative because he is a Christian.  His hatred of Christians is well known.  At this point he is playing the roll of atheist troll.

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

I suppose that @Morning Star thinks that when Bull Connor put the full weight of the state against civil rights marchers using a fire hose that the protesters should have just gone home. I mean, who needs _that_?

----------

Sled Dog (12-19-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> No.  Hell no.  HELL TO THE NO.
> 
> 
> Have you EVER backed down & given ground when I have argued for the Bible?  Wouldn't it be easier for you to tell me "Yes, sirree Mr. Knightkore anything you say & bow to my unwavering ideology?  Hmmmm.....
> 
> No?
> 
> Why not?


By the way I honestly don't expect you to give ground to what YOU believe unless you honestly change your mind.  Beyond that I expect you to fight for your beliefs even if I think they are wrong.  There is respect garnered & earned that way and a brutal honesty that is refreshing.

It is the dishonesty, the complete dumbassery similar to any liberal.....and not even one of the top liberals that brings me to irate ire of Incredible Hulk proportions.

----------


## Knightkore

> I suppose that @Morning Star thinks that when Bull Connor put the full weight of the state against civil rights marchers using a fire hose that the protesters should have just gone home. I mean, who needs _that_?


NOW you're getting it.  Except one proviso.....caveat.....as long as the targets are Christians.

----------


## Coolwalker

What would the court do if the baker was a Muslim?

----------

Big Dummy (12-19-2018),Knightkore (12-19-2018),NORAD (12-20-2018),Midgardian/Shane Ryan (12-19-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> What would the court do if the baker was a Muslim?


Make the gays apologize & then make them bake a cake where muhammed is beheading a few gays.....

----------

Coolwalker (12-19-2018),Rita Marley (12-19-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> NOW you're getting it.  Except one proviso.....caveat.....as long as the targets are Christians.


It's not about Christians per se, I find all belief in stupid to be equally laughable, all religions and all leftists are the same to me. All believe in in complete non-sense and why anyone would ruin his life over simply writing Happy Birthday Faggot, on a cake the customer is willing to pay money for is beyond me. If it's my job to write frosting on a cake I write what ever the hell the customer wants written on the cake. I don't give a rat's ass what they want.

----------


## darroll

I know what the answer would be if I asked a gay for anything.

----------

Knightkore (12-19-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> It's not about Christians per se, I find all belief in stupid to be equally laughable, all religions and all leftists are the same to me. All believe in in complete non-sense and why anyone would ruin his life over simply writing Happy Birthday Faggot, on a cake the customer is willing to pay money for is beyond me. If it's my job to write frosting on a cake I write what ever the hell the customer wants written on the cake. I don't give a rat's ass what they want.


See.....you did not back down on your bigoted beliefs.  Why not?  Instead of arguing with me wouldn't it be easier to tell me what you think I want to hear?  You can't do it.....because deep down.....you are honest.....and this is what you believe.  Good.  Don't back down.  You're wrong in my opinion but then again I will not back down either.

 :Thumbsup20: 

God bless and God loves you.

----------

darroll (12-19-2018),NORAD (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-19-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> See.....you did not back down on your bigoted beliefs.  Why not?  Instead of arguing with me wouldn't it be easier to tell me what you think I want to hear?  You can't do it.....because deep down.....you are honest.....and this is what you believe.  Good.  Don't back down.  You're wrong in my opinion but then again I will not back down either.
> 
> 
> 
> God bless and God loves you.


Ok, if I owned a cake shop and you came in and asked me, as a customer, to decorate you some Christian cake, I would do exactly what you asked. That is my job. I decorate cakes. Yes I will still think your beliefs are stupid, but I wouldn't make a scene about it by not making your cake. This is my point. All he had to do was make the pickle puffers a cake, for which he was being paid to do. If everyone didn't do thier job because they didn't like something about it, where would we be? Nothing would get done. Millions of people hate their job, there boss, the customer, etc. They all, for the most part, just STFU and do what they are being PAID to do. ...... Except the Christians of course. They have to be special. Then they wonder why they are persecuted.

----------


## Knightkore

> Ok, if I owned a cake shop and you came in and asked me, as a customer, to decorate you some Christian cake, I would do exactly what you asked. That is my job. I decorate cakes. Yes I will still think your beliefs are stupid, but I wouldn't make a scene about it by not making your cake. This is my point. All he had to do was make the pickle puffers a cake, for which he was being paid to do. If everyone didn't do thier job because they didn't like something about it, where would we be? Nothing would get done. Millions of people hate their job, there boss, the customer, etc. They all, for the most part, just STFU and do what they are being PAID to do. ...... Except the Christians of course. They have to be special. Then they wonder why they are persecuted.


Doing the STFU thing?  That has got us to where we are at right now with liberal & islamist ideology running rampant.....genders upon genders insisting on special treatment.....islam getting Sharia Law in Congress & schools.  All this because too many people STFU.  No on said or did anything.  Because of being polite.  Because it was more "peaceful" to go along to get along.....

THAT was never what the Founders wanted.  They wanted us all to BE adults & speak up, speak out & act if necessary.

Too much of America.....including you because of this STFU ideology has been castrated & become docile eunichs.

You've already surrendered to the left.....you just don't realize it.

----------

Big Dummy (12-19-2018),darroll (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-20-2018),usfan (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Doing the STFU thing?  That has got us to where we are at right now with liberal & islamist ideology running rampant.....genders upon genders insisting on special treatment.....islam getting Sharia Law in Congress & schools.  All this because too many people STFU.  No on said or did anything.  Because of being polite.  Because it was more "peaceful" to go along to get along.....
> 
> THAT was never what the Founders wanted.  They wanted us all to BE adults & speak up, speak out & act if necessary.
> 
> Too much of America.....including you because of this STFU ideology has been castrated & become docile eunichs.
> 
> You've already surrendered to the left.....you just don't realize it.


 :Geez: No, no, no, I'm talking about doing your job. He can bitch and complain and protest and hate and what ever the hell he wants after he is off the job, but while he is on the clock he has a job to do. Just STFU and make the damn cakes. That is what he is being paid for. Then punch out and let the whole world know "God" hates fags and so do I!

----------


## Knightkore

> No, no, no, I'm talking about doing your job. He can bitch and complain and protest and hate and what ever the hell he wants after he is off the job, but while he is on the clock he has a job to do. Just STFU and make the damn cakes. That is what he is being paid for. Then punch out and let the whole world know "God" hates fags and so do I!


 :Dontknow:   :Thinking:   :Smiley ROFLMAO: 

Got it.  I still disagree but.....got it.  Did you know concussions can be bad?

----------


## Morning Star



----------

Knightkore (12-19-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> 


 :Smiley ROFLMAO:

----------


## Abbey

> No, no, no, I'm talking about doing your job. He can bitch and complain and protest and hate and what ever the hell he wants after he is off the job, but while he is on the clock he has a job to do. Just STFU and make the damn cakes. That is what he is being paid for. Then punch out and let the whole world know "God" hates fags and so do I!


 He OWNS the bakery, he's not just an employee....he doesn't, punch out.

 Plus, being the owner, he doesn't have to 'just do it,' as an employee would have to.

 Why can't, instead of all the yelling about 'just make the damn cake' we say, "just shut up about it and, don't let it bother you so much?"

----------

Sled Dog (12-19-2018)

----------


## Abbey

By the way, he doesn't necessarily have to hate gay people, to refuse to bake a cake,  homosexuality might just go against his personal beliefs.

 Another, by the way, the Bible does make reference to homosexuality being a sin... so...

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-19-2018),RMNIXON (12-19-2018)

----------


## RMNIXON

> This guy is just plain stupid. How many times do you have to put your hand on the stove and get burnt before you learn to just STFU. Does it really matter if he is right or wrong at this point? Hasn't he ruined his life enough already? Maybe it's time to find another job where his festering hatred of faggots won't get him in to any more trouble.



That's what the LGBTQ activists want!

They want Christians and their beliefs in "The Closet" or underground and out of site like the early years before the Church was established. They want them to be ashamed and even frightened of their beliefs in public.

I was very much a "live and let" live kinda guy until I saw signs of the new fascism emerge......

----------

Jim Scott (12-19-2018),Knightkore (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-19-2018)

----------


## RMNIXON

> By the way, he doesn't necessarily have to hate gay people, to refuse to bake a cake,  homosexuality might just go against his personal beliefs.
> 
>  Another, by the way, the Bible does make reference to homosexuality being a sin... so...




The important legal point in the first case was that the Baker did not refuse public service to homosexual couples simply buying baked goods. What he refused was making a special cake as part of a Gay Marriage celebration. To take part in a behavior! And the same with making a special cake to celebrate someones Trans operation.

----------

Abbey (12-19-2018),Jim Scott (12-19-2018),Knightkore (12-20-2018),NORAD (12-20-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

> It's not about Christians per se, I find all belief in stupid to be equally laughable, all religions and all leftists are the same to me. All believe in in complete non-sense and why anyone would ruin his life over simply writing Happy Birthday Faggot, on a cake the customer is willing to pay money for is beyond me. If it's my job to write frosting on a cake I write what ever the hell the customer wants written on the cake. I don't give a rat's ass what they want.


Here's  an idea.

Learn what the difference is between "having a job" and "owning your own businrss".

That baker had EVERY right to tell the fags to foad because it was HIS business.  He has no one to answer to but himself, his wife, and his god.

That is what being free is all about.  Being able to refuse.

The faggots have NO RIGHTS here.  None at all.

