|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Interesting argument..... /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1512506232 Message started by raydawg on 12/05/17 at 12:37:12 |
|
Title: Interesting argument..... Post by raydawg on 12/05/17 at 12:37:12 With the surpreme court hearing the wedding cake case, the argument is artistic expression being denied by the lower court rulings. The guy states he would bake them a plain wedding cake, or they could buy anything in his shop, but not force him to create and design something he doesn’t want to do..,. He doesn’t to anti American cakes, or Halloween, and others, based on his own freedom of expression. I don’t know how the courts could decide against that argument without opening a flood of new cases. |
|
Title: Re: Interesting argument..... Post by Trippah on 12/05/17 at 14:01:41 It really, I suppose, hinges on if he is a business or a craftsman. A business cannot pick and choose its customers (only blacks, only pinks, only singles etc) without opening the floodgates of discrimination. If he says he makes wedding cakes, then if gay weddings are legal, he would be required to make one. If it weren't in these crusader times, he might offer customers to pick their own figurines but hey, what do I know. A craftsman can, I think, make only object's d'art based on his personal feelings and beliefs. Will be interesting. |
|
Title: Re: Interesting argument..... Post by raydawg on 12/05/17 at 14:28:02 10362D3434252C440 wrote:
I agree, he said he offered them your basic wedding cake. It’s when they wanted him to use his own expression, that it got muddy. Who will be in charge in deciding where that line is? I think we need an absolute, in this case, if it’s a cookie cutter rendition, then you cannot refuse service, however, if extends into the realm of creative interpretations, the artist should never be made to create against their will. BTW, this couple went elsewhere and got a cake, married, and hopefully live happy ever after.... Which I believe is material, they were not denied their needs based on this one person executing his freedom. You force this, what’s next, religion? |
|
Title: Re: Interesting argument..... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 12/05/17 at 15:42:53 Nobody has a right to my labor. I decide to accept a contract or not. They have no damage. People have forgotten property rights and freedom. It's not complicated. He doesn't do that kind of cake. Get over it. |
|
Title: Re: Interesting argument..... Post by raydawg on 12/05/17 at 17:06:03 657A7C7B6661506050687A763D0F0 wrote:
I think you are right Jog. If the guy said it restricts his freedom of religion, then I say he loses, because the man is still free to worship. Just like the couple is free to get married and have someone else make their cake. No damage, no infringement, no brainer.... Being gay has nothing to do with it, just like the guys faith. |
|
Title: Re: Interesting argument..... Post by raydawg on 12/05/17 at 20:00:40 https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/there-will-be-no-winners-in-the-supreme-courts-wedding-cake-case/2017/12/04/ba297c96-d6e4-11e7-a986-d0a9770d9a3e_story.html?utm_term=.7ecf11028099 |
|
Title: Re: Interesting argument..... Post by Serowbot on 12/06/17 at 08:50:30 5E4147405D5A6B5B6B53414D06340 wrote:
If you are a home builder, you can't refuse to build a home for a black family,... or a Jewish family... They do have the right to your labor... Refusal is discrimination... That's the law... I think the question here is,.. are LBGT protected minorities?... If they are,.. you cannot deny them service based on their sexuality... If they are not,... then it is legitimate to deny service... Religious beliefs can be distorted into any discrimination you want... (not just Christian beliefs) You can't argue against Sharia law and for Christian law... America has a Constitution... your religion ends at the tip of my nose... If your religion prevents you from treating US citizens as equals,... you need to move... |
|
Title: Re: Interesting argument..... Post by raydawg on 12/06/17 at 09:04:17 I think you are wrong on this..... Example, your spin: If you are a home builder, you can't refuse to build a home for a black family,... or a Jewish family... They do have the right to your labor... No, maybe the contractor said he feels his skills are not to the point of building the house the architect designed, and declines to bid/build it. The argument is NOT about his religious beliefs. You want to get into thought policing, good luck with that, you think Trump is bad, go ahead, base the law on that, you'll be sorry. You use to LOVE snuffing any dialogue/posting of opposing views to yours, under your authority of moderator interpretation.... While ignoring those who sided with you, funny how that power works. Free expression is just that, understand, or suffer from continual conflict. Look how folk use to chide Tweeter, for tweeting, now they tweet, becoming that of which they said they hated. Like the link I posted, did you read it? This problem/issue was so avoidable, but today's butthurt victimization mentality is dragging everyone down into the mud, maybe swamp mud, as Tweeter continues to sling it, others toss it back! :-[ |
