Author Topic: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case  (Read 44242 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Oceander

  • Guest
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #725 on: January 05, 2018, 08:10:20 pm »
That's not what he's suggesting.  He's suggesting don't write anything on the cake, and supply it in kit form so the customer can put whatever he/she/it wants on it.

Unless you do the same thing to every customer, you’re still discriminating.

Offline HoustonSam

  • "That'll be the day......"
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,982
  • Gender: Male
  • old times there are not forgotten
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #726 on: January 05, 2018, 08:37:11 pm »
This business retains the right to refuse any customer and message, advertising vehicle, marketing effort, promotional specialty, commercial, artwork, or request to produce or craft any item, service or project that acknowledges, celebrates, promotes or depicts any form of deviant sexual behavior, including adultery, wife swapping, homosexuality, homosexual unions or behaviors, creeds and opinions of belief deemed offensive by the owner and management.

Go somewhere else if you need something done to promote the above-mentioned deviant behavior.  We do not want that kind of business and refuse to serve any request that depicts or serves those behaviors listed above.

Thank you for your attention.

These Premises Protected by Smith & Wesson.

I think @Jazzhead is describing in 715 and 723 his understanding of what the law *actually* allows; he might be incorrect, but I think he is at least trying to share an understanding of fact.  @INVAR I think you are replying with your belief of what the law *should* allow; you are sharing a particular value belief.

I'm more closely aligned with you @INVAR and I think the discussion of what the law *should* allow is more interesting and more effective in trying to test ideas.  But if we can maintain a clear distinction between the two - what the law in fact says versus what we think it should say - maybe we can take some animosity out of this.
James 1:20

Offline Smokin Joe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 56,397
  • I was a "conspiracy theorist". Now I'm just right.
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #727 on: January 05, 2018, 08:48:58 pm »
@Smokin Joe

QUIT CALLING LEFTISTS "LIBERALS!

When you call them "liberals",you are helping them spread their propaganda and win the votes of the ignorant.

Was Hitler "liberal"?

What about Stalin?

Castro?

Che?

Nelson "burning man" Mandela?

Ho Chi Minh?

Mussolini?

Call them what they are,not what the WANT PEOPLE TO THINK THEY ARE SO THEY CAN SELL THEIR LIES TO THE IGNORANT.

They are NOT "liberals",they are FASCISTS!
Actually, I borrowed the graphic. I didn't generate it.

I much prefer "Totalitarians", but some people have trouble pronouncing that, and then there is the ever popular "statist", but some aren't sure which state they are in, in so many ways.

The bottom line is they want what they want regardless of anyone else, whatever it is (at the time) and they want others to pay and/or bleed to provide it. The phrase "spoiled brat" comes to mind, but it appears mommy caved instead of taking their hindparts to the woodshed, and the rest of us are reaping the rewards of those failures at parenting.
How God must weep at humans' folly! Stand fast! God knows what he is doing!
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

C S Lewis

Offline Smokin Joe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 56,397
  • I was a "conspiracy theorist". Now I'm just right.
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #728 on: January 05, 2018, 08:58:42 pm »
You're peeing into the wind.   Modern conservatives have embraced identity politics as vehemently as liberals have.   It's tribe against tribe against tribe.   Conservatives who favored the American melting pot,  and revered individual liberty outside the context of tribalism, are gone with the wind.
Republicans perhaps.
The extent of Conservative identity politics is that we are Conservatives.
There are a host of cheap imitations who have put a prefix in front of that, as if there is a multiflavor option menu or something.
When you have to hyphenate to fit, you aren't. You put something else first.
There's the 'identity' tribalism, in so many labels.
If you are Conservative, you really should need no modifiers.
How God must weep at humans' folly! Stand fast! God knows what he is doing!
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

C S Lewis

Online Cyber Liberty

  • Coffee! Donuts! Kittens!
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 79,867
  • Gender: Male
  • 🌵🌵🌵
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #729 on: January 05, 2018, 09:01:08 pm »
Unless you do the same thing to every customer, you’re still discriminating.

