Christian Bakery Declines to Bake Cake for Gay Wedding.

Correct, just as two heterosexual men would be excluded from marriage. Has nothing to do with sexual orientation. The law creates this fiction where its simply presumed to all just be motivated by hatred of gays, that needs the government and the law to stamp out.

 

I suspect if it was instead two heterosexual women living as roomates, who wanted the benefis of marriage and had no interest, whatsoever in engaging in homosexual relations with each other, they would have still objected to baking a cake for a same sex marriage. So more accurately, they are opposed to same sex marriage, not "gay marriage". But they need to portray their opposition as hatred of gays to bring it within the reach of the law. Absurd. Like presuming that anybody who doesnt like rap music, hates blacks. When in fact they dont like it when it comes from Vanilla Ice of Emenen either, (white rappers). Has nothing to do with race.

 

maybe that tribe has the bi-sexual gene as the norm, who knows, all I know is I am hetero-sexual and nothing you say could make me not so

it has to be confusing to you all that are bi-sexual, but we just are not sexually attracted to both genders.... period


.

 

The problem is, gays love to be angry & outraged.

So when anyone disagrees with them, and their is potential financial gain from being upset by it, they will be upset by it.
No one had a problem with this baker, because she served everyone, including gays.
They were satisfied customers, because they came back.
The baker simply said they will not make a cake for a same-sex marriage, and suddenly these repeat gay customers whine, sue, and their supporters call in death threats.





(i was bored)




.

 

I suspect it has more to do with being forced at the age of 10 to engage in sexual relations with men.

 

Since it's obvious you know nothing about the Bible let me enlighten you. Romans chapter 1; 24-30 tells us what homosexuality is. Do you need it broken done from the Greek for you to get the impact of what is being said? The last time I looked a business had the right to refuse service to anyone. Oh, you mean now, today, THAT STILL APPLIES TO ANYONE BUT HOMOSEXUALS???

 

So then these Christian bakers would also refuse to bake cakes for heteros who committed adultery prior to wanting to be married? Or people who divorced without one of the reasons sanctioned in the Bible? Or people who have had premarital sex?

 

Let's say Elton John refused to play Rush Limbaugh's fourth wedding... fines? Imprisonment?

 

That would be great though.

 

Nope, Rush isn't a member of a favored minority

 

Of course not.

Elton John is gay..... didn't refuse gays.... and isn't a Christian.

He's triply safe.

 

Since when does baking a cake constitute a religious issue - to the sane, anyway? It's a bloody cake. Only a complete idiot would raise a stink on a subject like this.

 

The baker said "sorry, but no".

The gays chose to raise a stink.

 

I have been thinking about this. What if an antiAmerican group came in and wanted me to bake a cake with derogatory messages about the military in my club. I just would not do it, it would not even be up for discussion. how is that different?

 

It's not.

But if they're also gay.... you better get a lawyer.

 

Yes go ahead hide your head in the sand and pretend reality is other than what it is. The only link between the three is that all three are behaviors that people find objectionable. There doesn't seem to be any genetic connection to any of those behaviors. And even if there were that would not make those behaviors any less objectionable. Bigotry is either religious or racial it is not behavior based. The point was that one can follow the religion of Judaism without being of Jewish decent. To be a Jew is to be a member of an ethnic group. One can be a Jew and not worship Yahweh. One however cannot follow the religion of Judaism and not worship Yahweh. And the point of my last sentence was to demonstrate the absudity of what you said of the Jewish ethnic group.

 

You could tell them to (*)(*)(*)(*) off you slimey commies. No problem, UNLESS they all happened to be a minority race, women, all of a particular religion, national origin or LGBTs. THEN it would be presumed that your opposition wasn't to their anti American stance and was instead your bigotry towards whatever particular group they happen to be, and therefore illegal.

 

I thought this through after I said this. I run a service organization, so I could, if you are not a member, even if protected, tell you to take a flying leap. We dont pretend to be open to hte public and visitors have to sign in. But if I were a buisness open to the public I dont think I should be able to not serve some segment of the public, just because I dont like them. I could see how it could turn into some minority group not being able to travel, rent or buy homes, get jobs and on and on. Buisness could in effect removes someones freedoms.

 

No, he would simply prove he is smarter than the dummies that own the Pastry Shop and say that he was already over booked and could not play at Rush's party. See how simple it is, but then again some simply have to express their stupidity publically and then whine when then catch hell for it.

 

I seriously doubt that is all he said, we both know there was more, Cons simply cannot help exposing themselves.

 

Let's say, theoretically, that society came to the point where they supported minor-attracted persons. Would you bake a cake or perform a service for the marriage of a 57yo man and a 13 year old boy?

- - - Updated - - -

So it's okay to discriminate against people as long as you lie about it?

 

The baker had supplied them with baked goods before, they were regular customers. They balked at making their customer a WEDDING cake. The Bible doesn't prescribe the details of the wedding ceremony, (it's mainly a secular contract with extra God's blessing anyway) but the cake isn't even part of that, it's the centrepiece of the beanfeast afterward, and nothing to do with the religious bit. Their justification of their bigoted action by claiming it's some kind of twisted religious requirement is patent BS.

 

Why would they want to give money to people who don't want their business in the first place?

 

I did not say that, but nice try on your part. Thing is we are talking about a business, to avoid having to serve someone all one has to do is provide a valid excuse and that is that. Problem is Cons are proud of their discrimination and do not think more than five minutes ahead to realize what will happen to their business, anyone that stupid probably should not be attempting to run a business they are bound to go out of business sooner or later.

- - - Updated - - -

Who says they still do. You are assuming they knew before hand that the owners were bigots?

 

They didnt want to. They wanted the government to take money from those people to punish them for their views.