They were told "no".  Tough shit for them, they get to find someone else to make their dessert, or they don't get a fucking dessert.

I guess you've never been to America.  Don't visit, you won't understand it.

----------

Abbey (12-19-2018),Don29palms (12-20-2018),OneDumbBlonde (12-19-2018)

----------


## Abbey

> It's not about Christians per se, I find all belief in stupid to be equally laughable, all religions and all leftists are the same to me. All believe in in complete non-sense and why anyone would ruin his life over simply writing Happy Birthday Faggot, on a cake the customer is willing to pay money for is beyond me. If it's my job to write frosting on a cake I write what ever the hell the customer wants written on the cake. I don't give a rat's ass what they want.


 Fine, if you're ever in that position...do it....but don't chastise someone for standing up for his/her beliefs and, NOT doing it.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Ok, if I owned a cake shop and you came in and asked me, as a customer, to decorate you some Christian cake, I would do exactly what you asked. That is my job. I decorate cakes. Yes I will still think your beliefs are stupid, but I wouldn't make a scene about it by not making your cake. This is my point. All he had to do was make the pickle puffers a cake, for which he was being paid to do. If everyone didn't do thier job because they didn't like something about it, where would we be? Nothing would get done. Millions of people hate their job, there boss, the customer, etc. They all, for the most part, just STFU and do what they are being PAID to do. ...... Except the Christians of course. They have to be special. Then they wonder why they are persecuted.


Americans have spines.  If they don't want to do something, they don't do it.  If that costs them a sale, that's a price they're willing to psy.

You clearly value pennies over principles.

I'm going to guess that you don't have a clue why men stayed through that awful winter at Valley Forge.

----------

Big Dummy (12-19-2018),Midgardian/Shane Ryan (12-19-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

> No, no, no, I'm talking about doing your job. He can bitch and complain and protest and hate and what ever the hell he wants after he is off the job, but while he is on the clock he has a job to do. Just STFU and make the damn cakes. That is what he is being paid for. Then punch out and let the whole world know "God" hates fags and so do I!


His "job" was to run HIS company HIS way.

What's your objection to that?

----------


## Sled Dog

> By the way, he doesn't necessarily have to hate gay people, to refuse to bake a cake,  homosexuality might just go against his personal beliefs.
> 
>  Another, by the way, the Bible does make reference to homosexuality being a sin... so...


Or, he just flipped a coin and said "I am not going to serve this next person, no matter what".

He has that right.

----------


## Sled Dog

Read the first line in my signature.

Fascists and their compulsion compulsion are extremely annoying.

Worse, though, are the Surrender Monkeys.

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

> Ok, if I owned a cake shop and you came in and asked me, as a customer, to decorate you some Christian cake, I would do exactly what you asked. That is my job. I decorate cakes. Yes I will still think your beliefs are stupid, but I wouldn't make a scene about it by not making your cake.


You would do it because making a cake for Christians does not violate your conscience. For most of these people, Jack Phillips included, making a cake for homosexuals does not violate their conscience either. It isn't about them being homosexuals, it is *the ceremony that the baker is being asked to participate* in which is the issue.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),Molly Pitcher (12-21-2018),tiny1 (12-20-2018)

----------


## Dr. Felix Birdbiter

If I owned a Christian bookstore and a potential customer came in and wanted me to order a copy of God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything  by Christopher Hitchens and I refuse should I be forced to do so?

----------

Big Dummy (12-19-2018),Knightkore (12-20-2018),NORAD (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-19-2018),usfan (12-20-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

To paraphrase the Psalm:

You are my God. Apart from You I have no good thing.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),NORAD (12-20-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

Let's make this perfectly clear:

A man does not have to post a sign saying he reserves his rights to exercise them.

Which idiots here do not understand that?

----------


## Big Dummy

> Let's make this perfectly clear:
> 
> A man does not have to post a sign saying he reserves his rights to exercise them.
> 
> Which idiots here do not understand that?


Every homo and most judges on the 9th circus court.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),navigator2 (12-20-2018)

----------


## Steezer/Golden

Jack Phillips, Christian baker, hit with new complaint over transgender birthday cake

These pieces of shit never learn, do they!? It's time to get this back to the supreme court with 2 new justices!

----------

Conservative Libertarian (12-20-2018)

----------


## msc

Enough is enough.  This is just harrassment. Leave this family alone.  This is just the people using the law to force ideological conformity.  Buy a damn cake off the shelf or go somewhere else.  You can't get what you want, when you want it, where you want it. Boo Freekin Whoo.   Gay, transgender, whatever.  These law suits are intentional to specifically attack Christians, being brought purposefully to force or punish Christians for their religious beliefs.  This has nothing to do with caring about the rights of Gays, transgenders, transexuals, etc.  Or there would be lawsuits regarding ALL people of refusing to participate in this perversion. 


*HIDDEN CAMERA: Gay Wedding Cake At Muslim Bakeries*

*STEVEN CROWDER THURSDAY APRIL 2 2015*










Now, compare what happened in Michigan to all the other gay wedding cake fiasco’s across America’s heartland:
https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/hi...muslim-bakery/


Notice the date: 2015.  Where have all the Gay rights activists been for the last three years while these injustices have been going on?

Please!  The judge is a Jack Ass. This case should not be heard.

HIDDEN CAMERA: Gay Wedding Cake At Muslim Bakeries

----------


## NORAD

> This guy is just plain stupid. How many times do you have to put your hand on the stove and get burnt before you learn to just STFU. Does it really matter if he is right or wrong at this point? Hasn't he ruined his life enough already? Maybe it's time to find another job where his festering hatred of faggots won't get him in to any more trouble.


Would you like to see him just  'roll over'?



This is clear cut persecution of religious freedom.


I understand you don't believe in God and that's your right.  


The rights of those who do believe in God must stand.


The right to choose a religion (or no religion) *without interference by the government*. Freedom of religion is guaranteed by the First Amendment  to the Constitution.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-20-2018),usfan (12-20-2018)

----------


## NORAD

> Lets change this to him being Jewish and a group of Nazi's come in and want him to bake a cake for Hitler's birthday.  Should he have the right to find that offensive and say no?  Would that mean he has a "festering hatred" of this group?


Excellent analogy!

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## liberal_hack

> I agree, but if that is the hill he want's to die on don't come whining and complaining about what comes of it.
> 
> *Wouldn't it be easier to just write what ever the hell the customer wants* and collect the cash?


Yes it would; I gather that you do not adhere to the Christian faith as this man does.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Sled Dog

> I agree, but if that is the hill he want's to die on don't come whining and complaining about what comes of it.
> 
> Wouldn't it be easier to just write what ever the hell the customer wants and collect the cash?



Yeah, the stupid jews of Germany truly believed that if they obeyed the law and went along, they'd survive Hitler.

Glad you're around to show us that some of them did.

----------


## navigator2

> This guy is just plain stupid. How many times do you have to put your hand on the stove and get burnt before you learn to just STFU. Does it really matter if he is right or wrong at this point? Hasn't he ruined his life enough already? Maybe it's time to find another job where his festering hatred of faggots won't get him in to any more trouble.


It was a setup. His bakery was targeted. (tranny lawyer, remember?)  Eff em. He's like Trump, he likes turmoil and mixing it up. These cases have made his shop famous with free advertising. He probably has more business than he can shake a stick at.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> Here's  an idea.
> 
> Learn what the difference is between "having a job" and "owning your own businrss".
> 
> That baker had EVERY right to tell the fags to foad because it was HIS business.  He has no one to answer to but himself, his wife, and his god.
> 
> That is what being free is all about.  Being able to refuse.
> 
> The faggots have NO RIGHTS here.  None at all.
> ...


We see the liberals do this all the with Facebook & Twitter banning Conservatives & suspending them from using their platforms altogether like Laura Loomer or others.  It is their business.  It is their freedom to run it as they wish.  

Yet the liberals & people like @Morning Star want Christians to fold their beliefs & not exercise their freedom to refuse service & run their business as they see fit.  The double standard here is suffocating & oppressive.

----------

Rita Marley (12-20-2018),usfan (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> Yeah, the stupid jews of Germany truly believed that if they obeyed the law and went along, they'd survive Hitler.
> 
> Glad you're around to show us that some of them did.



The time to go along to get along is FAR past.  "Obeying" the leftists unlawful & unconstitutional laws is participating in their destruction of America.  Dissent as the leftists say is the highest form of patriotism.  Time to dissent with all kinds of prejudice against the leftists/islamists/perverted freaks & show our patriotism in the extreme.

----------

usfan (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Lets change this to him being Jewish and a group of Nazi's come in and want him to bake a cake for Hitler's birthday.  Should he have the right to find that offensive and say no?  Would that mean he has a "festering hatred" of this group?


The two are not analogous at all. One was a Real attempt at genocide by one Nation against another, which understandably would create a multi-generational hatred for the victims of the atrocity. That being said, they should still just do what the customer asks for. It's a job. However I could understand why the Jew would perhaps refuse. In this case we have someone refusing to bake a cake based on nothing but the sheer stupidity of a 2000 year old fairy tale. A better analogy would be; I don't want to bake you a cake with a nose on it because it offends my belief in Pinocchio. I don't want to bake you a Happy 18th Birthday cake because Peter Pan never grew up and it offends me to take part in an Adult birthday. I don't want to bake you a cake for you Foster Parents because Harry Potter's foster parents were meanies.

