Florida teacher felt she had to quit amid 'Don't Say Gay' rhetoric

[SilverBear]

I have worked with people of different races. I find some are opposed to the racism that does not favor them, but favor those of their own race in the voting booth and elsewhere. I do not assume all white people are racist. A couple I met have a white daughter and adopted a boy from Ethiopia.

I dated a widow who had white children from two different marriages, then she and her second husband adopted a Chinese girl before her husband passed away.

that's all very nice I suppose but you didn't answer my question

 

[Lost Witness]

that they're going to hell because of something they have no power to change, could it?

indeed they've no power to 'change' anything, none of us do.
GOD does though

 

[Diamond7]

Now people are loud and proud about their bigotry.

Are you talking about the bigotry of gay people or straight people?

 

[Diamond7]

I do not assume all white people are racist.

I do not assume all black people are racist.

 

[rturner76]

Are you talking about the bigotry of gay people or straight people?

It seems that straight people are offended by someone being gay more often then gay people are offended by someone being straight.

 

[essentialsaltes]

It seems that straight people are offended by someone being gay more often then gay people are offended by someone being straight.

Case in point.

If congregants of First Baptist Church in Jacksonville want to remain members, they have to sign a statement vowing to oppose LGBTQ+ freedoms.

 

[Diamond7]

It seems that straight people are offended by someone being gay more often then gay people are offended by someone being straight.

My experience is that gay people are just as much offended if not more. I would not be mad if someone did not want to bake me a cake. But that is a civil war offense for them. In fact, I would want people to be offended by my sin so I know what I am doing is wrong. A real friend would confront me and encourage me that I should get right with God. They would say I still want to be your friend but as a friend, I believe what you are doing is wrong. They would not refuse to talk to me and refuse to have anything to do with me.

 

[Pommer]

My experience is that gay people are just as much offended if not more. I would not be mad if someone did not want to bake me a cake. But that is a civil war offense for them. In fact, I would want people to be offended by my sin so I know what I am doing is wrong. A real friend would confront me and encourage me that I should get right with God. They would say I still want to be your friend but as a friend, I believe what you are doing is wrong. They would not refuse to talk to me and refuse to have anything to do with me.

You’d be “okay” with a baker not being willing to write “HAPPY EASTER” on a cake that you’d like to purchase? And sending you “elsewhere”?
It strains credulity. It really does.

 

[Desk trauma]

. In fact, I would want people to be offended by my sin so I know what I am doing is wrong.

Such as the sin of having any other god but Allah?

 

[Desk trauma]

You’d be “okay” with a baker not being willing to write “HAPPY EASTER” on a cake that you’d like to purchase? And sending you “elsewhere”?
It strains credulity. It really does.

That would be persecution, clearly, unlike denying service to others which is just fine.

 

[Diamond7]

That would be persecution, clearly, unlike denying service to others which is just fine.

The law is broken if you refuse to sell them a cake. You can refuse to personalize that cake. The court already ruled on this one. At least for now, the court said it would be impermissible hostility to religion to force them to personalize a cake in a way that is against their beliefs.

 

[Belk]

The law is broken if you refuse to sell them a cake. You can refuse to personalize that cake. The court already ruled on this one. At least for now, the court said it would be impermissible hostility to religion to force them to personalize a cake in a way that is against their beliefs.

I'm unaware of any such ruling. Can you cite the case?

 

[Diamond7]

I'm unaware of any such ruling. Can you cite the case?

On Monday, June 4, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed in a 7–2 decision. Justice Kennedy wrote for the Court; only Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented. The Court did not reach the central issues of the case: Would it violate free exercise of religion or freedom of speech under the First Amendment to force Masterpiece Cakeshop to design and bake a cake for a same-sex wedding?

Instead, the Court found that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission had expressed impermissible hostility to religion and thus violated the free exercise clause of the First Amendment. Justice Kennedy wrote: “The Civil Rights Commission’s treatment of his case has some elements of a clear and impermissible hostility toward the sincere religious beliefs that motivated his objection.”

Not a Masterpiece: The Supreme Court’s Decision in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission

The recent decision in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case allowed a business to discriminate based on its owner’s beliefs, which goes against many established federal, state, and local civil rights laws.

www.americanbar.org

 

[essentialsaltes]

Instead, the Court found that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission had expressed impermissible hostility to religion and thus violated the free exercise clause of the First Amendment. Justice Kennedy wrote: “The Civil Rights Commission’s treatment of his case has some elements of a clear and impermissible hostility toward the sincere religious beliefs that motivated his objection.”

This is a little technical, but the 'impermissible hostility' came from this commission acting badly. The ruling did not state that baking a cake would be impermissible hostility.

 

[Belk]

On Monday, June 4, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed in a 7–2 decision. Justice Kennedy wrote for the Court; only Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented. The Court did not reach the central issues of the case: Would it violate free exercise of religion or freedom of speech under the First Amendment to force Masterpiece Cakeshop to design and bake a cake for a same-sex wedding?

Instead, the Court found that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission had expressed impermissible hostility to religion and thus violated the free exercise clause of the First Amendment. Justice Kennedy wrote: “The Civil Rights Commission’s treatment of his case has some elements of a clear and impermissible hostility toward the sincere religious beliefs that motivated his objection.”

Not a Masterpiece: The Supreme Court’s Decision in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission

The recent decision in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case allowed a business to discriminate based on its owner’s beliefs, which goes against many established federal, state, and local civil rights laws.

www.americanbar.org

View attachment 327209

Thank you. However, this made no ruling about "personalizing". It was decided that the commission was hostile so the idea that cake decoration is protected speech is not addressed or ruled on.

 

[Pommer]

Thank you. However, this made no ruling about "personalizing". It was decided that the commission was hostile so the idea that cake decoration is protected speech is not addressed or ruled on.

Correct, SCOTUS sidestepped the free speech issue by focusing on the “religious freedom” clause.

 

[SilverBear]

My experience is that gay people are just as much offended if not more. I would not be mad if someone did not want to bake me a cake.

Spoken like someone who had never experienced discrimination.

 

[Diamond7]

Spoken like someone who had never experienced discrimination.

It's unlikely that anyone has never experienced discrimination, as it can happen to anyone, regardless of their background, race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or any other characteristic. Discrimination can take many forms, such as prejudice, bias, or mistreatment based on a person's identity. It's important to note that discrimination can happen to anyone, and it's not limited to people who belong to certain groups or communities. Discrimination can be subtle, or it can be overt, and it can have a significant impact on a person's life.

It is also important to note that everyone experiences discrimination differently and to different degrees, as it depends on factors such as the type of discrimination, the severity, and how one perceives it.