If you're going to make it a "religious freedom, he doesn''t want to sin!" angle, I'd like to see where in the Bible does it say not to bake a cake that is pink on the inside and blue on the outside, is it in Leviticus?
You're opening this up to where anyone can say "well, that's a sin too me" as a means to circumvent laws. eg Paying traffic fines is a sin to me, but I still pay them.
Religious freedom implies practicing your religious beliefs so long as they don't interfere or act detrimental to other people in the society. Whether not baking a cake is detrimental to the couple or the trans lawyer is debatable(I would say it isn't, but there's a principle to these things).
I don't have a specific citation, but do you really have any doubt that somewhere in the bible it basically states that you shouldn't actively support the sins of others?
No because in the event of something like a traffic fine the guy takes a specific action. Penalizing him for that action is no different than arresting a radical muslim terrorist who attacks people in the name of Allah. In the bakers case, he's simply refusing to take an action that he considers a sin. By the same token, if the guy with a religious basis to refuse the traffic fine he should have taken the obvious course of not speeding. By taking the action he was effectively trying to force his religion on others. Freedom of religion means one can say "I can't *insert action* because it's a sin in my religion", it doesn't mean "You can't *insert action* because it's a sin in my religion". And don't get me wrong because a large number of Christians don't understand that subtle difference and are the worst about doing it. This baker didn't do that though. He didn't try to stop the wedding by refusing the cake, he offered them any other cake he'd already made. They could have bought one, taken it to someone else to have decorated however they wanted and the guy wouldn't have said a word about it.
__________________
Last edited by darthgoober on Aug 17th, 2018 at 08:24 PM
That's sort of a broad catch-all you're making. I also don't see how a pink/blue cake is sinning, I'm sure the man has made cakes with both pink and blue in them before (eg a baby's sex reveal party), he's just deciding now that this specific pink/blue cake is a sin.
I believe someone brought it up that the guy isn't being asked to bake a cake with Satan sucking dicks on it or "I <3 Sodomy and taking the Lord's name in vein!" writing, which sure, I can understand if the guy wants to hide behind his religion for that.
edit: And I still maintain that he should be allowed, but let's cut the shit with trying to excuse this guy's bigotry as something else, under his religion or whatnot. He simply does not like gays and trans people; that's bigotry plain and simple
It's not for anyone else to try to dictate by law what he personally considers a sin though. That's a REALLY bad precedent to set. Hell this guy refuses to make Halloween cakes...
It's not the law to cater to every invented whim. Like I said, can I be excused out of paying traffic fines because I see those as a "sin"? No, you'd laugh at me and rightfully so. It's also not mob-like extortion when I have to pay them or face greater consequences.
He believes they live in a state of sin. You can believe he's wrong about it but when you get right down to it none of us will know for sure unless there is a God and he tells us after we're dead.
I thought everyone agreed that business should be able to do whatever they want?
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
I believe paying traffic fines is a sin. You can believe I'm wrong about it but when you get right down to it none of us will know for sure unless there is a God and he tells us after we're dead.
Oh it's not? Because something tells me that the Trans people who called him very much support the notion that gender is determined strictly by the individual and the government should enforce their choices. And like I said, with the traffic fines you're being punished for your actions, not for a refusal to sin. It's a difficult matter to resolve, but I believe that this guy has at least come up with a fair way to do so. He won't focus what he considers to be his God given talents to support something he considers to be a sin, but he's still willing to serve them with anything he created for everyone. And it's absolutely a situation like that when you go to jail if you don't pay the fine. Going to jail is absolutely "facing greater consequences".
You're forfeiting the right to avoid traffic fines when you speed. Freedom of religion doesn't make all your actions excusable. At least it doesn't any more, there was the whole witch burning things back in the day... but see we've learned since then. If you're saying that it doesn't grant us any protection whatsoever however, then why keep it on the books at all? I mean do you want to just do away with that constitutional right? If not, what do YOU think it should encompass?
__________________
Last edited by darthgoober on Aug 17th, 2018 at 08:46 PM
I believe you're arguing against the baker now? He has freedom of religion, certainly. But that freedom does not allow him to break established laws because of his religion and that's the specific issue here. There are laws against discriminating against a person's sexual orientation (regardless of how you feel on these); this is what is being claimed again.
No I'm not because I don't believe that the law should extend so far as to force someone to sin. We'll find out from the supreme court when it finally gets that far. And he's not discriminating because he's not refusing service. He still welcomes their business. He's an artist he shouldn't be forced to use his gift for something he's spiritually against. By the same token, whatever is left of Fred Phelps church should be allowed to force a gay painter to paint a mural on the wall of their church depicting God casting gays into Hell.
KMC Community Forums
Aug 17th, 2018 08:02 PM