----------


## Knightkore

> The two are not analogous at all. One was a Real attempt at genocide by one Nation against another, which understandably would create a multi-generational hatred for the victims of the atrocity. That being said, they should still just do what the customer asks for. It's a job. However I could understand why the Jew would perhaps refuse. In this case we have someone refusing to bake a cake based on nothing but the sheer stupidity of a 2000 year old fairy tale. A better analogy would be; I don't want to bake you a cake with a nose on it because it offends my belief in Pinocchio. I don't want to bake you a Happy 18th Birthday cake because Peter Pan never grew up and it offends me to take part in an Adult birthday. I don't want to bake you a cake for you Foster Parents because Harry Potter's foster parents were meanies.


A moderator of these Forums or any Forum can moderate & refuse to allow you to post for any reason.  You could believe in the Fly Spaghetti Monster to piss off Christians and that would be enough reason.  You could have too many words not spelled right.  That could be enough reason to suspend you.

An owner, moderator, whatever has the Freedom to refuse service no explanation needed.

{Topix mods & others like Twitter routinely suspend Conservatives.  That is their Freedom to run their business as they see fit.  So if a business doesn't like Harry Potter & doesn't want to bake a cake with Harry Potter's magic wand.....they don't have to.}

----------


## Knightkore

Dick's Sporting Goods no longer offer service to gun owners.  They don't sell guns, ammo or anything because they hold to the liberal ideology of gun control.  Gun owners could sue them.  That is discrimination.  But why?  It is their business & their money.  They don't have to serve gun owners.

----------


## Knightkore

By the way.....thanks for the trolling challenge @Morning Star.  It is like sparing in a ring before going off to fight the real Clubber Lang of the leftists or islamists.  Excellent training.

----------

Morning Star (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

Here you go @Morning Star:

 *Judd Legum*‏Verified account @*JuddLegum* Dec 18 




                                     UPDATE: Tucker is hemorrhaging advertisers after repeating his claim that immigrants make America "dirtier"  NINE advertisers dumped Tucker since last night's show  @*ZenniOpt* @*IHOP* @*United* Explorer credit card  @*scottevest* @*justformen* @*LandRover* @*Voya* @*Ancestry* @*Minted*


{These businesses are choosing their sides against Tucker Carlson & for illegal foreigners.  THEY have that freedom to do so.  WE have the freedom to not buy or visit or even acknowledge these businesses exist.  Freedom is a wonderful thing.}

----------

navigator2 (12-20-2018)

----------


## navigator2

> Here you go @Morning Star:
> 
>  *Judd Legum*‏Verified account @*JuddLegum* Dec 18 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>                                      UPDATE: Tucker is hemorrhaging advertisers after repeating his claim that immigrants make America "dirtier"  NINE advertisers dumped Tucker since last night's show  @*ZenniOpt* @*IHOP* @*United* Explorer credit card  @*scottevest* @*justformen* @*LandRover* @*Voya* @*Ancestry* @*Minted*
> 
> ...


Those idiot advertisers about about to find out free speech is expensive.  :Grin:

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## usfan

> By the way.....thanks for the trolling challenge @Morning Star.  It is like sparing in a ring before going off to fight the real Clubber Lang of the leftists or islamists.  Excellent training.


 :Laughing7: 
I used to think battling the forces of darkness was supposed to be challenging and difficult.. but the more you 'debate' them, the more they expose themselves as just religious bigots, without any reasoning skills at all...

Lame ridicule, mocking, and ad hom.. that is all the anti-christian bigots have.. they just try to compensate with volume and indignation..    :Smiley ROFLMAO:

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> A moderator of these Forums or any Forum can moderate & refuse to allow you to post for any reason.  You could believe in the Fly Spaghetti Monster to piss off Christians and that would be enough reason.  You could have too many words not spelled right.  That could be enough reason to suspend you.
> 
> An owner, moderator, whatever has the Freedom to refuse service no explanation needed.
> 
> {Topix mods & others like Twitter routinely suspend Conservatives.  That is their Freedom to run their business as they see fit.  So if a business doesn't like Harry Potter & doesn't want to bake a cake with Harry Potter's magic wand.....they don't have to.}


I agree with all that, my point is, the baker has made a mountain out of nothing and it has cost him almost everything. I'm not saying he should be forced to do anything. I'm saying it would have been far smarter to just make the damn Adam and Steve cake and collect the money. That is the object of owning a business. Not to make a spectacle out of your stupid beliefs. Now the moron is doubling down on his making a spectacle of himself in the name of stupid. I understand, and I am all for standing up for principle, but not when the principle is based on a fairy tale. He got away with hating fags once, so why push your luck? It reminds me of Zimmerman. He got away with shooting Trayvon, but he just had to push his luck again. Dumb. I hope he loses his store.

----------


## navigator2

> I used to think battling the forces of darkness was supposed to be challenging and difficult.. but the more you 'debate' them, the more they expose themselves as just religious bigots, without any reasoning skills at all...
> 
> Lame ridicule, mocking, and ad hom.. that is all the anti-christian bigots have.. they just try to compensate with volume and indignation..


Morningstar is agnostic, so he has no dog in this fight. However, he is right a hell of a lot more often than wrong. We just disagree on this one point. Nobody agrees with EVERYTHING anyone else believes.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> I agree with all that, my point is, the baker has made a mountain out of nothing and it has cost him almost everything. I'm not saying he should be forced to do anything. I'm saying it would have been far smarter to just make the damn Adam and Steve cake and collect the money. That is the object of owning a business. Not to make a spectacle out of your stupid beliefs. Now the moron is doubling down on his making a spectacle of himself in the name of stupid. I understand, and I am all for standing up for principle, but not when the principle is based on a fairy tale. He got away with hating fags once, so why push your luck? It reminds me of Zimmerman. He got away with shooting Trayvon, but he just had to push his luck again. Dumb. I hope he loses his store.


You go far beyond what you claim you support & you reveal the bigotry, hatred & prejudice against him just because he is Christian & holds to the Bible.  THAT is how liberals think & act.  THAT is how Hillary thinks & acts & that is how islamists think & act.  You getting it yet?

I hope you lose your posting privileges.  But I am not the mod here.  I am a mod on my own Topix Forum Knightkore's Multiverse.  I would have deleted 95 percent of your insane anti-Christian posts.

I have no patience for the liberal disrespect you have been showing to this man of God.  Period.

You are blessed to have such incredible moderators here.

----------


## Morning Star

> Here you go @Morning Star:
> 
>  *Judd Legum*‏Verified account @*JuddLegum* Dec 18 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>                                      UPDATE: Tucker is hemorrhaging advertisers after repeating his claim that immigrants make America "dirtier"  NINE advertisers dumped Tucker since last night's show  @*ZenniOpt* @*IHOP* @*United* Explorer credit card  @*scottevest* @*justformen* @*LandRover* @*Voya* @*Ancestry* @*Minted*
> 
> ...


Let me know when they start boycotting him over comments he made about the Tooth Fairy or the Easter Bunny. Then we will have equivalence. 

You and your ilk keep making this about his right to refuse service and try to make it sound like I am for the Government forcing him to bake cakes for fags.
Nothing could be further from the truth, I NEVER once said I want the government to do anything or that he doesn't have the right to refuse.

How many times do I have to say it? He SHOULD do his damn job and bake what ever cake a customer wants. That is why he is in business. To refuse to do your job because you are too stupid to understand the difference between reality and some moronic fair tale and to use that as the reason to refuse to do your job is just a absurd hill to die on. In fact I would have far more respect if he just came out and said I hate fags and I don't want to serve them. At least that is an acceptable reality. "God" hates fags is just dumb.

----------


## Knightkore

> Morningstar is agnostic, so he has no dog in this fight. However, he is right a hell of a lot more often than wrong. We just disagree on this one point. Nobody agrees with EVERYTHING anyone else believes.


Morning Star is far more than an agnostic.  And his dog is pure anti-Christian.  THAT is the only reason is going after this Christian baker.  He is nothing more than a ranting, raving, violent Antifa thug on this subject.

----------

Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> Let me know when they start boycotting him over comments he made about the Tooth Fairy or the Easter Bunny. Then we will have equivalence. 
> 
> You and your ilk keep making this about his right to refuse service and try to make it sound like I am for the Government forcing him to bake cakes for fags.
> Nothing could be further from the truth, I NEVER once said I want the government to do anything or that he doesn't have the right to refuse.
> 
> How many times do I have to say it? He SHOULD do his damn job and bake what ever cake a customer wants. That is why he is in business. To refuse to do your job because you are too stupid to understand the difference between reality and some moronic fair tale and to use that as the reason to refuse to do your job is just a absurd hill to die on. In fact I would have far more respect if he just came out and said I hate fags and I don't want to serve them. At least that is an acceptable reality. "God" hates fags is just dumb.


"I NEVER once said I want the government to do anything or that he doesn't have the right to refuse."

YOU LIE.

"He SHOULD do his damn job and bake what ever cake a customer wants."

And illegal foreigners ARE like supporting the Tooth Fairy or militant atheists such as yourself.

THERE is your equivalence.

You are stuck in a circle of hate & bigotry.  

And if you want honesty.....

----------


## Morning Star

> You go far beyond what you claim you support & you reveal the bigotry, hatred & prejudice against him just because he is Christian & holds to the Bible.  THAT is how liberals think & act.  THAT is how Hillary thinks & acts & that is how islamists think & act.  You getting it yet?
> 
> I hope you lose your posting privileges.  But I am not the mod here.  I am a mod on my own Topix Forum Knightkore's Multiverse.  I would have deleted 95 percent of your insane anti-Christian posts.
> 
> I have no patience for the liberal disrespect you have been showing to this man of God.  Period.
> 
> You are blessed to have such incredible moderators here.


Once again you prove the religious are identical to leftists. You believe in stupid and would ban any speech that you disagree with. I loath Islam because I know if Muslims had their way America would become a theocracy. You have just proven that Christians are really not any different, you would turn America into a Theocracy as well. THIS is why atheists dictators have attacked religion in the past and will have to do so in the future. Whether its religion A or religion B on no religion we can not all co-exist.

----------


## Morning Star

> "He SHOULD do his damn job and bake what ever cake a customer wants."


That is exactly what I said. YOU are the one claiming I said the government should force him to. When you can post a quote of me saying that let me know.

As for me being a bigot, yes I am so what? So are you and all Christians, you can't push it off on "God" the hate is yours. Own it for once.

----------


## Knightkore

> Once again you prove the religious are identical to leftists. You believe in stupid and would ban any speech that you disagree with. I loath Islam because I know if Muslims had their way America would become a theocracy. You have just proven that Christians are really not any different, you would turn America into a Theocracy as well. THIS is why atheists dictators have attacked religion in the past and will have to do so in the future. Whether its religion A or religion B on no religion we can not all co-exist.


No.  I just would do my job as a moderator & silence a troll.  But then again.....I thought you were all for someone doing their job?  Come over to Topix Knightkore's Multiverse Forum.  We'll see what happens.  I already delete leftists posts that are abusive & trollish.

Anyhow, it is now time to stop feeding the troll.  You have been outed for who you really are.

Just as other Dems have been Trumped.....you have been Knightkored.

----------


## Morning Star

> No.  I just would do my job as a moderator & silence a troll.  But then again.....I thought you were all for someone doing their job?  Come over to Topix Knightkore's Multiverse Forum.  We'll see what happens.  I already delete leftists posts that are abusive & trollish.
> 
> Anyhow, it is now time to stop feeding the troll.  You have been outed for who you really are.
> 
> Just as other Dems have been Trumped.....you have been Knightkored.


Spoken like a true leftist, anyone that disagrees with you is a troll and should be censored. Got it.

----------


## usfan

> Morningstar is agnostic, so he has no dog in this fight. However, he is right a hell of a lot more often than wrong. We just disagree on this one point. Nobody agrees with EVERYTHING anyone else believes.


I RELISH disagreement.  I enjoy the challenge of crafting logical, consistent arguments.  I do NOT  enjoy dealing with bigotry, ad hom, ridicule, and hostility, just because i am up front with my biblical Christian beliefs. 

I cannot have a thread on scientific origins, anymore.   Hordes of hecklers and bigots trash the thread with antifa heckling until the mods close it.

Philosophical discussions are equally 'triggering!' to the anti-christian bigots,  who cannot stand ANY expression of belief based on biblical principles.

Arguing with the resident anti-christian bigots here is an exercise in futility.  They are protected like an LGBTQ minority, and dish it out, but cannot take it.

They exemplify the decline of civility and freedom of conscience, as their progressive indoctrination oozes from their every post.

So yeah.. other than that, they are right, most of the time.. 
 :Smiley ROFLMAO:

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> That is exactly what I said. YOU are the one claiming I said the government should force him to. When you can post a quote of me saying that let me know.
> 
> As for me being a bigot, yes I am so what? So are you and all Christians, you can't push it off on "God" the hate is yours. Own it for once.

----------


## Knightkore

> Spoken like a true leftist, anyone that disagrees with you is a troll and should be censored. Got it.






{No.  Just you.  Now What.}

----------


## Morning Star

> Arguing with the resident anti-christian bigots here is an exercise in futility. They are protected like an LGBTQ minority, and dish it out, but cannot take it.


When have you ever dished out anything?

All you ever post is the same thing over and over again any time anyone posts anything that upsets your pathetic narrative.

This is your go to always the same cry baby response:




> I do NOT enjoy dealing with bigotry, ad hom, ridicule, and hostility, just because i am up front with my biblical Christian beliefs.

----------


## Knightkore

> I RELISH disagreement.  I enjoy the challenge of crafting logical, consistent arguments.  I do NOT  enjoy dealing with bigotry, ad hom, ridicule, and hostility, just because i am up front with my biblical Christian beliefs. 
> 
> I cannot have a thread on scientific origins, anymore.   Hordes of hecklers and bigots trash the thread with antifa heckling until the mods close it.
> 
> Philosophical discussions are equally 'triggering!' to the anti-christian bigots,  who cannot stand ANY expression of belief based on biblical principles.
> 
> Arguing with the resident anti-christian bigots here is an exercise in futility.  They are protected like an LGBTQ minority, and dish it out, but cannot take it.
> 
> They exemplify the decline of civility and freedom of conscience, as their progressive indoctrination oozes from their every post.
> ...


It leads to a toxic atmosphere by the atheist trolls like @Morning Star.  Actually.....just a troll.  @Sled Dog is & can be combative on the subject of faith but is really an authentic atheist.  @Morning Star has reveal a LOT in this thread.

And possibly who he really is.

----------


## Morning Star

> {No.  Just you.  Now What.}


That was very Christian of you. Notice how, like a leftist, you attack me while I attack your beliefs.

Of all the people that have posted things against atheists never once have I said they should be censored or said they were trolling.

Atheists are not a protected class.

----------


## Knightkore

> Spoken like a true leftist, anyone that disagrees with you is a troll and should be censored. Got it.


In this case shutting down trolls.....I fully stand by my actions.

----------


## Morning Star

> In this case shutting down trolls.....I fully stand by my actions.


Sounds exactly like something a leftist college would say.

----------


## usfan

> Once again you prove the religious are identical to leftists. You believe in stupid and would ban any speech that you disagree with. I loath Islam because I know if Muslims had their way America would become a theocracy. You have just proven that Christians are really not any different, you would turn America into a Theocracy as well. THIS is why atheists dictators have attacked religion in the past and will have to do so in the future. Whether its religion A or religion B on no religion we can not all co-exist.


 :Smiley ROFLMAO:   :Smiley ROFLMAO: 

You guys kill me..  figuratively, for now, though once you get the full power of the govt, destroy the constitution, natural law, and freedon of conscience, I'm sure you'll go for the literal version..  :Thinking: 

This is just more of the phony narrative, from progressive indoctrinees. 

'Christians want a theocracy!'

'They want to control everyone!'

 :Rolleyes20: 
Right.  Just like the founders..
 :Geez:

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> Sounds exactly like something a leftist college would say.


Explain why a business like FB can deny services based on beliefs and a baker can't.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> That was very Christian of you. Notice how, like a leftist, you attack me while I attack your beliefs.
> 
> Of all the people that have posted things against atheists never once have I said they should be censored or said they were trolling.
> 
> Atheists are not a protected class.



*I attack your beliefs.


*
{And there is the full on confession.  Yes.  You do but expect us not to fight back.  THAT is a true leftist.  With this single admittance you just outed yourself completely.  Trap set & sprung.}

----------


## usfan

It's really a very effective tactic.  I see it used all the times in the public discourse.

Why engage in rational, idea based debate, if you can shut it down with disruption?  Even in this thread,  you can follow the progression:

1. The OP presents a current event as a premise for a disturbing trend regarding freedom.
2. Hecklers attack Christianity,  correlating the OP with 'Christian!' principles, deserving knee jerk hostility.
3. Personal shots intensify, until the original premise is forgotten, in favor of the desired, 'atheists vs christians!' flame war.

Next:
4. The mods infract the OP, for defending his thread from hostile invaders, or close the thread as being 'toxic!'
5. The hecklers prowl about, looking for other threads to shut down, so only the approved, progressive narrative is heard.  Anything opposing the progressive anti-christian narrative MUST be shut down!




> The anti-christian narrative:
> 
> 1. Christians hate science.
> 2. Christianity is responsible for all wars, exploitation,  and oppression. 
> 3. Christianity is the same as islam, but not as peaceful.
> 4. Muslims would love us, and live in harmony, if they weren't triggered by the hateful Christians.
> 5. American Christians want a theocracy.
> 6. American Christians want to ban all books but the bible.
> 7. The bible is the source of all hate and oppression in the world.
> ...

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> It's really a very effective tactic.  I see it used all the times in the public discourse.
> 
> Why engage in rational, idea based debate, if you can shut it down with disruption?  Even in this thread,  you can follow the progression:
> 
> 1. The OP presents a current event as a premise for a disturbing trend regarding freedom.
> 2. Hecklers attack Christianity,  correlating the OP with 'Christian!' principles, deserving knee jerk hostility.
> 3. Personal shots intensify, until the original premise is forgotten, in favor of the desired, 'atheists vs christians!' flame war.
> 
> Next:
> ...


You have their number exactly.

----------


## usfan

> When have you ever dished out anything?
> All you ever post is the same thing over and over again any time anyone posts anything that upsets your pathetic narrative.
> This is your go to always the same cry baby response:


 :Rolleyes20: 

Typical phony narrative.  I take on the anti-christian bigots here more than anyone, standing toe to toe without flinching.  You whiney fuckers are the ones blubbering to the mods to protect you from the 'mean Christian!'

But true to your progressive indoctrination and tactics, you flip everything, and accuse the very things you do.

You cowards don't have the balls to face people straight up, in the mosh pit, but slink around the public forums, denigrating anything remotely 'christian!' to feed some soul-sick urge.

