Most Americans side with gays in religious freedom disputes

[Hoofbite]

The point is that it’s a legal photograph which might be taken by any number of other vendors.

And that doesn't mean anything. Some people might take erotic photos, and some might not. Choosing not to take erotic photos doesn't mean you are discriminating just because there are people who take erotic photos. It just means that you don't provide your services for porn shoots.

As I said, the guy would have to deny the photos on a reason other the pictures being erotic in order for the example to be comparable.

The hypothetical photographer is objecting to a specific situation, activity or request which offends them, be it on religious grounds or otherwise. You needn't be Jewish to be offended by a Hitler cake. But will a baker be forced to deliver it?

Why would he?

If the content of the cake is offensive and if he refused because it is offensive, he would refuse such a cake to everyone and there wouldn't be any sort of legal argument that could be made. That's the entire issue. It's not the content of the cake, or any sort of request that wouldn't be granted if the requesting party were different.

If a florist is asked to create a bouquet in the form of a vagina for a bachelor party, can she not refuse on any grounds she chooses?

Sure she can. If she's offended by a flower vagina she can refuse, but she better not create the same bouquet for a bachelorette party and claim that she isn't discriminating.

Bottom line, you can't treat two identical requests differently based on who the requestor might be. That is what is happening.

It's not a matter of forcing businesses to provide services that are widely offensive regardless of who the requestor might be. Business can legally refuse services. They just can't universally refuse services to one population without a justifiable reason.

The issue isn't the content of the request. The issue with these cake stories is the person requesting them. It'd be no different than having a "whites only" bakery, which is why it's illegal.

 

[Hoofbite]

wtf? you make it sound like they have no choice but to do business in backwards countries which routinely abuse human rights. take a look at the list of countries where Apple has a presence. see any nations that engage in discrimination?

When was the last time Cook objected to a single act of discrimination in any of these places? Never. Instead, he prefers to bully Indiana because he knows that Americans won’t threaten his family or blow up his stores. he's a fucking coward who turns a blind eye to evil in the name of profit.

No. I just realize that doing business in any part of the world isn't an indication of what their stances might be on social or political issues within that area. They're a business and will operate wherever there's a demand for their product.

I also realize that whatever battles they undertake in any specific environment shouldn't be expected to take place in every environment where they could possibly undertake such battles.

As for Tim Cook, I don't follow the guy enough to know when the last time he has said anything. If Apple feels they can be force for change in Indiana but not in Saudi Arabia or China, I see no reason why it's noteworthy that they aren't going at those locations like they are in Indiana. Saying he opposes the law in Indiana doesn't begin to speak to what he thinks about what happens in the rest of the world. I'm sure if he could all of a sudden wipe out the discrimination in other parts of the world he'd be all for it. In reality, there isn't shit he can do to change the rest of the world and there's actually very little he can do to change what happens in America.

 

[bbgun]

It's not a matter of forcing businesses to provide services that are widely offensive regardless of who the requestor might be. Business can legally refuse services. They just can't universally refuse services to one population without a justifiable reason.

Correct, and since the majority of religions view homosexuality as a sin, there's your exemption. Just because you cater conventions doesn't mean you're obligated to cater all conventions. There are Star Trek conventions and there are sadomasochism conventions. Similarly, not all weddings are alike. And it goes without saying that personal services contracts are not the same as barring gays or any other minorities from your establishment. If strippers can pick and choose their gigs, so can bakers and florists.

 

[bbgun]

No. I just realize that doing business in any part of the world isn't an indication of what their stances might be on social or political issues within that area. They're a business and will operate wherever there's a demand for their product.

I also realize that whatever battles they undertake in any specific environment shouldn't be expected to take place in every environment where they could possibly undertake such battles.

As for Tim Cook, I don't follow the guy enough to know when the last time he has said anything. If Apple feels they can be force for change in Indiana but not in Saudi Arabia or China, I see no reason why it's noteworthy that they aren't going at those locations like they are in Indiana. Saying he opposes the law in Indiana doesn't begin to speak to what he thinks about what happens in the rest of the world. I'm sure if he could all of a sudden wipe out the discrimination in other parts of the world he'd be all for it. In reality, there isn't shit he can do to change the rest of the world and there's actually very little he can do to change what happens in America.

dude, if you do business in China or Saudi Arabia, thereby aiding and abetting despotic regimes, you absolutely have to keep your mouth shut about Indiana. want to effect change or send a message? then pull your stores out of those countries and stop relying on cheap Chinese labor to build iPhones. or maybe you think boycotts only work on American midwestern states.

 

[Hoofbite]

Correct, and since the majority of religions view homosexuality as a sin, there's your exemption.

The problem lies in that every single religion preaches how all the others are false, and thus the door would be open to discriminate against anyone who doesn't follow your religion.

People are free to practice their religion, not impose their religion. Practicing a religion doesn't bestow special rights upon you to skirt the law. I know this country has had a really hard time recognizing that, but that's the truth.

Just because you cater conventions doesn't mean you're obligated to cater all conventions.

Obviously not. But you couldn't refuse to cater a convention based on the race, sex, orientation, or religion of the convention's participants. The ability to refuse a service based on legitimate reasons doesn't mean you can also refuse a service based on illegitimate reasons.

There are Star Trek conventions and there are sadomasochism conventions. Similarly, not all weddings are alike. And it goes without saying that personal services contracts are not the same as barring gays or any other minorities from your establishment. If strippers can pick and choose their gigs, so can bakers and florists.

If your establishment bakes cakes then refusing to serve gay people results in the exact same outcome as barring gay people from your store.