|
Title: Re: Interesting argument..... Post by WebsterMark on 12/06/17 at 09:42:12 This is not an easy solution. The Supreme court correctly ruled religious institutions with a documented long standing belief against birth control could not be forced to pay for it. I agree with that. It's still a valid, mainstream Christian ideology for some that homosexuality is wrong and actions that condone that could be an affront to a person. A Church could refuse to accept a homosexual as a member of their congregation for example. I think any reasonable person would agree you could not force a Church to accept a member. However, commerce is different, its a little trickier. Discriminating due to race is obviously not valid because for one thing, race is an inherent facet of an individual; you are who you are. We don't decide race nor despite what some say, we can't decide gender either. However, homosexuality is viewed by many as a chosen lifestyle. (I don't necessarily agree with that by the way) As such, if it is affront to a long standing position of an established religion, I can see valid arguments supporting the baker's position. However, I can see valid arguments the other way. I honestly am not sure what I would do if asked to decide for the country as a whole. I would need to spend far more time thinking about the ramifications either way I decided that I have time to do now. That much I know. I also know if this were a Muslim baker refusing to bake a cake for a gay or Jewish couple, this case would never be an issue. A gay coffee shop owner in Seattle refused service to a group of Christians with no repercussions. |
|
Title: Re: Interesting argument..... Post by raydawg on 12/06/17 at 09:58:51 Seattle's a strange place...... If the man declined to bake a cake, yes, I agree, but I understand that is not the case in point. He was asked to design it, create it anew. I believe I heard a "standard" white wedding cake was offered. They said no. Which, could he turn down making a "black" frosted wedding cake for a BLM couple with two cops beheaded, atop of it? Can I be turned down at a woman's day spa, because of my sex? |
|
Title: Re: Interesting argument..... Post by Serowbot on 12/06/17 at 10:26:27 41524A57524454330 wrote:
Let us know... ;D |
|
Title: Re: Interesting argument..... Post by raydawg on 12/06/17 at 10:31:51 2E382F322A3F32295D0 wrote:
Let us know... ;D[/quote] Will you entertain the question? |
|
Title: Re: Interesting argument..... Post by WebsterMark on 12/06/17 at 10:33:20 This is not a Rosa Parks moment. By the way.... https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLkciPoNf3Ukw3QhIuMSLCJZpZkpnGNQd8&v=m8Occ7XSgQc |
|
Title: Re: Interesting argument..... Post by raydawg on 12/06/17 at 12:08:20 54475F42475141260 wrote:
Let us know... ;D[/quote] Will you entertain the question? [/quote] Same old drive by..... Doesn’t it get old? |
|
Title: Re: Interesting argument..... Post by T And T Garage on 12/06/17 at 15:16:11 4553445941545942360 wrote:
If you are a home builder, you can't refuse to build a home for a black family,... or a Jewish family... They do have the right to your labor... Refusal is discrimination... That's the law... I think the question here is,.. are LBGT protected minorities?... If they are,.. you cannot deny them service based on their sexuality... If they are not,... then it is legitimate to deny service... Religious beliefs can be distorted into any discrimination you want... (not just Christian beliefs) You can't argue against Sharia law and for Christian law... America has a Constitution... your religion ends at the tip of my nose... If your religion prevents you from treating US citizens as equals,... you need to move... [/quote] Well put Bot! |
|
Title: Re: Interesting argument..... Post by Trippah on 12/07/17 at 08:00:40 As a guess RD - yes, as a woman's day spa if for women, and the degree of lack of clothing etc allows for separation, as in bathrooms etc. In other parts of the world, public nudity in such places eg public baths, would probably make the answer no, if going by US Constitution and acceptance of prevailing standards (which are always evolving as in Rosa Parks and public busing). I will continue scratching my head now. ;) |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |