Texas family: We’re getting death threats for not baking a cake for same-sex ‘marriag

I had to google what Xtain meant, which is a hate speech slur for Christian.

Given your belligerent attitude, the fact you combined it with "idiot", and your obvious support of the Hitler-esque branding of Christians, this makes you one hell of a bigot.

Bravo.

 

All, while claiming to be in the name of tolerance and equality.

 

??? Is this your defense of death threats made to the baker?

 

Why are right wing nutjobs always thinking about what's going on in the bathroom. You people are obsessed with this idea of gay bathroom orgies. Perhaps if you were not sexually repressed your entire life, you'd be able to think clearly.

 

Not just bathrooms, but men's bungholes and what they might put in them. It's downright creepy...

 

Gay mafia? Is that like goodfellas but in more colorful suits and up to date hairstyles? Do they drive around in prius instead of caddy's? I bet the quality of decorations in the mafia hangouts would imrpove.

Bigot bakers refusing business because of their superstitions are people who are not deserving of the business in the first place. I am glad that their bigotry comes to light, so only bible thumping neanderthals visit their business. Look at what happened in Atlanta when fairy tale believing morons tried to legislate their whackadoodle beliefs. Another victory for freedom and a loss for christian idiots. So it continues religious nuts will have to be dragged, kicking and screaming, into the 21st century.

Personal experience on this? Let me guess, it happened in a bathroom.

 

No, just dunce caps for the superstitious. No refusal of services (like christian idiots) or reduction in personal freedoms. Just a heads up for people with a brain to steer clear of people stuck in the bronze age. Hey, on the bright side, you'd be able to identify each other easily. Maybe make the dunce cap rainbow colored for dramatic effect!

 

I've often said it seems the right wing superstition police spend more time considering gay sex scenarios than gay people do.

 

Yeeaaa...

Hitler ordered every Jew to sew yellow stars on their clothing so they would be identifiable in public.

Of course that was only the beginning.

Clearly you admire Hitler's tactics.

But I'm just curious would it just be the Christians who get marked? ...will you be branding your Muslim friends as well?

Because for every one Christian who might not want to serve cake to a homosexual there are probably 100,000 Muslims who would cut the homo's head off for simply walking down the street.

So I'm curious, does your bigotry extend to all religions or just Christians.

And you know for that matter does it extend to all Christians of the world or just American Christians ...or perhaps more specifically White American Christians?

Most of South America is religious which means most of the illegal invaders you cherish are as well, got your yellow stars ready for them?

The majority of Blacks believe in the Christian god so will they be marked as well?

I'd just love to hear more on your branding plan so please man the (*)(*)(*)(*) up and answer these questions.

Or just close the browser and pretend your extremist bigotry went unnoticed.

Because in all the posts I've read on this forum yours is the single most hateful slimebag foolish bigoted comment I've ever seen.

Oh and here's another thing you've gotten wrong.

I'm not a Christian.

But let me make one thing perfectly clear to you.

If you and your liberal hate mongers even attempt to walk down a path of branding Christians with your little yellow stars you can count on seeing me there with them, rifle in hand.

 

Uh huh, so you approve of death threats because a cake wont be baked.

Again and you call other people psychos and neanderthals?

Thanks for proving my point

 

You would need to ask the female customers at the bar who didn't feel comfortable using the ladies bathroom with a bunch of guys in drag.

Right, its the ladies who don't want to use a bathroom with a bunch of guys in drag who are obessed, not the guys in dresses who insist upon using the womens bathroom because they have a dress on. NOT!.

 

Yes of course. A ...."different".... lifestyle.

Don't think the vast majority of normal people care what you think. Think what you want...right up until you and the tiny minority you are an advocate for attempt to use tyranny, bullying, fascistic tactics to enforce YOUR concept of "tolerance" on them. You want to get tolerance? Show a little your self and everyone will get along just fine.

Go to another baker, don't issue death threats. Everyone gets along fine.

 

...Well, isn't that God's plan?

 

Well, no. Its the gaystapo who troll for reasons to be offended so they can bully and tyrannize normal people who don't believe those who exhibit a strange form of mental disease need to be celebrated for their perversions. Do what you want - WE...DON'T...CARE. Right up until the time the perversion is shoved in our face and down our throat and we are told that we MUST approve and celebrate it....WE....DON'T....CARE. Don't expect normal people to praise, clap and cheer like the tyrannical dictators in the old Soviet Union expected people to praise and venerate Stalin's latest 5 year plan failure.

BTW, ever notice that the first thing Communist dictators do when they seize power and initiate a dictatorship is they shut down churches? Why one would think that our founder's placement of freedom of religion in the First Amendment to the Constitution recognized that a free people can maintain their freedom when the government is prevented from prohibiting the "free exercise thereof".

 

One of the greatest things about America is that it was designed from the start to allow freedom of religion. It would be wrong for the government to decide whether a baptism should be performed by immersion or sprinkling... or even to decide if and when a baptism is necessary. It was wrong for the government to make any law regarding marriage. Until they wipe the word "marriage" from the books and replace it with "civil union" for everybody, the most logical way to look at it is that the government is defining civil unions (which happened to be misnamed "marriage" in the legal system).

I have already stated my position about the people who harassed the baker and his family - That was bad behavior on their part.

I am a Christian myself, and I know that the Bible does not require me to refuse to do business with people who do not agree with my interpretation of the Bible... Nor does it require me to REFUSE to do business with people of other religions. That is why I would like somebody to explain to why they think this baker feels compelled to refuse to bake cakes for a same-sex wedding reception.