Run along now.. you've been outed, here.  Perhaps elsewhere in the forum you can keep up the illusion that you are a traditional, conservative American, who loves freedom.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

[QUOTE=usfan;2000067]It's really a very effective tactic.  I see it used all the times in the public discourse.

Why engage in rational, idea based debate, if you can shut it down with disruption?  Even in this thread,  you can follow the progression:

1. The OP presents a current event as a premise for a disturbing trend regarding freedom. I didn't start the thread
2. Hecklers attack Christianity,  correlating the OP with 'Christian!' principles, deserving knee jerk hostility. The OP is about Christian Principles, no correlation necessary.
3. Personal shots intensify, until the original premise is forgotten, in favor of the desired, 'atheists vs christians!' flame war. Every post has been about the OP it has not been forgotten, until you chimed, your posts have nothing to do with the baker at all.

4. The mods infract the OP, for defending his thread from hostile invaders, or close the thread as being 'toxic!' The mods are going to infract RMNIXION for opening this thread?

5. The hecklers prowl about, looking for other threads to shut down, so only the approved, progressive narrative is heard. Anything opposing the progressive anti-christian narrative MUST be shut down! That is the dumbest thing I ever heard, name one thread that has been shut down based on your narrative.

*As Usual:*

----------


## patrickt

> Explain why a business like FB can deny services based on beliefs and a baker can't.


Beliefs don't make you a protected class. Membership in the class makes you a protected individual.

But, I wonder why it's just bakers? I know lawyers are almost as creative as they are ethical but why not sue an artist for not doing a nude portrait of a gay couple? How about suing a masseur for not giving a gay man a massage? How about suing a band for not playing music at the wedding reception? How about suing a maid service for refusing the clean the house after an orgy? How about a skydiving instructor who doesn't want to do a tandem jump with a gay man?

----------

Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Typical phony narrative.  I take on the anti-christian bigots here more than anyone, standing toe to toe without flinching.  You whiney fuckers are the ones blubbering to the mods to protect you from the 'mean Christian!'
> 
> But true to your progressive indoctrination and tactics, you flip everything, and accuse the very things you do.
> 
> You cowards don't have the balls to face people straight up, in the mosh pit, but slink around the public forums, denigrating anything remotely 'christian!' to feed some soul-sick urge.
> 
> Run along now.. you've been outed, here.  Perhaps elsewhere in the forum you can keep up the illusion that you are a traditional, conservative American, who loves freedom.


Never once have you taken me on nor have I ever cried to the mods. With you the same thing happens EVER SINGLE TIME.

1. You post some narrative.
2. I expose your non-sense or simple disagree with you.
3. No matter what was said you post the same crap; Ad Hom, militant atheist oh boo hoo i'm being attacked.

----------


## Morning Star

> Beliefs don't make you a protected class. Membership in the class makes you a protected individual.
> 
> But, I wonder why it's just bakers? I know lawyers are almost as creative as they are ethical but why not sue an artist for not doing a nude portrait of a gay couple? How about suing a masseur for not giving a gay man a massage? How about suing a band for not playing music at the wedding reception? How about suing a maid service for refusing the clean the house after an orgy? How about a skydiving instructor who doesn't want to do a tandem jump with a gay man?


It's not even bakers, it just this one baker, (there may be a couple more but I can't recall it). He is just making a spectacle of himself to show what a great "Christian" he is. If it were gays setting up christian bakers where are all the others that are being set up?

----------


## usfan

> Never once have you taken me on nor have I ever cried to the mods. With you the same thing happens EVER SINGLE TIME.
> 
> 1. You post some narrative.
> 2. I expose your non-sense or simple disagree with you.
> 3. No matter what was said you post the same crap; Ad Hom, militant atheist oh boo hoo i'm being attacked.


You want a flame war?  Take it to the mosh pit, where it is appropriate.  ..maybe I'll join you.. Why disrupt the public threads with your bigotry?

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> You want a flame war?  Take it to the mosh pit, where it is appropriate.  ..maybe I'll join you.. Why disrupt the public threads with your bigotry?


Who is flaming, I'm just posting the facts on your usual avoidance of any real debate.

As for disrupting this thread with bigotry, this IS a thread about bigotry. The baker is bigoted against gays. That is the basis for his denial of service.
I actually don't care about his bigotry, my problem is that he hides behind "God" to do it. He does this because that makes him special, he doesn't have to obey the civil rights laws because his religion give him the right to be above the law everyone else has to follow. He's a "Christian".

----------


## Rita Marley

> Beliefs don't make you a protected class. Membership in the class makes you a protected individual.
> 
> But, I wonder why it's just bakers? I know lawyers are almost as creative as they are ethical but why not sue an artist for not doing a nude portrait of a gay couple? How about suing a masseur for not giving a gay man a massage? How about suing a band for not playing music at the wedding reception? How about suing a maid service for refusing the clean the house after an orgy? How about a skydiving instructor who doesn't want to do a tandem jump with a gay man?


So...why can a member of a protected class be discriminated against? Religion is protected.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> Beliefs don't make you a protected class. Membership in the class makes you a protected individual.
> 
> But, I wonder why it's just bakers? I know lawyers are almost as creative as they are ethical but why not sue an artist for not doing a nude portrait of a gay couple? How about suing a masseur for not giving a gay man a massage? How about suing a band for not playing music at the wedding reception? How about suing a maid service for refusing the clean the house after an orgy? How about a skydiving instructor who doesn't want to do a tandem jump with a gay man?


Actually the First Amendment makes religious expression a protected class.  For much of the reasons you list here.  Freedom of assembly is also Freedom FROM assembly if one chooses not to participate based on ones conscience.  It is why you are not forced to go to church.

{I'm going to add this:  The Founders perhaps naively assumed that America would grow & America would still have adults with the maturity to act civilized & to work out differences with the same kind of maturity and intelligence the Founders did.  They did not realize just how people would de-evolve & end up having such a lack of maturity in flabbergasting ways being triggered by the simplest words.  Going to safe spaces because someone writes the name Trump.  This country.....the Constitution was written for MATURE, INTELLIGENT, RELIGIOUS adults.  America is short on all three.}

----------

Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## patrickt

> It's not even bakers, it just this one baker, (there may be a couple more but I can't recall it). He is just making a spectacle of himself to show what a great "Christian" he is. If it were gays setting up christian bakers where are all the others that are being set up?


I've seen no evidence that what you say is accurate but there is no logic to religion so looking for rational beliefs or actions is pointless. I'll take the baker at his word but for me it's a moot point. I support our Constitution.

----------


## Morning Star

> So...why can a member of a protected class be discriminated against? Religion is protected.


Apparently they can be. Homosexuals are a protected class but they can be discriminated against by the religious which is a higher protected class.

----------


## Rita Marley

> Apparently they can be. Homosexuals are a protected class but they can be discriminated against by the religious which is a higher protected class.


Well...religion IS protected first.

But hey if you're down with forced labor, make me a sammich.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),usfan (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> I've seen no evidence that what you say is accurate but there is no logic to religion so looking for rational beliefs or actions is pointless. I'll take the baker at his word but for me it's a moot point. I support our Constitution.


As do I. I don't say he should just bake the cake from a government control position, I am against that, but the civil rights amendment is constitutional law too. No one can open a business and violate discrimination laws, like not providing a service to someone because they are black. No matter what you believe that is the law. That is unless you are a Christian, now you are above the law. You have the RIGHT to use one constitutional protection to violate the constitutional protection of others because you are special and you imaginary sky man says so.

----------


## Morning Star

> Well...religion IS protected first.
> 
> But hey if you're down with forced labor, make me a sammich.


No one is forcing him to be a baker.

----------


## Knightkore

> Apparently they can be. Homosexuals are a protected class but they can be discriminated against by the religious which is a higher protected class.


There is actually NO Constitutional Amendment that says same sexers are a protected class.  There IS however a First Amendment that protects religious expression.  Kind of written to protect my fellow religious people against those like you.  The Founders even back then had your number.

----------

Rita Marley (12-20-2018),usfan (12-20-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> No one is forcing him to be a baker.


They are attempting to force him to bake a cake that negates his right to religion.

No one forced Zucky to start FB.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> As do I. I don't say he should just bake the cake from a government control position, I am against that, but the civil rights amendment is constitutional law too. No one can open a business and violate discrimination laws, like not providing a service to someone because they are black. No matter what you believe that is the law. That is unless you are a Christian, now you are above the law. You have the RIGHT to use one constitutional protection to violate the constitutional protection of others because you are special and you imaginary sky man says so.

----------


## Morning Star

> Well...religion IS protected first.


OK, so a Muslim believes he should kill all homosexuals, that means his religious right overrides the homosexuals right to life.

I'm guessing you are going to say the right to life is higher than religious rights. 

So we have an order of rights now huh? Odd that it doesn't say that, in fact the constitution says:

*the enumeration of rights shall not be interpreted to deny other rights*

----------


## usfan

Are all human actions 'protected?'  Can you deal drugs, crap on the sidewalk (or in a Christian bakery!), or shoot guns at the park?

Why should the statistically proven dangers of homosexuality,  sodomy, and the consequences to society be ignored, in favor of some lame excuse of 'personal choice!'?

No different than abortion.  Unborn children were once protected, but progressive legal maneuvering made it ok.

Why should a belief in absolute morality be censored, in favor of the belief in amoral relativity?  Which is better for society?

1. Moral standards, strong nuclear family, freedom

2. Amoral relativism, massive dependency, crime, social breakdown, nanny state control.

Americas WAS based on #1, at one time.  But in our current post Christian,  anti American progressive culture, the latter is preferred and increasing.

