Christian Baker Under Fire on a New Front with Satanic Request

[Nathan98]

The Christian baker who found himself in legal trouble after declining to make a cake for a same-sex wedding and whose case is now before the U.S. Supreme Court, has been asked to make a birthday cake for Satan.

Christian Baker Under Fire on a New Front with Satanic Request

 

[Hank77]

Their protected religious class does not mean that they can demand that someone produce and sell a product that they don't for someone else. That means no wording or design that they don't already sell.
That would be like demanding that GAP produce a shirt with a particular design on it. Because GAP sells shirts a Christian or satanist couldn't legally demand that GAP produce a shirt for them because they have religious protection.
I suspect these emailers and callers know this and they are just harassing him.

 

[Sketcher]

If anything, this should help his court case.

 

[Hank77]

If anything, this should help his court case.

Well, if anything it will show how vindictive some people can be. It's pure harassment.

 

[MoonlessNight]

Their protected religious class does not mean that they can demand that someone produce and sell a product that they don't for someone else. That means no wording or design that they don't already sell.
That would be like demanding that GAP produce a shirt with a particular design on it. Because GAP sells shirts a Christian or satanist couldn't legally demand that GAP produce a shirt for them because they have religious protection.
I suspect these emailers and callers know this and they are just harassing him.

We are at the point where "protected religious class" means precisely what a particular judge wants it to mean, no more or no less.

Part of the mistake of the Christian response to these types of things is the presumption that there is a well defined standard of law which is applied evenly and fairly across all groups of people. That's the ideal sure, and what was intended at the founding of the nation, but it's hardly the reality that we find ourselves with today.

 

[brinny]

God have mercy!

Praying for Jack Phillips, all his family, household, and his business.

 

[Hank77]

We are at the point where "protected religious class" means precisely what a particular judge wants it to mean, no more or no less.

Part of the mistake of the Christian response to these types of things is the presumption that there is a well defined standard of law which is applied evenly and fairly across all groups of people. That's the ideal sure, and what was intended at the founding of the nation, but it's hardly the reality that we find ourselves with today.

True, but that is what we should be supporting and fighting off.

 

[MoonlessNight]

True, but that is what we should be supporting and fighting off.

I agree that we should be fighting, but we should be fighting without compromise.

There are too many people who are willing to make small changes and change their business practices under the delusion that if they try to be fair, the law will protect them. But we've seen too many cases to think that the majority of these lawsuits desire anything other than the complete destruction of a business merely for being Christian.

The standard that we should fight for is that Christians should be do whatever they need to in order to run their company in accordance with God's law. Anything less than that is foolishly shooting ourselves in the foot.

 

[Douger]

Happiness is found in understanding and trust in the Lord's ways.
I think Satan needs happiness more than anyone else.

 

[brinny]

Praying.

 

[Hank77]

But we've seen too many cases to think that the majority of these lawsuits desire anything other than the complete destruction of a business merely for being Christian.

Is it because they are a Christian?
Do you think that these people who harass and sue would act differently towards someone with the same actions but was not a Christian?
ie.
Joe, refuses to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. Joe is not a Christian but Joe thinks same-sex marriage is wrong. Do you think that he would not be harassed or sued?

 

[MoonlessNight]

Is it because they are a Christian?
Do you think that these people who harass and sue would act differently towards someone with the same actions but was not a Christian?
ie.
Joe, refuses to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. Joe is not a Christian but Joe thinks same-sex marriage is wrong. Do you think that he would not be harassed or sued?

Your question isn't hypothetical, as can be seen when your "Joe" is actually named "Mohammad."

 

[Hank77]

Your question isn't hypothetical, as can be seen when your "Joe" is actually named "Mohammad."

You didn't answer the question, or if this is your answer please expound.

 

[Rion]

You didn't answer the question, or if this is your answer please expound.

This has been done as an experiment, with the bakers refusing. Muslim bakers don’t want to make your gay ‘wedding’ cake, either; where are the protests? (video)

 

[Hank77]

This has been done as an experiment, with the bakers refusing. Muslim bakers don’t want to make your gay ‘wedding’ cake, either; where are the protests? (video)

It's not the same scenario at all. The people who asked for the cake were not a same-sex couple. If they had been, would they have sued, or harassed the Muslim bakery? What if the baker was Jewish, would they have sued them?

 

[Rion]

It's not the same scenario at all. The people who asked for the cake were not a same-sex couple. If they had been, would they have sued, or harassed the Muslim bakery? What if the baker was Jewish, would they have sued them?

It'd depend on where they felt they belonged on the progressive stack, but probably not.

 

[FenderTL5]

"..let your fingers take a walk
through the business guide for the "born again" flock
you'll be keeping all your money in the kingdom now
and you'll only drink milk from a Christian cow
don't you go casting your bread to keep the heathen well-fed
line Christian pockets instead--avoid temptation,
Guilty by Association"

- Steve Taylor -

 

[Hank77]

It'd depend on where they felt they belonged on the progressive stack, but probably not.

So now you understand my point. You can only say Probably not because you really don't have any idea if they would or not.

 

[Rion]

So now you understand my point. You can only say Probably not because you really don't have any idea if they would or not.

Of course, but it was also interesting that when the results were made public, there was no outcry about it.

 

[MoonlessNight]

It's not the same scenario at all. The people who asked for the cake were not a same-sex couple. If they had been, would they have sued, or harassed the Muslim bakery? What if the baker was Jewish, would they have sued them?

It's becoming clear that no matter what information you come across in the real world, you have a hypothetical prepared in your back pocket to change the subject.

What's true is that the baker in the OP is being attacked for his Christian beliefs.

Trying to make the discussion about whether his attackers would hypothetically attack Jews, even if they wouldn't have attacked Muslims, is exactly the kind of stupidity that I was alluding to earlier in the thread.

The fact is that Christians are being attacked for holding to Christian principles. Do you think that we should defend them, or do you think that we should fret about if their enemies might be justified in some counterfactual hypothetical scenario that you dream up?