 

[Hoofbite]

dude, if you do business in China or Saudi Arabia, thereby aiding and abetting despotic regimes, you absolutely have to keep your mouth shut about Indiana. want to effect change or send a message? then pull your stores out of those countries and stop relying on cheap Chinese labor to build iPhones. or maybe you think boycotts only work on American midwestern states.

Are they pulling stores out of Indiana?

 

[bbgun]

Are they pulling stores out of Indiana?

don't have to. they and other wedding cake fascists got Gov Pence to fold. if only they were as brave and determined regarding the Middle East or, you know, Muslim bakeries in Dearborn, MI who refuse to do gay cakes. curiously, no outrage from Cook or the Left.

 

[bbgun]

The problem lies in that every single religion preaches how all the others are false, and thus the door would be open to discriminate against anyone who doesn't follow your religion.

no, you have to go to court and prove that rejecting a gay themed event would violate your faith, and a lot of businesses wouldn't go to those lengths. you can't just "discriminate" willy nilly.

People are free to practice their religion, not impose their religion. Practicing a religion doesn't bestow special rights upon you to skirt the law. I know this country has had a really hard time recognizing that, but that's the truth.

actually, the Left has been doing all of the imposing lately (submit or else!), which is why 20 states have these exemption laws.

Obviously not. But you couldn't refuse to cater a convention based on the race, sex, orientation, or religion of the convention's participants. The ability to refuse a service based on legitimate reasons doesn't mean you can also refuse a service based on illegitimate reasons.

they're rejecting activities, not people. you don't have the right to force people to work for you just because you're a member of a protected class. nor do you have to be religious to find homosexuality unhealthy, anti-social, immoral, offensive, etc. does Kroger reject homoerotic cakes because they hate gay people or because they simply find it inappropriate?

If your establishment bakes cakes then refusing to serve gay people results in the exact same outcome as barring gay people from your store.

nonsense. there's quite a bit of difference between a party supply store barring you from the building and going out of their way to decorate a personal, private event.

 

[Bluenoser]

Who will go down as a better President? Obama or Hillary?

 

[dbair1967]

Doing business in a country with fucked up laws isn't passively condoning those laws. It's the price of operating a business.

Eh. Again don't give us the moral outrage stuff here (ie Indiana) and then go about business as usual w/o saying a peep in countries where they treat minorities FAR worse than anything that goes on here.

They should just keep their fucking mouths shut.

 

[dbair1967]

Who will go down as a better President? Obama or Hillary?

Hopefully America wont be this fucking stupid again and Hildabeast will get beat down in the polls in Nov 2016

Then again, they (leftists) pretty much have what they want. A slight majority of the country almost completely dependent on government handouts, and those people don't vote with their brains, they vote to keep the free shit coming.

 

[dbair1967]

Are they pulling stores out of Indiana?

no, but they helped shut one private business down with their ridiculous protests

again...why cant people just shut the fuck up about this? I really don't care if you want to suck dick or not. Ultimately while I don't agree with it, I really don't care if you want to marry the guy you are sucking. What I have a problem with is hypocrite left wingers believing that its their RIGHT to force me to AGREE that what they do is ok. I also have a problem with government getting involved in private business.

Ultimately this comes down to a very simple way of life that people should adhere to. If you own a business and I think you are a fucking asshole, I wont do business with you. There are 1000's of bakeries, pizzarias, florists etc etc that people can choose from. Go the fuck someplace else instead of making a federal case out of everything. Why is that so hard for left wingers to understand?

 

[peplaw06]

no, it's the activity. there are any number of events involving gay people that most businesses would tolerate. most bakers would be content to make non-marital treats for gay couples, and most photographers would be eager to collect a fee to take photos of a gay person's family’s reunion, because in those scenarios, being gay is incidental to the event. explicitly gay ceremonies like gay marriage are another ballgame entirely. and the bar is set high for any business denying that service (i.e., they have to go to court to prove their religious exemption), so let's not pretend that gays can be shunned without good reason.

I'm not sure you're understanding me... operating on the assumption that the business would cater to a straight wedding, and not to a gay wedding would mean the discrimination would be against the customer not the activity. Presumably in this scenario, the only reason they would cater to one and not the other would be the identity of the customer.

And I'm not going to assume that most bakers would make non-marital treats for gay couples, or that a photographer would take pics at a gay person's family's reunion. They may or may not... I would guess that the sexual orientation of the person wouldn't come up as often as in the wedding scenario, because it's not relevant in your new hypotheticals. It's not only relevant in the wedding scenario, it's what the whole thing is about, so you can't avoid but have it come up. But if discrimination against gays were acceptable business practices, then yeah, I would bet more anti-gay bakers would refuse to serve gays, even when it's not really relevant to the event.

 

[jnday]

no, but they helped shut one private business down with their ridiculous protests

again...why cant people just shut the fuck up about this? I really don't care if you want to suck dick or not. Ultimately while I don't agree with it, I really don't care if you want to marry the guy you are sucking. What I have a problem with is hypocrite left wingers believing that its their RIGHT to force me to AGREE that what they do is ok. I also have a problem with government getting involved in private business.

Ultimately this comes down to a very simple way of life that people should adhere to. If you own a business and I think you are a fucking asshole, I wont do business with you. There are 1000's of bakeries, pizzarias, florists etc etc that people can choose from. Go the fuck someplace else instead of making a federal case out of everything. Why is that so hard for left wingers to understand?

I think this is your best post ever. A private business owner should be able to run his business as he chooses. He should not be forced to do business with anybody and the government should stay out of it.