We are only reaping the harvest of the sown ideology.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> They are attempting to force him to bake a cake that negates his right to religion.


Which denies the homosexual of his right not to be discriminated against:

*the enumeration of rights shall not be interpreted to deny other rights*

----------


## Morning Star

> Are all human actions 'protected?'  Can you deal drugs, crap on the sidewalk (or in a Christian bakery!), or shoot guns at the park?
> 
> Why should the statistically proven dangers of homosexuality,  sodomy, and the consequences to society be ignored, in favor of some lame excuse of 'personal choice!'?
> 
> No different than abortion.  Unborn children were once protected, but progressive legal maneuvering made it ok.
> 
> Why should a belief in absolute morality be censored, in favor of the belief in amoral relativity?  Which is better for society?
> 
> 1. Moral standards, strong nuclear family, freedom
> ...


I'm just going by the constitution as it stands today, and sorry it is unconstitutional to discriminate against homos. Like it or not. 

I don't like it myself to be honest. I am actually all for a business denying service for any reason, including discrimination. 

My problem is, once again, that Christians are using their religious "rights" to violate other people's constitutional rights. One right CAN NOT be used to violate another.

Unless of course if you are a Christian. You're special.

----------


## Morning Star

> There is actually NO Constitutional Amendment that says same sexers are a protected class.  There IS however a First Amendment that protects religious expression.  Kind of written to protect my fellow religious people against those like you.  The Founders even back then had your number.


You are wrong as usual on this, one right can not be used to violate another. We could repeal the civil rights act.

----------


## Knightkore

> OK, so a Muslim believes he should kill all homosexuals, that means his religious right overrides the homosexuals right to life.
> 
> I'm guessing you are going to say the right to life is higher than religious rights. 
> 
> So we have an order of rights now huh? Odd that it doesn't say that, in fact the constitution says:
> 
> *the enumeration of rights shall not be interpreted to deny other rights*


Yes.  Anyone worth their weight in honesty realizes the concept of life versus murder.  And to imply that Christians, this Christian is doing the same as islamists.....or even desires to.....reveals the level of your own hate.  Your quote "I attack your beliefs" is now in my signature for all to see all the time.  I remember Sooda.  You're actually in some respect worse than her.  Your dishonesty, your inauthenticity makes you a laughing stock.....and essentially now being a troll apologist for the murder of same sexers by islamists as a right is as dangerous as I have seen you get.  You've become unhinged.

You've become this sites Jim Acosta.

----------


## El Guapo

Remember faggots and their virtue signalling fuckwit proxies words a few short years ago?

Their smarmy asshole rejoinder to everyone who has since been proven correct in spades? That they:

*'... don't want to force anyone to do anything...'*

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## El Guapo

> No one is forcing him to be a baker.


 That's an incoherent argument. Absurd, actually.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> OK, so a Muslim believes he should kill all homosexuals, that means his religious right overrides the homosexuals right to life.
> 
> I'm guessing you are going to say the right to life is higher than religious rights. 
> 
> So we have an order of rights now huh? Odd that it doesn't say that, in fact the constitution says:
> 
> *the enumeration of rights shall not be interpreted to deny other rights*


And yet homos...and now tranny lawyers...persist in denying religious rights.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Yes.  Anyone worth their weight in honesty realizes the concept of life versus murder.  And to imply that Christians, this Christian is doing the same as islamists.....or even desires to.....reveals the level of your own hate.  Your quote "I attack your beliefs" is now in my signature for all to see all the time.  I remember Sooda.  You're actually in some respect worse than her.  Your dishonesty, your inauthenticity makes you a laughing stock.....and essentially now being a troll apologist for the murder of same sexers by islamists as a right is as dangerous as I have seen you get.  You've become unhinged.
> 
> You've become this sites Jim Acosta.


You are the one advocating that one right should be used to deny another. So now you want to define which rights have greater power than others.

Even though the constitution specifically says one right can NOT be used to deny another. Why should your logic be confined to your beliefs? Islam is a religion, is your religion higher than all others in this hierarchy as well?

----------


## Morning Star

> That's an incoherent argument. Absurd, actually.


The argument is that he is being forced to work, he is not.

----------


## Morning Star

> And yet homos...and now tranny lawyers...persist in denying religious rights.


That would be unconstitutional, which religious right would that be.

----------


## Rita Marley

> That would be unconstitutional, which religious right would that be.


The right to religious expression.

ShouldJewish delis and muslim falafel shops be forced to make ham sammies?

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> The right to religious expression.
> 
> ShouldJewish delis and muslim falafel shops be forced to make ham sammies?


It is about one right being used to violate another which is expressly forbidden in the constitution.

A Jewish Deli should not be forced to do anything, but it also can not violate the rights of other citizens based on a right they have.

A Jewish Deli can not refuse to provide any service they are providing to the pubic based on discrimination against an individual customer. 

So, if the deli serves ham sandwiches they have to sell ham sandwiches to homosexuals and blacks and whatever etc, etc.

There is no religious right to violate the rights of others.

----------


## Knightkore

> You are wrong as usual on this, one right can not be used to violate another. We could repeal the civil rights act.


PROVE where it shows same sexers are a protected class?

{Incidentally you've trapped yourself again.  Same sexer rights cannot violate religious rights either.}

----------


## Knightkore

> You are the one advocating that one right should be used to deny another. So now you want to define which rights have greater power than others.
> 
> Even though the constitution specifically says one right can NOT be used to deny another. Why should your logic be confined to your beliefs? Islam is a religion, is your religion higher than all others in this hierarchy as well?


Murder is not a right.

----------


## Knightkore

> That would be unconstitutional, which religious right would that be.


Bull.  It is exactly what you are defending.

----------


## Morning Star

> Murder is not a right.


It is a religious belief, which YOU are claiming is the highest right in the land. I guess you just meant your religious beliefs. We better inform the SC.

----------


## Morning Star

> PROVE where it shows same sexers are a protected class?
> 
> {Incidentally you've trapped yourself again.  Same sexer rights cannot violate religious rights either.}


Read the civil rights act, it will be an eye opener for you.

----------


## Rita Marley

> It is about one right being used to violate another which is expressly forbidden in the constitution.
> 
> A Jewish Deli should not be forced to do anything, but it also can not violate the rights of other citizens based on a right they have.
> 
> A Jewish Deli can not refuse to provide any service they are providing to the pubic based on discrimination against an individual customer. 
> 
> So, if the deli serves ham sandwiches they have to sell ham sandwiches to homosexuals and blacks and whatever etc, etc.
> 
> There is no religious right to violate the rights of others.


You're using two separate arguments. The proper analogy is:

One - the baker bakes cakes, therefore must bake all types of cakes, regardless if they negate his religious views.

Two - the falafel owner makes falafels, therefore must make all types of falafels, regardless of his religious views.

----------


## Morning Star

> One - the baker bakes cakes, therefore must bake all types of cakes, regardless if they negate his religious views.
> 
> Two - the falafel owner makes falafels, therefore must make all types of falafels, regardless of his religious views.


This is correct.

----------


## Knightkore

> It is a religious belief, which YOU are claiming is the highest right in the land. I guess you just meant your religious beliefs. We better inform the SC.


 :Geez: 

Oh please, lets inform SCOTUS.  There are at least four Judges that are far more intellectually superior to your Christian bigotry.

----------


## Knightkore

> Read the civil rights act, it will be an eye opener for you.


https://history.house.gov/Exhibition...d-Legislation/

NONE of these are to negate or void the First Amendment.  EVER.

----------


## Rita Marley

> This is correct.


Your position will lead to mayhem. I expect the tranny will receive the same legal decision as the homos. Perhaps with a harassment lawsuit thrown into the mix.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> This is correct.

----------


## usfan

The hypocrisy of the progressive position is obvious, yet they defend it with jihadist zeal.

The central question is this:

Can you legislate behavior, in society?

And the followup is, 'Where people disagree on standards of morality and behavior, who gets preference?

For many decades, homosexual activity was tolerated, or ignored, as long as they weren't too obvious.  But under the pretext of 'freedom!', they became activists and now push their lifestyle openly.

If society considers homosexuality a dangerous aberration, with destructive consequences to society, why would they NOT pass laws forbidding and/or punishing this behavior?  If the majority thinks it is cool, or benign at worst, why not allow it?

We have a small minority who promote homosexuality.  The majority of Americans,  imo, still view it as a social aberration. Why should their MORAL BELIEFS, be subjugated by the militant homosexuals who demand parity and acceptance?  Even preference?

The liberal narrative is not about moral standards, or beliefs.  It is about hate.. the favorite card of the propagandizing left.

The progressive left LOVES regulations and control.. they want to dictate every detail, and homogeneity of belief for all.  This baker is a thorn in their flesh, and an opportunity to demonize all citizens who have moral convictions that it is 'hate!', not preferred standards of social behavior that drives them.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Oh please, lets inform SCOTUS.  There are at least four Judges that are far more intellectually superior to your Christian bigotry.


So you're saying all 4 judges will agree that religious rights supersede all other constitutional rights and protections. 

Whatever non-sense your "God" says, no matter what other rights exist, always comes first.

So we are right back to what Allah says to Islamic Terrorists. That is their religious belief, and you insist they have the right to violate all other rights in following their belief.

----------


## Knightkore

> So you're saying all 4 judges will agree that religious rights supersede all other constitutional rights and protections. 
> 
> Whatever non-sense your "God" says, no matter what other rights exist, always comes first.
> 
> So we are right back to what Allah says to Islamic Terrorists. That is their religious belief, and you insist they have the right to violate all other rights in following their belief.