What @Jazzhead said:

Quote
One practical solution may be to supply the customer with the materials he/she needs, but not to affix the requested message.  If the customer wants an offensive message placed on the cake,  bake the cake and provide the customer with an icing bag and let him/her affix his/her own message.    The idea is to distinguish between lawful discrimination on the basis of the item or message requested and unlawful discrimination based on who the customer is.   

I infer from that, everybody gets the same cake and the same "kit."  I asked him for clarification about my lousy penmanship, and it seems that's indeed what he meant.  Other than the penmanship issue, it sounds like a pretty good solution.
For unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death — if you’re unvaccinated — for themselves, their families, and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm. Sloe Joe Biteme 12/16
I will NOT comply.
 
Castillo del Cyber Autonomous Zone ~~~~~>                          :dontfeed:

Oceander

  • Guest
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #730 on: January 05, 2018, 09:13:04 pm »
What @Jazzhead said:

I infer from that, everybody gets the same cake and the same "kit."  I asked him for clarification about my lousy penmanship, and it seems that's indeed what he meant.  Other than the penmanship issue, it sounds like a pretty good solution.

If everyone gets the same, no matter what the message is, then that should be fine.  Except that most people expect the message to be written by the cake maker, so I doubt if a lot of people would go for it.

Online Cyber Liberty

  • Coffee! Donuts! Kittens!
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 79,867
  • Gender: Male
  • 🌵🌵🌵
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #731 on: January 05, 2018, 09:17:20 pm »
If everyone gets the same, no matter what the message is, then that should be fine.  Except that most people expect the message to be written by the cake maker, so I doubt if a lot of people would go for it.

I wouldn't care, except my handwriting looks like something from a shithouse wall.  I am blessed, Mrs. Liberty has beautiful handwriting.

All that said, it's the sort of compromise that would keep people legal, unless the baker really really thinks crafting a cake is the problem, in which case I really don't have a lot of sympathy for him.  He should get out of the business.   :shrug:
For unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death — if you’re unvaccinated — for themselves, their families, and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm. Sloe Joe Biteme 12/16
I will NOT comply.
 
Castillo del Cyber Autonomous Zone ~~~~~>                          :dontfeed:

Offline INVAR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,961
  • Gender: Male
  • Dread To Tread
    • Sword At The Ready
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #732 on: January 05, 2018, 09:25:13 pm »
I'm more closely aligned with you @INVAR and I think the discussion of what the law *should* allow is more interesting and more effective in trying to test ideas.  But if we can maintain a clear distinction between the two - what the law in fact says versus what we think it should say - maybe we can take some animosity out of this.

Not possible.  The courts deciding on their own that discrimination extends to deviant sexual behaviors has delegitimized any moral authority 'the law' would have.  This isn't about tangible absolutes such as skin color or gender, deviancy has been defined down to incorporate sexual behavior as well as other choices related to perverted and abhorrent behavior.

It's intended consequences are to compel and force those who view deviant behavior as sinful to be forced to accommodate, serve, create, craft, acknowledge and celebrate said sinful behavior, or face punishment.  It is being used for that exact purpose in all these cases.

It is nothing less than the state being used to impose mandated labor to serve a deviant sexual religion. 

All that said, it's the sort of compromise that would keep people legal, unless the baker really really thinks crafting a cake is the problem, in which case I really don't have a lot of sympathy for him.  He should get out of the business.

And that is exactly how the Mark of the Beast will work and operate.

Think and act as the Beast demands, or you cannot make a living, period.  Satan's wrath on the remnant of the people of God.

Of greater consequence is that those who do have that mark, will suffer the full weight of the Wrath of God without mercy (Rev. 14: 9-10).

