Supreme Court rules in favor of baker in same sex wedding cake case.

In some cases, yeah, we should. Like the scumbag asking for 54m for his next plane.

 

It's time for these bible thumpers to deal with the blowback. Intelligent and sensible folk should and will boycott the business that discriminates against other tax paying law abiding citizens. The owners should wear a huge red "B" for bigot on their chest and in spirit they already are.

 

thats just it, anyone can refuse service. i made my position clear to you and everyone else. open to the public means serving everyone.

 

No need to bring religion into it at all. Artistic freedom is protected under freedom of expression.

 

Does it matter? IF business owners are allowed to pick and choose who they serve, then do they need a reason? Remember the Muslim cab driver who didn't want a fare who had a bottle of liquor with him?

 

Just a coincidence I’m sure, but the only two who voted against the Christian baker were of a certain religious background that has historically been very anti Christian.

 

Intent can be demonstrated or determined in a number of ways. Proving intent to someone who doesn't like the ruling is probably
a pointless task anyway. Nothing said will be accepted.

 

There are atheist who could refuse to participate in such a celebration. Remember the baker said he had no problem selling to these guys and had in the past, it was the becoming a part of their celebration of their homosexuality to which he could not participate.

 

Like the intolerant asshat lefties tried to do with Chick-Fil-A? That turned into record sales for them.

Oops!

 

In the US, that would require a lot of lions.

 

Let the left wing zealots boycott. For every dollar the baker loses, he'll gain three from normal people.

The left tried to boycott Chick Fil A and Chick Fil A's profits soared.

 

They asked him to use his artistic talents to become a part of the celebration of their homosexuality. No one should be forced to do such things that violate their sincere moral beliefs.

 

And this is a great one!

 

I agree that the gay couple should have found a new bakery. However, it's not like every bakery advertises "Hey we're Christian, don't come here if you're gay, a thief, a charlatan, or a sinner of any sort, or we may defecate in your cake."

 

Calm down calm down everyone is getting way too confused over this ruling clearly. This is not a broad ruling this was specifically regarding the civil rights commissions case against the baker. The justices DID NOT rule on the broader issue at hand.

The only people spreading fake news are the people who think this ruling was something that it was not.

 

I know a guy who has a DJ business. He was asked to do a wedding. After he agreed to everything he was told "oh by the way it is a gay wedding". That was a dirty trick in my opinion. Theh should have been up front about that fact. He asked me about it and I said I would have no problem but would ask plenty of questions like "how would they like to be announced?".

 

Sincerely held RELIGIOUS beliefs, blues, not moral. Because moral values and duties are defined far beyond and outside the realm of religion and have existed before the creation of said mythologies.

 

Dennis Hastert forced his values into a bunch of teenage boys rumps and was rewarded by being chosen Speaker of the House for 10 years...The new GOP is has taken a real '60s liberal, free love, do your own thing type of attitude regarding sexual behavior lately. These godly evangelicals have recently changed their views on screwing prostitutes while your new bride is pregnant and flagrant pu$$y grabbing, as long as it's done in good taste.

 

It wasn't public.

The bakery is a private business.

 

The baker didn't want to make a cake celebrating gay marriage. All these bakers being targeted and attacked were or could have been customers.
It's like you guys want it illegal to have opposing beliefs on policy.

 

The gays could have found another baker. There were many bakers closer to their home.

But the baker could not outsource or suspend his religious convictions.

 

While I agree with you that we shouldn't discriminate against people concerning their sexuality you are one of the most intolerant and bigoted posters I've seen on this forum in awhile. We get it. You hate Christians, but do you really think your hatred of an entire people group is helping your cause here?

 

Yes, discrimination is a trait that often gets celebrated by people that have miserable pathetic and lonely small lives of their own and wish to lash out at others that are happy, merely out of spite and envy.

 

the purveyors of outcome-based 'social justice' have openly adopted a shortsighted philosophy of forced compliance, enforced by way of Lawfare *

Slavery in America is no more....no human has a natural or legal right to compel another human to create something.

* Lawfare is a form of asymmetric warfare, consisting of using the legal system against an enemy, such as by damaging or delegitimizing them, tying up their time or winning a public relations victory. The term is a portmanteau of the words law and warfare. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawfare

 

That was open to the public. If the baker had any form of common decency, they would have advertised that they were part of the special "we are deluded and believe outdated nonsense club, and we only serve those who feel the same".