When you start making sense & stop making straw man arguments we can talk.  Otherwise.....I have nothing more to say.  You've wasted enough of my time I can't get back.  In fact I demand reparations for time wasted.

Credit cards are accepted.

----------

heyslick (12-20-2018),usfan (12-20-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> So you're saying all 4 judges will agree that religious rights supersede all other constitutional rights and protections. 
> 
> Whatever non-sense your "God" says, no matter what other rights exist, always comes first.
> 
> So we are right back to what Allah says to Islamic Terrorists. That is their religious belief, and you insist they have the right to violate all other rights in following their belief.


You have just explained why only Christians are being challenged.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Your position will lead to mayhem. I expect the tranny will receive the same legal decision as the homos. Perhaps with a harassment lawsuit thrown into the mix.


It will lead to mayhem if McDonald's, which sells hamburgers, has to sell their hamburgers to any customer who wants a hamburger?

Now I assume you by "all kinds" you meant even kinds they don't have ingredients for, but this is a stupid argument because you and I know this is not what we are arguing about, there was no ingredient in the cake that the baker did not have in stock. It is not discrimination not to have bacon in a Muslim restaurant. It is simply an item they don't sell. They have to sell anything they sell normally to everyone equally. Nice try but thanks for the red herring.

----------


## Morning Star

> When you start making sense & stop making straw man arguments we can talk.  Otherwise.....I have nothing more to say.  You've wasted enough of my time I can't get back.  In fact I demand reparations for time wasted.
> 
> Credit cards are accepted.


OK, let's drop murder, just some mundane thing they believe in that would violate some other right you have. You're ok with that. 

Their religious belief would give them the right to violate some other right you have, because religious rights top all other rights according to you.

...... and you don't want a Theocracy  :Geez:

----------


## Rita Marley

> It will lead to mayhem if McDonald's, which sells hamburgers, has to sell their hamburgers to any customer who wants a hamburger?
> 
> Now I assume you by "all kinds" you meant even kinds they don't have ingredients for, but this is a stupid argument because you and I know this is not what we are arguing about, there was no ingredient in the cake that the baker did not have in stock. It is not discrimination not to have bacon in a Muslim restaurant. It is simply an item they don't sell. They have to sell anything they sell normally to everyone equally. Nice try but thanks for the red herring.


The falafel owner doesn't have ingredients for ham sammies because of his religious beliefs. He refuses to make them, even if you provided the ham. It's against his religion.

Same with the Jewish deli owner.

Force them to provide delicious BLTs?

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> The falafel owner doesn't have ingredients for ham sammies because of his religious beliefs. He refuses to make them, even if you provided the ham. It's against his religion.
> 
> Same with the Jewish deli owner.
> 
> Force them to provide delicious BLTs?


Can't serve what you don't have or sell. That's not discrimination.


But now that I think about it maybe every restaurant should be forced to sell BLTs.  :Smiley ROFLMAO:

----------


## Rita Marley

> Can't serve what you don't have or sell. That's not discrimination.


Because of their religious beliefs.

Same as the Christian baker.  He can't serve what he doesn't have or sell.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

I have to wonder if atheists today would have been happier living in the Roman Empire where they could sit in the coliseum and bet on how long a Christian would last against the lions.

----------

Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> OK, let's drop murder, just some mundane thing they believe in that would violate some other right you have. You're ok with that. 
> 
> Their religious belief would give them the right to violate some other right you have, because religious rights top all other rights according to you.
> 
> ...... and you don't want a Theocracy


You mean like how islamists try to bully restaurants to stop serving pork?

School Serves Pork To Muslim Girl, Family Speaks Out (Photo)

----------

Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> I have to wonder if atheists today would have been happier living in the Roman Empire where they could sit in the coliseum and bet on how long a Christian would last against the lions.


I have no doubt @Morning Star would be like this about it:

----------

Morning Star (12-20-2018),Midgardian/Shane Ryan (12-20-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

Christians do beat the Lions in the NFC, whenever New Orleans plays Detroit.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> You mean like how islamists try to bully restaurants to stop serving pork?
> 
> School Serves Pork To Muslim Girl, Family Speaks Out (Photo)


Close enough yea.

----------


## Morning Star

> I have to wonder if atheists today would have been happier living in the Roman Empire where they could sit in the coliseum and bet on how long a Christian would last against the lions.


I think I would have like Roman times. ..... but the Lion thing isn't why I would have like it. I am an expansionist. I think the US should be an Empire.

----------


## Rita Marley

> Close enough yea.


The Christian baker does not discriminate. He doesn't provide homo-themed cakes to anyone. Not heteros, nor trannies, nor homos, nor any of the other 64 genders.

Ask @Rebel Yell. He's been 57 of them.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),Midgardian/Shane Ryan (12-20-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

> The Christian baker does not discriminate. He doesn't provide homo-themed cakes to anyone. Not heteros, nor trannies, nor homos, nor any of the other 64 genders.
> 
> Ask @Rebel Yell. He's been 57 of them.


This. No one should be forced to provide a product or service that they do not sell. You don't walk into Subway and ask for a hot dog.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

"Welcome to Baskin-Robbins".

"I'd like a pepperoni pizza with extra mushrooms."

"Uh, we don't do that."

"You will be hearing from MY lawyer!"

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## darroll

They are baiting people. Then they are happy to add them to their hate list.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> This. No one should be forced to provide a product or service that they do not sell. You don't walk into Subway and ask for a hot dog.


OR you don't get into a Miss Universe pagaent and have a hot dog.....er.....damn.

----------

Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> "Welcome to Baskin-Robbins".
> 
> "I'd like a pepperoni pizza with extra mushrooms."
> 
> "Uh, we don't do that."
> 
> "You will be hearing from MY lawyer!"


Exactly!

----------

darroll (12-20-2018),Midgardian/Shane Ryan (12-20-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

> OR you don't get into a Miss Universe pagaent and have a hot dog.....er.....damn.


Hate speech!

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> Hate speech!


 :Smiley ROFLMAO:

----------


## Morning Star

> The Christian baker does not discriminate. He doesn't provide homo-themed cakes to anyone. Not heteros, nor trannies, nor homos, nor any of the other 64 genders.
> 
> Ask @Rebel Yell. He's been 57 of them.


That is acceptable then. I'll buy that defense legally.

From strictly a business sense it never makes sense to turn away business. 
I doubt that the cake they wanted required him to produce a homo-themed cake. They probably just wanted two grooms on the top.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> This. No one should be forced to provide a product or service that they do not sell. You don't walk into Subway and ask for a hot dog.


Already said they shouldn't, another red herring argument

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

> Already said they shouldn't, another red herring argument


Could you clarify? Do you or do you not support the state of Colorado micromanaging this man's business and telling him that he must participate in an immoral ceremony?

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Rita Marley

> That is acceptable then. I'll buy that defense legally.
> 
> From strictly a business sense it never makes sense to turn away business. 
> I doubt that the cake they wanted required him to produce a homo-themed cake. They probably just wanted two grooms on the top.


He doesn't provide that to anyone, regardless of their protected status.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),Midgardian/Shane Ryan (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> Could you clarify? Do you or do you not support the state of Colorado micromanaging this man's business and telling him that he must participate in an immoral ceremony?


I do not support that, but I do expect the state to uphold the constitution, whether anyone, including me, likes it or not. A religious right can NOT over ride a civil right. Whether you like it or not.

If the law needs to be changed that is another issue.

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

> I do not support that, but I do expect the state to uphold the constitution, whether anyone, including me, likes it or not. A religious right can NOT over ride a civil right. Whether you like it or not.
> 
> If the law needs to be changed that is another issue.


There are no distinctions between civil rights and religious rights. There are rights, period. Incidentally, the Supreme Court has never ruled on whether a faggot has a right to force a Christian baker to participate in a ceremony that offends his conscience. Where in the constitution do you find that "right"?

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

> If the law needs to be changed that is another issue.


Which is it?  Changing the law is an entirely different matter. You implied that the homosexuals have a constitutional right that supersedes the rights of people to not violate their conscience. Does the constitution apply here or not?

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> There are no distinctions between civil rights and religious rights. There are rights, period. Incidentally, the Supreme Court has never ruled on whether a faggot has a right to force a Christian baker to participate in a ceremony that offends his conscience. Where in the constitution do you find that "right"?


You can cut the BS, baking a cake is NOT participating in anything, it's baking a cake. Same shit he does all day long. The faggot in question is protected from discrimination by the civil rights amendment and you're right all rights are the same. Therefore a Christian does not have the right to violate another person's rights, no matter how much "God" hates fags. Period.

----------


## RMNIXON

> That is acceptable then. I'll buy that defense legally.
> 
> From strictly a business sense it never makes sense to turn away business. 
> I doubt that the cake they wanted required him to produce a homo-themed cake. They probably just wanted two grooms on the top.




I think your missing the point. 

Business people large and small must make choices that might offend some customers and potentially lose business. But that is their right to do so and how free market choices work. 

Personally I wish we could go back to the days when the best product and service mattered most, but we are long passed that now.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

> You can cut the BS, baking a cake is NOT participating in anything, it's baking a cake.


If the cake is for a homosexual "wedding", then yes, he is participating in it.

Would you say that a Jewish baker making a cake with a swastika on the frosting for a Nazi wedding is not participating in the ceremony? Just making a cake, same as he does all day long, right?

