Kern County judge rules against State of California in case against Tastries Bakery

[roamer_1]

None at all.  It’s clear I’ve hit the nail on the head with all the hyper-vigorous denials popping up. 

Why not simply be honest and admit to hating gays?

Non-acceptance is not hate. Even shunning is not hate.

[mountaineer]

I feel like I've seen this thread before.  I know how it ends too.

This subject and the Civil War threads.

[Sanguine]

This subject and the Civil War threads.

No kidding!

[Oceander]

Umm...because it wouldn't be honest were I to admit to hating gays.  But, your mind is made up, so there we are.

I’m simply pointing out that the stuck-pig tenor comes out quite remarkably on these anti-gay threads. 

And it is a particularly silly hill for the crusade for religious freedom to commit suicide on, because fighting for the right to be openly discriminatory in a mundane business simply confirms in the minds of the uncommitted all of the worst stereotypes the left pitches about Christians.  Which means that calls for real religious freedom, in ones private life, will end up falling on deaf ears. 

It happened with gay marriage, now it’s going to happen with baking cakes, for crying out loud. 

Such is life.

[Oceander]

Non-acceptance is not hate. Even shunning is not hate.

It goes beyond non-acceptance; it goes to hate. 

[WingNot]

This subject and the Civil War threads.

Spot on

[roamer_1]

I’m simply pointing out that the stuck-pig tenor comes out quite remarkably on these anti-gay threads. 

And it is a particularly silly hill for the crusade for religious freedom to commit suicide on, because fighting for the right to be openly discriminatory in a mundane business simply confirms in the minds of the uncommitted all of the worst stereotypes the left pitches about Christians.  Which means that calls for real religious freedom, in ones private life, will end up falling on deaf ears. 

It happened with gay marriage, now it’s going to happen with baking cakes, for crying out loud. 

Such is life.

In the case of the business angle, it's not even about gays.
It's about the simple right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason, on my own damn property.

[Oceander]

In the case of the business angle, it's not even about gays.
It's about the simple right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason, on my own damn property.

That was never there in the first place when it comes to retail type business establishments.  The general police power, which the states undeniably have, has always extended to regulating to a fairtheewell what retail business establishments can and cannot do with their own property. 

[Frank Cannon]

I cannot believe people are droning on endlessly with ANOTHER damn cake thread.

It's too bad that threads are not a living thing. I would take this one into the alley and shoot it between the eyes.

[Sanguine]

I’m simply pointing out that the stuck-pig tenor comes out quite remarkably on these anti-gay threads. 

And it is a particularly silly hill for the crusade for religious freedom to commit suicide on, because fighting for the right to be openly discriminatory in a mundane business simply confirms in the minds of the uncommitted all of the worst stereotypes the left pitches about Christians.  Which means that calls for real religious freedom, in ones private life, will end up falling on deaf ears. 

It happened with gay marriage, now it’s going to happen with baking cakes, for crying out loud. 

Such is life.

That's fairly convenient: now it's just general tenor since you can't point to anything specific.  Sounds pretty specious. 

Oh, and keep in mind, there are more than the two, hate vs not-hate, options.

[Sanguine]

I cannot believe people are droning on endlessly with ANOTHER damn cake thread.

It's too bad that threads are not a living thing. I would take this one into the alley and shoot it between the eyes.

I'll buy you some bullets.

[WingNot]

I cannot believe people are droning on endlessly with ANOTHER damn cake thread.

It's too bad that threads are not a living thing. I would take this one into the alley and shoot it between the eyes.

Shit Frank let them choose up sides, Give em team jerseys and let them play dodgeball.

[roamer_1]

That was never there in the first place when it comes to retail type business establishments.  The general police power, which the states undeniably have, has always extended to regulating to a fairtheewell what retail business establishments can and cannot do with their own property.

Not to the point of coercion wrt creating a contract.

There is no contract.
There is no deal.
Therefore there is no fault possible.

Now, however, one is coerced into contract.
That is not free enterprise.

[WingNot]

I'll buy you some bullets.

The south ran out of bullets that's why we lost the war.

[Taxcontrol]

Correct ruling - wrong reason.

The first amendment protects the freedom to peacefully assemble.  Protection to do something also includes the protection to NOT do something.  For example, freedom of speech also means freedom from speech (cant be forced to support a position).  Likewise, freedom TO peacefully assemble also means freedom to NOT assemble.  One of the reasons for the People to assemble is for the conduct of commerce.  I.e. you have the right to exchange goods and services.  Likewise, you have the right to NOT exchange goods and services.

[Hoodat]

Why not simply be honest and admit to hating gays?

'Being honest' would involve reading the actual facts of the case, which is something you obviously are not interested in doing.  So carry on with your false bigoted narrative.

[Right_in_Virginia]

It's not a matter of free speech.  The baker alone decides what she will sell, and advertises those wares to the public.  ....

Just want to be clear on what this means @Jazzhead   Are you saying had the baker advertised "We bake wedding cakes for heterosexual marriages" --- or something similar --- the plaintiffs in this suit would not have a case?

[Sanguine]

The south ran out of bullets that's why we lost the war.

Some truth to that.

[roamer_1]

Correct ruling - wrong reason.

The first amendment protects the freedom to peacefully assemble.  Protection to do something also includes the protection to NOT do something.  For example, freedom of speech also means freedom from speech (cant be forced to support a position).  Likewise, freedom TO peacefully assemble also means freedom to NOT assemble.  One of the reasons for the People to assemble is for the conduct of commerce.  I.e. you have the right to exchange goods and services.  Likewise, you have the right to NOT exchange goods and services.

EXACTLY right. An unintended consequence (one would hope) of anti-discrimination law.
If one is not allowed freedom to discriminate (discern), one is not free.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Amazing the contortions people will go through in order to justify their hatred of gays.

Bingo, you exposed your agenda.

Those against the complainer are not the haters, but defenders of freedom to choose. 

[truth_seeker]

Yes but she can say "no" to any order.

Here is an interesting example: A flamboyant gay man pulls into the brake repair shop bay. He says my brakes seem to be going out.

The service writer, who really dislikes flamboyant gays, tells the guy to go elsewhere-he doesn't want the gay's business. The service writer doesn't bother to even evaluate the safety of the brakes.

A winning civil rights case ??

(Safe vehicles are a community issue. State laws cover brake and tire repairs.)

So class, can the brake repair service writer turn down the business?

[WingNot]

Some truth to that.

Had this old boy up in Buford Ga always said to the yankee's passing thu.  "If'n weda had enuff bullets...y'all be dead"

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Without lawsuits some people would have to find real jobs & produce something of real value.

And lawyers like the guy complaining heavily here would have nothing to do.

[roamer_1]

It goes beyond non-acceptance; it goes to hate.

Not in my case. I do hate a few people (working on that). but as a matter of fact, none of them are homos.
Do I hate the sin? Oh, hell yes.
Do I hate the agenda? Oh, hell yes.

That is not the same as hating gays.

[Hoodat]

I cannot believe people are droning on endlessly with ANOTHER damn cake thread.

To me, it is, and always will be, a Constitutional issue.  Or one based upon law.  I don't give a damn who anyone wants to sleep with.