 

That's up to the individual conscience of the baker. Individual Christian sects have different takes on details of their faith despite believing in an overarching set of principles. My problem is with the intolerant bullies in the gaystapo who have decided that individuals shall be forced to abandon their faith in order to celebrate aberrant sexual relationships (or any other position the bullies happen to have an any individual moment). Those who are the most active in demanding tolerance are manifestly intolerant of any opinion other than their own.

 

Who said he was compelled by his religion? Marriage is limited to men and women in the bible. He is simply choosing to adhere to the same limitation. Probably views gay marriage to be a mockery of the institution. The free exercise of religion isn't limited to those activities you believe to be compulsory under their doctrine. Guy down the street flies a US, State of Texas and a Christian flag. He is not compelled by Christian doctrine to do so but chooses to none the less. Government prohibiting him from flying his Christian flag would be an impermissible violation of his right to the free exercise of his religion.

 

Do you believe religious belief should overrule local law? How about state law? Federal law?
Are there any limitations on the "free exercise of religion"?

I don't believe companies open to the public selling goods advertised to the public should openly discriminate against anyone but it is not current law in Texas so they can use orientation to refuse service but when (not if, when) it becomes illegal to do so should the bakers comply, move to a more religious dominated state, or just flat out ignore law? We have been here before during prior civil rights movements - I expect the same end result.

 

Nah, keep it white to coordinate with the hood...

 

Well, first, this baker hasn't violated ANY law regardless of what several here would like you to believe. And, I think the Constitutional right to the free exercise of religion should overrule this statutory right to be served by any business IF and only if you are a member of the preferred classifications of people.

Sure. Frequently one persons rights can conflict with anothers. When they lead to ACTUAL harm to others, then limitations are appropriate. Causing them to simply go to another baker, is not harm.

Actually, its not current law ANYWHERE other than maybe California. All other states you need to be a member of selected classifications of people. For instance the Oregon bar owner who was ordered to pay $400,000 in damages to the T Girls because he politely asked that they not hold their weekly club meeting at his bar because he was losing business, ONLY because the T girls are tran sexuals. A member of the selected classifications of people. If instead of trannies, it was instead furries, people who like to dress up in furry animal costumes and role play, that met at his bar every Friday, he could throw them out and demand they never return to his bar again, and there is not a thing they could legally do in response. But because the T girls instead like to dress up as women instead, they get $400,000. There are no such laws that prevent discrimination against "anyone"

WHAT BS!!!!! Blacks were refused service in restaurants and hotels, sometimes across entire states. Across most areas of the south. Gays have never been subjected to such discrimination.

 

Exactly! We don't care what your bronze age book of nonsense says. We don't care if you think the old book of BS should be law. We don't care that you worship a nonsensical sky god. Keep your nonsense to yourself and bake the cake.

- - - Updated - - -

Discrimination based on religious stupidity is against the law. Deal with it. There are 5000 other superstitions on this planet, pick one that doesn't make you look like a bronze age neanderthal.

- - - Updated - - -

At no point did I approve a death threat. You are defending superstitious nonsense from the bronze age, so i'll cut you some slack. Where I won't is when it comes to equal protection under the law for US citizens. Take your religious nonsense and shove it.

- - - Updated - - -

If you had any guts, you would have served in the military. Save it. Religious idiots are free to practice their idiocy all they like. When they try to legislate their nonsensical beliefs, that's when it becomes a problem.

 

From the OP article: The Delormes say they aren't targeting same-sex couples, but merely following their sincerely held Christian beliefs.
Nobody asked him to marry a guy. Roman soldiers did not follow the Hebrew God, nor did they follow Jesus, but Jesus told his followers if a man asks you to carry his gear 1 mile carry it 2 miles instead. Basically you are saying it is OK for the baker to use his power in the situation to be a bully, and you will support him because he uses the term "sincerely held Christian beliefs" as his justification?

 

I mentioned in the same post you quoted that they did not violate law. Many arguing the law side of this argument seem to be against the law argument when the tables are turned. So you believe someone claiming to be religious should be able to deny service; does this only apply against homosexuals or can a restaurant refuse service to a black or Jew? Both have been argued as being against people's religion.

Ok, so there is no harm by being told you are unwelcome in a facility, how about if you took time off from work and used fuel to get to a business advertising a good - do you argue there is no financial harm (ignoring the emotional because gays are not allowed to have those)

How about if you own the only gas station in 50 miles, can service be denied then? Refusing fuel could put their life in danger

What about doctors? Can they say "go across the street"?

I know you are going to say the examples are stupid but you are the one that is pro-discrimination, just trying to figure out what the level of "harm" has to be.

I am unaware of the case but I feel if a group of people is impacting the financial viability of a facility they should be asked to leave.

Gays have been murdered, hung, drug behind vehicles, raided and arrested, chemically and physically castrated. Is your argument really if they can get service somewhere close then it's no longer an issue? I agree, it's BS.

 

Like you know I didn't?

Like you know anything about me other than what opinions I express in these posts?

What I know about you, what will stand out most from now on, is the fact that you want to brand Christians in some Hitler-esque yellow star fashion.

Still really want to hear your responses to these questions:

 

The baker isn't the bully. He is just refusing to do something someone asks him to do. They can go down the street and still get what they want. The bullies are those who want to FORCE the baker to do something against his will. In the initial contact, the baker has choice, the homosexuals have choice. After initial contact, the homosexuals are the bullies.