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),RMNIXON (12-20-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

> You can cut the BS, baking a cake is NOT participating in anything, it's baking a cake. Same shit he does all day long. The faggot in question is protected from discrimination by the civil rights amendment .


We have been over this already. If a faggot comes to the bakery, identifies himself as one, and asks for a cake, he will get a cake. 

It is the nature of the ceremony for which the cake is being baked that is the issue, not the customers sexual preference.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> If the cake is for a homosexual" wedding, then yes, he is participating in it.
> 
> Would you say that a Jewish baker making a cake with a swastika on the frosting for a Nazi wedding is not participating in the ceremony? Just making a cake, same as he does all day long, right?


Yes I would say that a Jewish baker making a swastika cake is doing just that, he is making a swastika cake. He is in no way participating the the event.

Is the guy at the toilet paper factory participating in wiping your ass?

----------


## Molly Pitcher

> Shouldn't be hard to sue the "thing" for harassment and abuse of power . 
> If that doesn't work than shoot it .
> 
> 
> I use to accept - I used to be benevolent . Now these freaks can all die in the gutter , I've lost all tolerance.


AMEN BROTHER!!!!!!!    I'm SOOOO sick of this crap!   These assholes don't want to be discriminated against, and they AREN'T.   Nobody is stopping them from leading their evil, pathetic little lives.  BUT.....they won't leave Christians alone.  It's clear none of them are willing to take this to EVERYONE who objects to their life.....who's heard of any of these assholes going to a muslim bakery and asking for a cake that shows what their are?  It's pure discrimination against Christians, and interfering with their personal religion/beliefs, but that's okay with them.
*HYPOCRISY!  * *HYPOCRISY!  * *HYPOCRISY!  * *HYPOCRISY!  * *HYPOCRISY!  * *HYPOCRISY!  *

----------

darroll (12-20-2018),Don29palms (12-20-2018),Knightkore (12-20-2018),Rita Marley (12-20-2018)

----------


## Morning Star

> AMEN BROTHER!!!!!!!    I'm SOOOO sick of this crap!   These assholes don't want to be discriminated against, and they AREN'T.   Nobody is stopping them from leading their evil, pathetic little lives.  BUT.....they won't leave Christians alone.  It's clear none of them are willing to take this to EVERYONE who objects to their life.....who's heard of any of these assholes going to a muslim bakery and asking for a cake that shows what their are?  It's pure discrimination against Christians, and interfering with their personal religion/beliefs, but that's okay with them.
> *HYPOCRISY!  * *HYPOCRISY!  * *HYPOCRISY!  * *HYPOCRISY!  * *HYPOCRISY!  * *HYPOCRISY!  *


This is an interesting point, and one I would love to see, but the MSM would never allow it.

I would love to see them go into Muslim bakers and ask for a gay wedding cake  :Smiley ROFLMAO:

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

> Is the guy at the toilet paper factory participating in wiping your ass?


I didn't know that you made wiping your ass a big ceremony, and really didn't need to know.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018),usfan (12-21-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

> Yes I would say that a Jewish baker making a swastika cake is doing just that, he is making a swastika cake. He is in no way participating the the event.


Are you willing to say that to a Auschwitz survivor's face?

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## Garden House Queen

*Colorado Baker Back in Court Over 2nd LGBT Bias Allegation*
Attorneys for a Colorado baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple on religious grounds, a stand partially upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, argued in federal court that the state is punishing him again over his refusal to bake a cake celebrating a gender transition. Lawyers for Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in suburban Denver, are suing to try to stop the state from taking action against him over the new discrimination allegation. They say the state is treating Phillips with hostility because of his Christian faith and pressing a complaint that they call an "obvious setup." "At this point, he's just a guy who is trying to get back to life. The problem is the state of Colorado won't let him," Jim Campbell, an attorney for the Alliance Defending Freedom, said after the hearing. The conservative Christian nonprofit law firm is representing Phillips. State officials argued for the case to be dismissed, but the judge said he was inclined to let the case move forward and would issue a written ruling later. The Colorado Civil Rights Commission said Phillips discriminated against Denver attorney Autumn Scardina because she's transgender. Phillips' shop refused to make a cake last year that was blue on the outside and pink on the inside after Scardina revealed she wanted it to celebrate her transition from male to female.

----------

Jim Scott (12-20-2018)

----------


## Old Tex

No shoes, no shirt, no service. I believe that businesses should not be forced to serve people that they don't want to.

----------


## RMNIXON

Nothing personal, but a little hard to have missed this one:

Activist Attacks on Christian Baker Continue....

Warning Major Cat Fight still in progress............. :Sofa:

----------


## RMNIXON

> If the cake is for a homosexual "wedding", then yes, he is participating in it.
> 
> Would you say that a Jewish baker making a cake with a swastika on the frosting for a Nazi wedding is not participating in the ceremony? Just making a cake, same as he does all day long, right?


SCOTUS took note, and the same would apply to a Cake made special for the celebration a transgender operation.

----------

Knightkore (12-20-2018)

----------


## darroll

From strictly a business sense it never makes sense to turn away business. 
.[/QUOTE]True Morning Star:
I only know two Gays. They seem to bend over backwards to give you a dirty look. I can't knock on their door? they just peek at me like I'm a rape-o and would not come to the door... Strangest crap I ever saw.

----------

Knightkore (12-21-2018)

----------


## Lone Gunman

[QUOTE=Daily Bread;1998920]Shouldn't be hard to sue the "thing" for harassment and abuse of power . 
If that doesn't work than shoot it .


*I use to accept - I used to be benevolent . Now these freaks can all die in the gutter , I've lost all tolerance.[*/QUOTE]

amen.

----------

Knightkore (12-21-2018)

----------


## Rebel Yell

> The Christian baker does not discriminate. He doesn't provide homo-themed cakes to anyone. Not heteros, nor trannies, nor homos, nor any of the other 64 genders.
> 
> Ask @Rebel Yell. He's been 57 of them.


 @Rita Marley "lick a pail full of copper pennies" :Smiley ROFLMAO:

----------

Rita Marley (12-21-2018)

----------


## darroll

Some people just have to kick someones ass.

----------

Knightkore (12-21-2018)

----------


## Iron

Id make them a cake that is brown on the inside if you know what I mean.

----------

Knightkore (12-21-2018)

----------


## Iron

> This guy is just plain stupid. How many times do you have to put your hand on the stove and get burnt before you learn to just STFU. Does it really matter if he is right or wrong at this point? Hasn't he ruined his life enough already? Maybe it's time to find another job where his festering hatred of faggots won't get him in to any more trouble.


Burnt by the stove? HE WON AT THE SUPREME COURT. That is the ultimate judicial win, how many people win so great they win at the Supreme Court?


It was the radical crybullies that put their hand on the stove. This man is a hero and someone to be looked up to even if you dont agree with him. His bravery showed us that the 1st Amendment still exists. Name the last time the 1st Amendment prevailed like this.

Sorry to break it to you but you have a cowardly, defeatest attitude, which is exactly what the crybullies want. They want to kill your spirit to fight and want you to just roll over (or bend over knowing those freaks) and capitulate.

----------

darroll (12-21-2018),Knightkore (12-21-2018),OneDumbBlonde (12-21-2018),Sled Dog (12-21-2018),usfan (12-21-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

> Id make them a cake that is brown on the inside if you know what I mean.

----------


## Rita Marley

> @Rita Marley "lick a pail full of copper pennies"


LOL. You bastard.

----------

Knightkore (12-21-2018),Rebel Yell (12-21-2018)

----------


## nonsqtr

> You can cut the BS, baking a cake is NOT participating in anything, it's baking a cake. Same shit he does all day long. The faggot in question is protected from discrimination by the civil rights amendment and you're right all rights are the same. Therefore a Christian does not have the right to violate another person's rights, no matter how much "God" hates fags. Period.


There is no right to purchase a cake. Neither faggets nor anyone else have the right to force an American citizen to perform labor.

----------

darroll (12-21-2018),Knightkore (12-21-2018),Midgardian/Shane Ryan (12-21-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

> There is no right to purchase a cake. Neither faggets nor anyone else have the right to force an American citizen to perform labor.


I think his lawyers should present a 13th Amendment defense. I was going to say that doing that would blow the Democrat's mind, but then I remembered that Democrats not only opposed the 13th Amendment, they had to be forced to ratify it or not be allowed seats in Congress.

----------

Knightkore (12-21-2018)

----------


## Liberty Monkey

I remember a time when if you went to one shop and they didn't want to serve you for any reason, you just went to another one and they did. I just wonder why we need fake outrage?

This is just victim mentality in another form.

And if this was a real issue I would start a gay cake bakery in the area because I like to make money like all true Republicans rather than it just be given to me.

----------

Knightkore (12-21-2018),Kris P Bacon (12-26-2018),Rebel Yell (12-21-2018)

----------


## Trinnity

*Multiple threads merged.*

----------

Knightkore (12-28-2018)

----------


## Midgardian/Shane Ryan

Or, we can classify this attorney as an agent of the state, since she is an officer of the court.

Jack Phillip's place of business is a private establishment. You are supposed to have autonomy in your home (within reason).

By entering the cake shop and demanding he participate in an unconscionable ceremony, the agent of the state is forcing Phillips to quarter her in his private domain.

Third Amendment violation.

----------

Knightkore (12-28-2018)

----------


## Knightkore

Frankly it is time to back hand some dumbass perverts back into their closet where they are supposed to stay.

----------

Molly Pitcher (12-28-2018)

----------

