Colorado baker is back in court over cake refusal for transitioning person

Originally posted by mike brown
See this is a tricky subject to me cause my first impulse is to agree that you have to respect people's right to be married but you don't have to participate in the wedding. That being said, there are interesting hypothetical counter examples that support both sides of this argument.

One such example would be if a Republican candidate wants you to bake a cake for a political event and you are fiercely opposed to said candidate. Wouldn't it be within your rights to refuse service?

Another example on the other side of the argument is a cake for a black or interracial marriage if you are a racist. In this case it would seem that the precedent is that you aren't allowed to discriminate along racial lines, thanks to the civil Rights movement in the 50s and 60s.

So the important question at the root of this is do you support these anti discrimination laws brought by the civil rights movement, and if so which groups should this protected status be extended to? In which case I am inclined to extend them to include gays and trans.

I wouldn't have a problem with any of this.

In the case of the Republican, I wouldn't even be offended. The racist can go to hell, but still should be able to refuse service.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
we also have a descriptive main for Donald Trump. Toad in the hole.

I’m supposed you haven’t tired of Trump insults. He’s the most talked about man in the world and your not even on his radar.

Liberals get mad at conservative Christians yet defend Muslims. Lulz

Originally posted by cdtm
I wouldn't have a problem with any of this.

In the case of the Republican, I wouldn't even be offended. The racist can go to hell, but still should be able to refuse service.

Also, as far as intolerance goes, I understand public institutions needing to maintain an egalitarian standard of service, but privatized institutions should not be beholden to such standards, imo. If customers dislike the intolerance of the business, they can just shop at other businesses, and the intolerant business can go bankrupt. If the intolerant business owners are willing to accept the consequences of losing their business, then there is no problem, and if they don't want to lose business, they become more tolerant. Either way, consumers should control markets, not censorship policies.

Originally posted by Lestov16
Also, as far as intolerance goes, I understand public institutions needing to maintain an egalitarian standard of service,

Originally posted by Emperordmb
And they don't lmfao.

I didn't say they do. I said they need to.

Originally posted by Lestov16
I didn't say they do. I said they need to.

9 pages in this thread, yet it can all still be summed up with "nobody sane would wanna force a dude to bake a cake".

The gay couple is mad, who cares? They can go suck on a churro. Or sit on one, zing!

Originally posted by Lestov16
Liberals get mad at conservative Christians yet defend Muslims. Lulz

This is an unfair statement and iirc, it was brought up that if a Muslim baker said “no gay cakes!” as well, the same people would have a problem with it for the same reasons.

Plus some Islamophobes would be chiming in as well most likely.

Originally posted by Robtard
This is an unfair statement and iirc, it was brought up that if a Muslim baker said “no gay cakes!” as well, the same people would have a problem with it for the same reasons.

Plus some Islamophobes would be chiming in as well most likely.

Which religion does the left cut more slack, Christianity or Islam?

Considering Christianity has rediculously more pull in US politics, from lobbyist to congressman using their own views of Christianity to pass laws that would affect alll of us, it’s that.

Originally posted by Robtard
Considering Christianity has rediculously more pull in US politics, from lobbyist to congressman using their own views of Christianity to pass laws that would affect alll of us, it’s that.

Nah I asked you which group the left specifically cuts more slack.

And I answered and gave why: Christianity, considering how pervasive it is in US politics

Sure, I’m certain you can link me to a story of some intolerant Muslim, but that’s ignoring the bigger picture that Islam’s pull in the US is minor

Originally posted by Robtard
And I answered and gave why: Christianity, considering how pervasive it is in US politics

Sure, I’m certain you can link me to a story of some intolerant Muslim, but that’s ignoring the bigger picture that Islam’s pull in the US is minor

Nope, being pervasive in US politics doesn't mean shit when it comes to who the left cuts more slack.

Try again.

Originally posted by Lestov16
Also, as far as intolerance goes, I understand public institutions needing to maintain an egalitarian standard of service, but privatized institutions should not be beholden to such standards, imo. If customers dislike the intolerance of the business, they can just shop at other businesses, and the intolerant business can go bankrupt. If the intolerant business owners are willing to accept the consequences of losing their business, then there is no problem, and if they don't want to lose business, they become more tolerant. Either way, consumers should control markets, not censorship policies.

Businesses open to the public are not private institutions. Those would be private clubs, like country clubs and membership clubs like Costco and Sam's Club.

Businesses open to the public agree to be governed by public accommodations laws as a cost of doing business. It is literally a contingency of their business license.

Also there is an inherent assumption that bigotry will necessarily hurt business. The chic filet example is a good demonstration of how naive that assumption is.

I'm unaware that Chick Fil A refuses to serve gay people.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
I'm unaware that Chick Fil A refuses to serve gay people.

It doesn't refuse them. They are just...Christian lol. That's their crime.

Now you'd think the quality of the food would be what matters, but nope...that's not the case when lunatics are involved.

Plus I mean... this baker got death threats and shit. Let's not pretend there's no public backlash to this kind of thing.