Fart for freedom, fart for liberty and fart proudly.  - Benjamin Franklin

...Obsta principiis—Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people. When the people give way, their deceivers, betrayers and destroyers press upon them so fast that there is no resisting afterwards. The nature of the encroachment upon [the] American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer, it eats faster and faster every hour." - John Adams, February 6, 1775

Offline HoustonSam

  • "That'll be the day......"
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,982
  • Gender: Male
  • old times there are not forgotten
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #733 on: January 05, 2018, 09:33:49 pm »

Not possible.  ....

It is nothing less than the state being used to impose mandated labor to serve a deviant sexual religion. 


I mean @INVAR if we can maintain the conceptual distinction in our discussion between what the law says and what we think it should say, we might take animosity out of our discussion.  I'm not asking you to change what you believe nor am I condemning it.  I would just like to get to a more effective discussion.
James 1:20

Offline roamer_1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 43,289
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #734 on: January 05, 2018, 09:53:53 pm »

How does your statement apply to the obvious dichotomy above?

In this context, if you don't like what the Muslim has in his shop, go see the Frenchman. No fault, no foul.

Online sneakypete

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 52,855
  • Twitter is for Twits
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #735 on: January 05, 2018, 10:00:15 pm »
Actually, I borrowed the graphic. I didn't generate it.

I much prefer "Totalitarians", but some people have trouble pronouncing that, and then there is the ever popular "statist", but some aren't sure which state they are in, in so many ways.

The bottom line is they want what they want regardless of anyone else, whatever it is (at the time) and they want others to pay and/or bleed to provide it. The phrase "spoiled brat" comes to mind, but it appears mommy caved instead of taking their hindparts to the woodshed, and the rest of us are reaping the rewards of those failures at parenting.

@Smokin Joe

"Fascist" best describes them because that IS what they are even though they do their best to hide it by calling their political polar opposites "fascists". Since even THEY know that "Fascist" is a dirty word  and they are hiding from it,let's hang that sign around their necks.

ANYTIME you are in an argument with someone else and allow THEM to define the terms,you are going to lose the argument regardless of how right you may be.

We need to quit playing their game out of politeness. There is nothing the least bit polite about them. They are after world domination and a leftist police state.
Anyone who isn't paranoid in 2021 just isn't thinking clearly!

Offline INVAR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,961
  • Gender: Male
  • Dread To Tread
    • Sword At The Ready
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #736 on: January 05, 2018, 10:04:01 pm »
I mean @INVAR if we can maintain the conceptual distinction in our discussion between what the law says and what we think it should say, we might take animosity out of our discussion.  I'm not asking you to change what you believe nor am I condemning it.  I would just like to get to a more effective discussion.

I don't find that attempting to reason with what is unreasonable is a worthwhile endeavor.

The blunt reality of where I stand is sufficient now at this juncture.  I don't really care who or what disagrees with it or finds it offensive.

Believe it or not I think Pete's sentiments sum up mine most efficiently:


ANYTIME you are in an argument with someone else and allow THEM to define the terms,you are going to lose the argument regardless of how right you may be.

We need to quit playing their game out of politeness. There is nothing the least bit polite about them. They are after world domination and a leftist police state.


Fart for freedom, fart for liberty and fart proudly.  - Benjamin Franklin

...Obsta principiis—Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people. When the people give way, their deceivers, betrayers and destroyers press upon them so fast that there is no resisting afterwards. The nature of the encroachment upon [the] American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer, it eats faster and faster every hour." - John Adams, February 6, 1775

Offline Luis Gonzalez

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,621
  • Gender: Male
    • Boiling Frogs
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #737 on: January 05, 2018, 10:16:51 pm »
The store in question doesn't anymore, and in a few years nobody will.  They're fattening anyway, and the diet nannies will be thrilled at the win they get without firing a shot.

Here's the most pertinent question of all about this "debate".

Did the bakers bake the same-sex wedding cake?
"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, i have others." - Groucho Marx

Offline HoustonSam

  • "That'll be the day......"
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,982
  • Gender: Male
  • old times there are not forgotten
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #738 on: January 05, 2018, 10:18:34 pm »

I don't find that attempting to reason with what is unreasonable is a worthwhile endeavor.


