As I said, I haven't heard of a case in which it was actually management policy, so management has always been immediate fire the employee, issue apologies, and it's never a good political move for government agents to sue for such things.
Upvote
0
supreme court sounds skeptical on baker's case
- Thread starter FireDragon76
- Start date
As I said, I haven't heard of a case in which it was actually management policy, so management has always been immediate fire the employee, issue apologies, and it's never a good political move for government agents to sue for such things.
DaisyDay
I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State
- Jan 7, 2003
- 38,083
- 17,553
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Unitarian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
That's a ridiculous argument.
The bakers can refuse to sell an item to a particular person, but not refuse to sell to a class of people - ie wedding cakes to gay people.
Upvote
0
Which, again, is why the baker was found in violation of Colorado's Civil Rights Accommodation Law, he refused to sell this couple an item (wedding cake) that he routinely sold to others in the operation of his business, based on the couple's sexual orientation.
Upvote
0
Terminal_Marxicity
Active Member
Has anyone yet commented on the wisdom of forcing someone to make you food who does not want to?
Simple solution for the baker would be to force the client to sign an arbitration agreement as well as institute a return policy that covers your costs once their wedding has been ruined with inedible cake.
Just because I have a business that serves the public does not mean I have to serve every member of said public who walks through my door with some money. "We reserve the right to refuse service" ring a bell?
Simple solution for the baker would be to force the client to sign an arbitration agreement as well as institute a return policy that covers your costs once their wedding has been ruined with inedible cake.
Just because I have a business that serves the public does not mean I have to serve every member of said public who walks through my door with some money. "We reserve the right to refuse service" ring a bell?
Upvote
0
Terminal_Marxicity
Active Member
You don't sell wedding cakes, you make wedding cakes custom per the event. He has the right to decline providing his specialized services for any reason, be it lack of time, lack of desire to participate in said event or any other reason.
Upvote
0
- Oct 29, 2017
- 55,323
- 8,143
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Messianic
- Marital Status
- Private
By what logic can a nation that is built on religious freedom, force someone to participate in contributing to an act that YHWH abhors?
Upvote
0
Probably during the 60s when black people had to fight for the right to sit alongside white people in restaurants.
People can put up signs all they want - doesn't mean the law stops applying to them.
Upvote
0
Terminal_Marxicity
Active Member
This isn't the 60's. Argue this case on it's merits, not off a case a half century ago with completely different circumstances.
The law backs their right to put up these signs.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
That's what the court case is about. Forcing someone to create a custom piece geared towards something the creator of the piece disagrees with.
They are looking for ways to balance to two viewpoints, and still allow freedom of speech and lack of discrimination.
I went to the Supreme courts website, and read the transcript. It was an interesting read.
I didn't know the baker also refused to make an Anti-LGBT cake as well. He also doesn't do Halloween, Divorce celebration, etc. So, this theme that the case is about isn't the only aspect of life he won't create for customers.
Upvote
0
Yeah, you'd have hoped some people would have learned from history.
I already said they could put up any signs they want. Following through on the threats in them is a different story.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
No, it is about a business owner refusing to sell something to a gay person that they'd happily sell to anyone else.
Upvote
0
Terminal_Marxicity
Active Member
Except it's not. It's about the customization of the cake. He offered them off the self goods.
Upvote
0
lol You let the Supreme court know that then. All of them are under the impression it is about the two issues they themselves brought up!
Upvote
0
What is the difference in circumstances? BTW, I personally remember those signs and the places I was not allowed to go.
That's why I never got to see any of the Disney children's classics until I was an adult--they were only shown at the whites-only theater.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
But that's not the deal here. He refused to sell it for the purpose of a gay wedding. This guy might have refused to sell it to a straight person who came in to buy it for the same purpose. It's not usually the bride and groom that walk into a bake shop to buy the cake anyway, is it? Doesn't a caterer usually do that service?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
