Supreme Court Backs Christian Baker

Its so fun to see others announce to everyone that they know what a "true Christian" really is. There are so many ways to follow your own faith, but its not "right" according to others and that's funny. As an atheist, you should know that there is only One that can judge someone's "Christianity" authenticity, and it aint you.

 

Yes, of course. A small business should be able to refuse to do business with whomever it chooses. There are consequences to such a refusal but one hopes we still have a free country.

 

exactly and another point only the gay couple was forcing a person to do something against their religious beliefs. The baker wasnt forcing anything. He is free to not provide artistic service to anyone he wants. Unless of course I can force a muslim baker to make me a cake with the prophet on it. Im guessing the left would have a ninny fit over that scenario.

 

I think it's always fun when Christians are pelted with facts of their religion about theory and reality now and they want to wind and turn themselves out of the evil trap with flimsy arguments like you now.
But as an atheist I have really to laugh about the hypocrisy of Christians ... because if a bad Muslim defends himself with the right the same reasoning as you do now, then people like you slam these arguments back in the face of the Muslim and people like you are suddenly better Islam connoisseurs than the Muslims himself!

 

Under current law they can already exclude the adulterer and harlot or any other sinner they like. Unless of course it were a gay adulterer, harlot or sinner, then it would simply be presumed the discrimination was based upon sexual orientation instead. Just like in this case, the baker would have declined to make a wedding cake for two heterosexuals of the same sex. Has nothing to do with sexual orientation.

 

For some, these qualifiers don't actually matter. I still believe the ruling was also more about the state of CO's legal language and it's unsuitability to commerce. I expect that is why a couple of the liberal justices joined the decision.

 

Let's imagine that your car has broken down at 2am in the middle of nowhere. You call a tow company and the tow truck arrives. The driver takes one look at the cross hanging on the rear view mirror and says "I'm a Muslim I won't tow Christians", and drives off, how would you react?

 

I would love to see where I would make a case against a muslim business owner refusing services to anyone that goes against their religious beliefs. I side with the muslim at the salon who wouldn't wax the male tranny. I side with any business owner who refuses any service to anyone for any reason.

 

Another person who doesn't understand this ruling.

 

Id be pissed, but if its his company, he has every right to refuse service. Id be just a pissed if they didn't come at all, or no one was open at all. But that's because of the human nature of believing we are the most important person on the planet at that time. What does a 2 am emergency have to do with a middle of the day baker where there are 10s if not hunders of other bakers available?

 

I do find it funny that the lawyer against the baker was so vitriolic and hateful that he even managed to alienate the liberals on SCOTUS. This unhinged, rabid hatred is the same reason that the DNC is currently blowing golden opportunity after opportunity against Trump. If Trump gets reelected I will be blaming the liberals for screwing it up yet again.

 

You make no money off your business? You can decide to serve the public with your business if youd like, but its not the business owners primary goal. If you are only thinking about the public, and not yourself, you will typically go out of business or starve to death.

 

If a business is there to serve the public, you cannot discriminate based on certain criteria. This really came to light in the 60's with negroes doing "sit ins" in cafes and such.

I don't understand what you are saying, really. It is the business owner's "primary goal" to serve the public if that is what his business does. That's how his business makes money.

 

The alt right pretend above that the case is not in a state court in which the state has a PA law.

That PA law and the religious rights of the baker are the crux of the struggle, not just religious rights.

 

It's important to understand that they didn't rule in favor of the baker denying cakes to gay couples over religious reasons.

They ruled that the Colorado body that adjudicated the matter exhibited anti-religious bias. It's a good ruling but I think people are going to confuse this with a defense of the baker's action and not a punishment of the Commission itself.

This issue is far from over. The SCOTUS just kicked the can down the road.

 

There are Christians who wouldn't care, but there are also fundamentalists who take things quite literally and do care, and they are willing to lose money to go against their beliefs. I consider this quite virtuous regardless of what their beliefs may be.

Besides that, if it is a private business, no one has the right to impose their own standards and beliefs on them.

 

As Christians, the love of Jesus and his teachings is supreme to the love of money. But I don't care even if this was a bigoted atheist who just doesn't like gays, he would still have the right to refuse the customer. The customer does not have a right to the services of someone else, no matter how much the government tries to claim taxation isn't theft.

 

And what if the driver of the tow truck was gay, and the driver of the car was dressed in Nazi regalia with all the accouterments, then doesn't the tow truck have the right to drive off? I would!

 

Then start doing it today! And then don't worry yourself if these people decide to do business with your competitors. So do it at your own risk to your business. I will be supporting you fully.

 

Let's imagine that your car has broken down at 2am in the middle of nowhere. You call a tow company and the tow truck arrives. The driver takes one look at the New York Yankees bumper sticker and says "I'm a Mets fan I won't tow Yankee fans", and drives off, how would you react?
Tough ****. Perfectly legal.

 

I'm sorry but my religion says I can't serve (enter the name of any religious, political, or ethnic group here).

The new Jim Crow.

 

Negative, since you don't understand that Jim Crow was the governments oppression and exclusion, it wont be like that at all. Unlike with Jim Crow, there will be plenty of other businesses that will cater to those groups, so no one will actually be excluded from products or services.

 

Exactly.

That is why it was referred to as a NARROW decision.

The wider "broad-based" issues have been kicked down the road (for another day).

 

Another one who thinks it was the companies who decided to enact jim crow and segregation. Sorry, but that was the democrats in government that made that happen. Free market would have had a desegregated business just across the street taking all that business of those who didn't care for segregation.

Its the business owners primary goal to earn a profit so they can stay open. To 'serve the public' mean you give into anything any one of your customers whims. If you aren't willing to give away your stuff for free, how can you really say you are "serving" the public? If you want to serve the public, go work at a food bank for free.

 

Just WOW dude. Civil rights mean a lot to me.

We have laws. Discrimination laws exist. Either way you have no idea of what you speak about.