I certainly feel that way myself about some things and some people.  But if you've fully reached that conclusion, then let me ask you, why are you here?  All we can really do in a forum where people communicate is to attempt to reason.  We're not physically present with each other so we can't physically fight, all we can do is talk.  Does it really accomplish anything for @Oceander and @Jazzhead to call you a bigot, and for you to reply that they are defending unGodly perversity, over and over and over again?  Does something good come of the effort you put into that?
James 1:20

Offline Suppressed

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,921
  • Gender: Male
    • Avatar
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #739 on: January 05, 2018, 10:21:39 pm »

"Fascist" best describes them because that IS what they are even though they do their best to hide it by calling their political polar opposites "fascists".

No, they aren't fascists. Fascism is rooted in nationalism, and they have no patriotism or loyalty to this country.
+++++++++
“In the outside world, I'm a simple geologist. But in here .... I am Falcor, Defender of the Alliance” --Randy Marsh

“The most effectual means of being secure against pain is to retire within ourselves, and to suffice for our own happiness.” -- Thomas Jefferson

“He's so dumb he thinks a Mexican border pays rent.” --Foghorn Leghorn

Oceander

  • Guest
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #740 on: January 05, 2018, 10:34:25 pm »
I certainly feel that way myself about some things and some people.  But if you've fully reached that conclusion, then let me ask you, why are you here?  All we can really do in a forum where people communicate is to attempt to reason.  We're not physically present with each other so we can't physically fight, all we can do is talk.  Does it really accomplish anything for @Oceander and @Jazzhead to call you a bigot, and for you to reply that they are defending unGodly perversity, over and over and over again?  Does something good come of the effort you put into that?

Good points.  I apologize for losing my temper a bit last night. 

Offline Luis Gonzalez

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,621
  • Gender: Male
    • Boiling Frogs
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #741 on: January 05, 2018, 10:35:25 pm »
In this context, if you don't like what the Muslim has in his shop, go see the Frenchman. No fault, no foul.

In the context of the question as I posed it and of this case in general, the Muslim has a right to kill the Frenchman, because that is what his religious beliefs call for, and if a Christian baker gets to live by his beliefs, unobstructed by any laws other than the higher law of His God, then so does a Muslim.

In my question, if one is arguing that a Christian baker should be allowed to violate laws that stand against their religious beliefs, as it's been suggested here, then every other citizen has that same natural right, and the Muslim can kill the French cartoonist with impunity.

Our society is governed by secular laws, and that has been the case since the inception of the Republic, and as a Republic, the people of Oregon can make a law which disallows discrimination in goods and services based on sexual orientation, without any religious exceptions to the law. 

The bakers did not bake the cake, so their rights, as they see them, remained intact.

They violated the secular law, and a secular Court imposed a fine for their actions.

That's simply the way things work.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2018, 10:36:49 pm by Luis Gonzalez »
"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, i have others." - Groucho Marx

Offline Smokin Joe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 56,397
  • I was a "conspiracy theorist". Now I'm just right.
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #742 on: January 05, 2018, 10:40:43 pm »
I am indeed in the middle of my workday.  But feel free to post all your questions in one spot if you like.   Keep in mind -  the requirement of non-discrimination is unique to businesses that are deemed "public accommodations"  that open their doors to the general public.  Architects, advertising consultants and similar purveyors of customized or specialized services aren't covered by these laws,  so they can pick and choose their clients as they wish.

I understand that the baker, although subject to the rules for public accommodations,  maintains that he's a cake "artiste" who should not be forced to "create" against his will (notwithstanding that it was his free choice to offer wedding cakes to the general public).   But, as has been pointed out before,  he didn't refuse a particular customization request.   As soon as he heard that his potential customers were gay,  he decline to provide any custom service of any sort whatsoever.    Remember -  service was refused before ANY DISCUSSION REGARDING THE DESIGN OR MESSAGE ON THE CAKE HAD TAKEN PLACE.   That is the inconvenient fact that proves, to my mind, that his claims of artistic expression are disingenuous and that his refusal to provide service was rooted in plain and simple bigotry.
Because as "everyone knows",this is not a work of art:



Oh wait, it is a work of art!

