Cakegate to be decided by supremes

^ Chaos.

 

What kind of cakes do the bakers make, and what kind of cake does the customer want?

 

I would bake and decorate any cake -- LBGT, Nazi, kluxer, ISIS, Taliban, Star Wars, Alpha and Omega, USSR, Hammer and Sickle, Hitler sketch, Rosenberg sketch, Star of David, Idi Amin sketch, Blackwater logo, Wounded Knee sketch, Sitting Bull, Custer scalped, TransCanada Pipeline logo, Exxon-Mobil, 101st Airborne, Operation Overlord, Nawlins SWAT, Wild Weasels, lump of good greasy Peabody coal, whatever.

Green is the color that counts. When somebody has the money I always have the time. I'm not gonna to judge other than pay money upfront.

If somebody won't make what you want, go see somebody who will.

 

Many Christians have the same suspicians about you and other homsexuals

Certainly Christian bakers should brace for the worst when they see you coming

As for putting you in the closet that is unlikely

The supreme court legalized homosexuality and I obey the law

Even if the black robes had not ruled in your favor I have never practiced violence against homosexuals even when they gave me reason to

Besides the internet is infested with gays so you may actually be in the majority on this forum

So you are quote safe

 

If the First Amendment becomes the central, compelling issue in this case I'm inclined to agree with you - the baker will prevail by the narrowest of margins (5-4).

I don't see that happening.

The only way the baker wins this case is on narrow First Amendment grounds, so the vast majority of anti-discrimination protections will remain intact.

 

Based on what, exactly? Bigoted ideas about homosexuals?

I don't harbor any such preconceptions toward someone just because someone says they're a Christian.

That's a strange sentiment. Seems like you're trying to make people feel like they should be afraid of 'homosexuals'.

Before there was Lawrence v. Texas, there was Bowers v. Hardwick. Stacking the court with judges who view the law differently isn't entirely out of the question. If Bowers can be reversed, so can Lawrence. Precedent only matters if the justices choose to respect it.

Violence is hardly the only tool used to keep 'homosexuals' in the 'closet'.

"Infested with gays" - more language that speaks volumes concerning your blanket opinions of a diverse group of people.

Like I'm going to take as Gospel the word of someone who considers "gays" to be an "infestation".

 

But this asks us to view the case in isolation from other efforts nationwide to chip away at the Court's rulings and anti-discrimination laws. There is a lot more going on than this one case.

 

A bit more to say about this:

Does that include the gay Christian bakers?

"Homosexuals" and Christians are not mutually exclusive groups.

 

Apparently gay men prefer the more traditional heterosexual Christian bakers for their weddong cakes

Or at least those are the ones thery choose to harrass

 

I'm thinking there's got to be something in the U.S. Constitution to allow the federal government to intervene when states are being extremely unreasonable and issuing excessive fines.

However, the real issue is that there are so many in that state that support this.
All this over writing on a cake, because someone refuses to express their support for something.

Why not make it simple and just make it a policy not to write any wedding messages on cakes, or put any figures on it?

 

They could create a right of judicial review under the commerce clause, but it wouldn't be retroactive, so the fine would stay in place.
But if it were to prohibit "excessive fines," then what is excessive? I think the guy should be able to appeal to a jury, though doing that in the northwest might just get his fines doubled.

 

True, there is a lot more going on than this one case, which is one more reason why it shouldn't be viewed in isolation. Because this case involves fundamental human and constitutional rights such as freedom of thought, conscience and expression it involves much more than gay rights.

While the SCOTUS will be considering many issues in relation to this case, I still think it will adjudicated along very narrow lines and even if the baker wins I don't see this resulting in a widespread reversal of the anti-discrimination laws that have been enacted to protect homosexuals. Furthermore, I think most of society has moved beyond the days when homosexuals were ostracized and discriminated against as they were in the past, just as most of society has moved beyond the negative attitudes that once existed towards mixed race couples and marriage.

 

SHHHVVEEEET!!!

(I know, the eighties called.....take a message)

 

I don't think there should be any balancing. It's a nice sounding word, but it doesn't belong in a judicial decision. If the cops kick down your door without a warrant, the drugs they find are inadmissible, period. The courts don't balance the interests of society in drug interdiction with the accused's rights under the 4th Amendment.

I think the baker wins here; it'll be a cakewalk.

What? I didn't say nothin'.

 

Nothing 'apparent' about it - a very few lawsuits here and there tell you nothing about what most gay couples are doing to obtain wedding cakes. Your focus on gay men, while apparently ignoring lesbian couples, is noted.

So long as most of the population identifies as Christian, it stands to reason that most bakers will also probably be Christian, which equals another reason to regard the claims of an abundance of bakers happy to make wedding cakes for gay couples with a healthy dose of skepticism.

...because if I was looking for a cake for my wedding, it would make total sense for me to prioritize "harassing" a "traditional heterosexual Christian baker", since putting together a wedding is super easy and takes no time at all. < Sarcasm.

It's not as if baker's advertise that they're "traditional heterosexual Christian bakers" with signs in the window saying "no homosexuals".

It must be nice for some people to have the luxury of not expecting to be randomly discriminated against when they're trying to do business. As a gay man, I don't have that luxury. I can try to find gay-friendly businesses, but a lot of the time it's a complete crap shoot - especially in rural areas. Which is why my husband and I shopped for a judge to marry us, have refused to plan a wedding reception, and told family members to stop nagging us about it. I can't see a reason to put ourselves through the additional stress. A lifetime of being told, "no you can't" has conditioned us to believe it's not worth trying.

Heck, look at the VistaPrint incident. We never know when some random employee is going to discriminate, even if it's not the policy of the business itself.

Those who support anti-gay discrimination are supporting the ghettoizing of the gay population - whether they're conscious of it or not - and some definitely are aware, because it's the actual end goal - making life as miserable as possible for vulnerable populations - like gay people - to drive them underground so that they don't have to see us and can pretend we don't exist.

And the latest is a push to "protect" health care workers who want to discriminate against patients. Right - just try to tell me the aim of that isn't actually an attempt to make our lives miserable by targeting our ability to keep ourselves healthy.

"Sincerely held religious belief" my big, fat, hind end!

 

I suspect you've never been randomly discriminated against when trying to do business AND as a gay man in most states you have even more protections than those who don't fall into one of the favored identity groups.

 

Could be the potential of the award of $100,000+ if they are denied service, might have something to do with it.

 

You mean gay victimhood as a profession?

Slip and fall homosexuals?

Hum

 

This discrimination business must be pretty thin spread. Even in the 50's, even in the deep south, homosexuals owned businesses and homes, and everyone knew who they were.

Now a couple of Christian bakers decline to make one specific kind of cake and all of a sudden there's an all out war against gays. In 2018?? Who here honestly believes it?

 

No protections in my state.

The actual experiences of gay people > the suspicions of a person who chooses willful blindness to them.

 

Not "all of a sudden". You've never heard of the "culture wars"? Or the "moral majority"? It's been going on for decades.

Dismissing something as non-existent because you weren't personally the target, or didn't personally witness it doesn't negate the real experiences of people who experienced discrimination, harassment, violence, etc.

Efforts to gaslight us won't work. We've seen too much - even if you haven't.

 

Those real experiences are imaginary and based on conspiracy theories.

 

It's all in their fabulous heads?

Matthew Shepard notwithstanding.

 

That's why I said "most" states. And couldn't help but notice you didn't disagree with the rest of my statement.

 

I don't agree with the rest of your statement. I just figured it would be a waste of my time to bother saying so. And now that I have, I'm pretty sure it will be.