Originally posted by |King Joker|
It was a limited ruling that said the Colorado court was biased against the baker, nothing more.
So this could have been about a lawn-mowing case and the outcome would be the same, if I understand you correctly? Meaning, this was not a ruling on free-speech rights and how they apply, it was a ruling on impropriety in a court case?
Originally posted by Robtard
Members of Abolish Human Abortion had been handing out rather vivid posters outside the shop that seem to link gay acceptance to the prevalence of abortion. They then came inside Bedlam Coffee and received service—until shop owner Ben Borgman angrily threw them out, declaring their views and their posters offensive. -snipYeah, clearly the same thing and comparable, squirt <--- This is sarcasm btw
Nice. But, as a business owner, I would care more about them driving customers away or being rowdy in my establishment. If they paid and played nicely, I wouldn't kick anyone out.
I hope this owner doesn't get into trouble over this. He should get to kick people out of his business if he doesn't like them.
Originally posted by Surtur
[B]Speaking of double standards...read about this:Christian Cake Bakers and Gay Coffee Shop Owners: Why Freedom of Association Is for Everybody
[b]"It's very easy to watch Borgman's rant and decide that, no, his shop shouldn't have to play host to a group of people who were just outside handing out fliers that he found offensive and that he felt attacked him personally.
It's also easy to watch it and immediately think about the upcoming Supreme Court case about whether the government can force a baker to prepare wedding cakes for gay couples. And some, like the legal scholar Jonathan Turley, are doing exactly that. If a coffee shop owner doesn't want to serve a group whose positions he finds disagreeable and offensive, is that subtantially different from a baker refusing to do work for a same-sex marriage he finds offensive?
Members of Abolish Human Abortion had been handing out rather vivid posters outside the shop that seem to link gay acceptance to the prevalence of abortion. They then came inside Bedlam Coffee and received service—until shop owner Ben Borgman angrily threw them out, declaring their views and their posters offensive. -snipYeah, clearly the same thing and comparable, squirt <--- This is sarcasm btw
Originally posted by Surturimagine being surturd and whining about anti religious bigotry lmao
No. The ruling doesn't mean another business could do this and necessarily get away with it. It was more about the hostility towards the mans religion that was shown. At least that is how it comes off.In other words: the left actually faced consequences for their anti christian bigotry. I love that lol.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
imagine being surturd and whining about anti religious bigotry lmao
I don't care if people are bigoted against religion. I do like seeing the side that so often gets away with bashing Christians...not get away with it.
People can scream "herp derp persecution!". I wouldn't use that word. It's just more okay to talk shit about Christians in this country than it is other religions.
It's why someone like Joy Behar would run her mouth against Christians, but would never say a damn thing about Islam.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
Jesus didn't promote promiscuous sexual behavior either, he was against it, but he argued against stoning a woman for committing adultery.Just because you disagree with the morality of an action isn't enough justification for the state getting involved in inflicting force to enforce that morality.
Were I the baker, I would've just made them the ****ing cake and I don't have a problem with gays, but I take issue with the government being used to compel what a person does with their own labor and artistic expression.
And notice they don't see to have as much issue with the gay cafe owner kicking out christians for their religious views?
They need to be consistent. These anti abortion folk can hand out whatever flyers they want outside. If they came into the restaurant and tried I could understand it, but they didn't. They were kicked out for a strong anti abortion stance that comes 100% from religious beliefs.
This is why either religion should not be a protected class or other beliefs(like political beliefs) should also be one.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
I don't see a difference.I'm too lazy to think critically right now, could you elaborate?
The coffee shop guy didn't refuse them service due to their religion, he kicked them out because they were being offensive.
eg If the baker had refused service because the gay-couple had been passing out leaflets in and around his store that purposed that Christianity and pedophilia were connected and they got booted on that, no one would have had an issue.
tl; dr: Surt's doing another faulty comparison.
Originally posted by Robtard
The coffee shop guy didn't refuse them service due to their religion, he kicked them out because they were being offensive.eg If the baker had refused service because the gay-couple had been passing out leaflets in and around his store that purposed that Christianity and pedophilia were connected and they got booted on that, no one would have had an issue.
tl; dr: Surt's doing another faulty comparison.
Lol that's just bullshit. They weren't behaving offensively in the restaurant. Perhaps outside of it, but not inside. You are lying.
And listen to his damn rant and listen to the reason he says he wants them out.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Nice. But, as a business owner, I would care more about them driving customers away or being rowdy in my establishment. If they paid and played nicely, I wouldn't kick anyone out.I hope this owner doesn't get into trouble over this. He should get to kick people out of his business if he doesn't like them.
I agree he should. But then people agreeing need to cease their damn whining over what the Christian baker did.
Either it's all okay or none of it is.
And I'm pretty sure the gay cafe thing is in the SAME state as the flower thing lol.
Originally posted by Surtur
Lol that's just bullshit. They weren't behaving offensively in the restaurant. Perhaps outside of it, but not inside. You are lying.And listen to his damn rant and listen to the reason he says he wants them out.
Copy & Paste from your own story: "shop owner Ben Borgman angrily threw them out, declaring their views and their posters offensive."
Their view being that abortion is bad and abortion is prevalent because we accept homosexuality. Pretty offensive garbage. Maybe be honest for once?
Originally posted by Robtard
Copy & Paste from your own story: "shop owner Ben Borgman angrily threw them out, declaring their views and their posters offensive."Their view being that abortion is bad and abortion is prevalent because we accept homosexuality. Pretty offensive garbage. Maybe be honest for once?
They were offended over religious views lol. Just stop.
And who the hell decides what is and isn't offensive? It means different things to different people. So if the baker was offended by gays kissing and they had kissed outside his shop...he could boot them out? Cuz offensive? Go on, give excuses. That offense is different, less righteous.
Originally posted by Surtur
And who the hell decides what is and isn't offensive? It means different things to different people. So if the baker was offended by gays kissing and they had kissed outside his shop...he could boot them out? Cuz offensive? Go on, give excuses. That offense is different, less righteous.
Originally posted by SurturThe story is trying to push that the coffee shop owner had a "no service to Christians" policy and/or viewpoint; that is not the case, they were kicked out due to the specific offensive actions; not their religion.
They were offended over religious views lol. Just stop.And who the hell decides what is and isn't offensive? It means different things to different people. So if the baker was offended by gays kissing and they had kissed outside his shop...he could boot them out? Cuz offensive? Go on, give excuses. That offense is different, less righteous.
If the baker had a 'no kissing' policy across the board and for everyone, you'd have a point.
Originally posted by Robtard
The story is trying to push that the coffee shop owner had a "no service to Christians" policy and/or viewpoint; that is not the case, they were kicked out due to the specific offensive actions; not their religion.If the baker had a 'no kissing' policy across the board and for everyone, you'd have a point.
And the baker didn't have a "no service to gays" policy. Moving on.