I do no know Carlo's policies, one way or the other, but for the person creating such a work of art, they are indeed an artist. They are an artist regardless of their deeply held beliefs, and whether you agree with those beliefs or not.

You don't get to decide arbitrarily which media are and are not included in "art" or the "creation"
 thereof.  There are many artistic works I find, well, obscene or repulsive. I would not own them, regardless of value, I would not intentionally create anything resembling them, but that does not strip them of the label "art", regardless of my approval, nor their creator of the label "artist", regardless of how repulsive I find their work.
To deprive someone of the appellation "artist" because they refuse to create that which they find repulsive, but of which you approve, reeks of totalitarian inclinations we have seen all too often in history.
How God must weep at humans' folly! Stand fast! God knows what he is doing!
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

C S Lewis

Online Cyber Liberty

  • Coffee! Donuts! Kittens!
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 79,867
  • Gender: Male
  • 🌵🌵🌵
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #743 on: January 05, 2018, 11:01:52 pm »
Here's the most pertinent question of all about this "debate".

Did the bakers bake the same-sex wedding cake?

I'd guess not, otherwise they wouldn't have had the snot fined out of them....
For unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death — if you’re unvaccinated — for themselves, their families, and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm. Sloe Joe Biteme 12/16
I will NOT comply.
 
Castillo del Cyber Autonomous Zone ~~~~~>                          :dontfeed:

Offline INVAR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,961
  • Gender: Male
  • Dread To Tread
    • Sword At The Ready
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #744 on: January 05, 2018, 11:06:29 pm »
I certainly feel that way myself about some things and some people.  But if you've fully reached that conclusion, then let me ask you, why are you here? 

The majority of the membership here are not unreasonable Leftists that lie about who and what they are while vehemently advocating policies anathema to Conservatism, while pretending to claim what they are not.

  We're not physically present with each other so we can't physically fight, all we can do is talk. 

We can cut bullshit down to size and call ideas hostile to liberty what they are without playing the pretend game that we can be reasonable with evil and despotism disguised as tolerance and magnanimity. 

Does it really accomplish anything for @Oceander and @Jazzhead to call you a bigot, and for you to reply that they are defending unGodly perversity, over and over and over again?  Does something good come of the effort you put into that?

I don't care what they call me.  I don't suffer bullies, I put them in their place, call their totalitarian, evil positions what they are.   They can call good, evil and evil good as the day is long - I will remain to set the record straight in the face of despotic bullshit.
Fart for freedom, fart for liberty and fart proudly.  - Benjamin Franklin

...Obsta principiis—Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people. When the people give way, their deceivers, betrayers and destroyers press upon them so fast that there is no resisting afterwards. The nature of the encroachment upon [the] American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer, it eats faster and faster every hour." - John Adams, February 6, 1775

Offline Smokin Joe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 56,397
  • I was a "conspiracy theorist". Now I'm just right.
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #745 on: January 05, 2018, 11:22:09 pm »
If everyone gets the same, no matter what the message is, then that should be fine.  Except that most people expect the message to be written by the cake maker, so I doubt if a lot of people would go for it.
Well, if you want a work of art, go to an artist, but no artist should be compelled to produce art which they find morally or otherwise offensive. And here we are, back at the starting line.
How God must weep at humans' folly! Stand fast! God knows what he is doing!
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

C S Lewis

Offline roamer_1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 43,289
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #746 on: January 05, 2018, 11:34:16 pm »
7
Our society is governed by secular laws, and that has been the case since the inception of the Republic, and as a Republic, the people of Oregon can make a law which disallows discrimination in goods and services based on sexual orientation, without any religious exceptions to the law. 


No. that is absolutely untrue. The very basis of Judicial precedent in this country comes from two sources: English Common Law as defined in Blackstone, and the Holy Bible - Neither of which is secular. Both require obedience under God, whether king, lord, serf, or slave... That basis continued unabridged until the rise of multiculturalism and moral relativity in the near past.

In FACT our law has always been seen through the prism of Judeo-Christian ethics and morality, secular or not, and it is in fact, the only way we will continue to adhere together as a nation.

A Muslim killing a Frenchman is certainly not ok, and the Muslims had no problem with that, as free Muslims have been here since the get-go. But that is an inapt analogy - Killing someone is an ACTION. This is an inaction, more in line with a Muslim butcher refusing to slaughter a pig for the Frenchman.

Quote
The bakers did not bake the cake, so their rights, as they see them, remained intact.

No, Rights remaining intact would be without penalty.

Quote
They violated the secular law, and a secular Court imposed a fine for their actions.

No, your secular court DESTROYED the man. Even if I were to admit fault on the baker's part (which I most adamantly do not), the fine is well beyond any reason wrt the level of infraction. Light years beyond. There is no damage whatsoever.

But that is without regard, as there is no basis with which to deny the baker his guaranteed first amendment enumerated rights to freedom of speech, association, and religion - all of which were grievously violated, and on his own property to boot.

This is tyranny, coercing behavior antithetical to the Constitution -  Force under the color of law. And it is utterly reprehensible.

Offline HoustonSam

  • "That'll be the day......"
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,982
  • Gender: Male
  • old times there are not forgotten
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #747 on: January 05, 2018, 11:38:57 pm »
Good points.  I apologize for losing my temper a bit last night.

Accepted @Oceander.  I'm not reluctant to argue a position aggressively, but I don't enjoy upsetting people.  If I hit some sensitive personal button without realizing it let me know.

I'm sure glad I've never lost my temper ...........................
James 1:20

Oceander

  • Guest
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #748 on: January 05, 2018, 11:47:13 pm »
Well, if you want a work of art, go to an artist, but no artist should be compelled to produce art which they find morally or otherwise offensive. And here we are, back at the starting line.

Then they shouldn’t hold themselves out as offering a service to the general public in a state that they know has made it illegal to discriminate in public accommodations.

It’s just that simple. 

Offline HoustonSam

  • "That'll be the day......"
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,982
  • Gender: Male
  • old times there are not forgotten
Re: Court rules against Oregon bakers in wedding-cake case
« Reply #749 on: January 05, 2018, 11:59:18 pm »
The majority of the membership here are not unreasonable Leftists that lie about who and what they are while vehemently advocating policies anathema to Conservatism, while pretending to claim what they are not.

We can cut bullshit down to size and call ideas hostile to liberty what they are without playing the pretend game that we can be reasonable with evil and despotism disguised as tolerance and magnanimity. 

I don't care what they call me.  I don't suffer bullies, I put them in their place, call their totalitarian, evil positions what they are.   They can call good, evil and evil good as the day is long - I will remain to set the record straight in the face of despotic bullshit.

I'm with you @INVAR, let's fight the good fight.  When I say "reasonable", I actually mean "rational", I don't mean compromising.  In my opinion I was reasonable with @Oceander last night, in that IMO I was rational, but I damn sure didn't compromise with him; to his credit he's offered me an olive branch this evening which I've accepted, and I hope he and I will find some common ground somewhere, if not on this issue then on the next.

But we can't fight the good fight and cut bullshit down to size by just yelling back and forth at each other.  We do actually have to listen and understand, and we have to distinguish when someone is explaining what they understand to be factual, from when they are advocating what they believe.  My honest opinion is that a lot of belligerency is occurring here because one person will explain what they understand to be factually true, and another person will reply with what they think should be true.  People talk past each other because even this fundamental of reasoning seems to be overlooked.

So I'll gladly join with you in confronting what I find to be faulty reasoning or even sound reasoning that would deny essential liberty.  But we'll have to be reasonable ourselves in order to accomplish it.

Are you with me?
James 1:20