Christians No Longer Have to Tolerate People They Hate..

Washington (CNN)The Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to bake a cake to celebrate the marriage of a same sex couple because of a religious objection.

next up.. colored people..  

ever since of of them went and became president, I just don't like them, either....

Caution: Mainstream Media Link

Whew, I hope the methodists are next.

DWags wrote:Whew, I hope the methodists are next.  

it'll be pretty funny when some folks refuse to serve some loving, christian patriots because one of them is wearing a cross around their neck.

It seems this is a narrow ruling in regards to this baker and this cake only. I'm sure we'll see the Supreme court just jammed up now with these type cases from flowers to food service.

DWags wrote:It seems this is a narrow ruling in regards to this baker and this cake only.   I'm sure we'll see the Supreme court just jammed up now with these type cases from flowers to food service.  

oh, yeah - with a champion in the White House, the racist, bigoted knuckle-draggers feel emboldened to perpetrate their hate on any/everyone now.

DWags wrote:It seems this is a narrow ruling in regards to this baker and this cake only.   I'm sure we'll see the Supreme court just jammed up now with these type cases from flowers to food service.  

Seriously, though, what's next? Telling certain people to get to the back of the bus or use a different drinking fountain?

I just hope they overlook the fat that, as a catholic, I got all my orders from the pope.

DWags wrote:I just hope they overlook the fat that, as a catholic, I got all my orders from the pope.  

Sorry, I can't overlook fat catholics. There are limits to everything.

Frank, I guess I'll just have to eat less cake.

Well on the bright side they are no longer under the thumb of the oppressive gay majority running this country.

Why would you want someone to make a cake for you if they hate you? If a business doesn't want your money, take it elsewhere.

AnomanderRake wrote:Why would you want someone to make a cake for you if they hate you? If a business doesn't want your money, take it elsewhere.

Sounds a lot like separate but equal to me.

AnomanderRake wrote:Why would you want someone to make a cake for you if they hate you? If a business doesn't want your money, take it elsewhere.

yeah - if they won't let you drink out of the "whites only" drinking fountain.. might as well go around the corner and use you're own.

I'm curious, did the sidewalks that lead up to that store cost any gay people tax money? Does the police protection of it, or the fire department use any gay peoples tax dollars? I'm not quite sure how this is able to be done. Someone explain this from a legal standpoint.

BTW, I don't get anybusiness that would turn away any business, but it must be a real special kind of hate where you couldn't put two males on top of a cake. That can't just be a natural hate, that kind of hate has to be taught, re-taught, and retaught and quized and reinforced.

DWags wrote:I'm curious, did the sidewalks that lead up to that store cost any gay people tax money?  Does the police protection of it, or the fire department use any gay peoples tax dollars?   I'm not quite sure how this is able to be done.   Someone explain this from a legal standpoint.  

BTW, I don't get anybusiness that would turn away any business, but it must be a real special kind of hate where you couldn't put two males on top of a cake.  That can't just be a natural hate, that kind of hate has to be taught, re-taught, and retaught and quized and reinforced.  

your problem is that you're approaching the argument from a rational, logical and compassionate perspective... and a desire for humanity to be thoughtful, respectful and decent.

Random thought I remember that movie Teenwolf where M j fox is about to reveal to his friend he’s a werewolf. He’s like I have something to tell you and his friend is relieved he’s like whoa I thought you were going to tell me you are gay.

Dude is happier the guy is a fucking werewolf over a homosexual.

DWags wrote:I'm curious, did the sidewalks that lead up to that store cost any gay people tax money?  Does the police protection of it, or the fire department use any gay peoples tax dollars?   I'm not quite sure how this is able to be done.   Someone explain this from a legal standpoint.  

BTW, I don't get anybusiness that would turn away any business, but it must be a real special kind of hate where you couldn't put two males on top of a cake.  That can't just be a natural hate, that kind of hate has to be taught, re-taught, and retaught and quized and reinforced.  

If that were the criteria, then there would be no such thing as private enterprises in this country.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

AnomanderRake wrote:Why would you want someone to make a cake for you if they hate you? If a business doesn't want your money, take it elsewhere.

yeah - if they won't let you drink out of the "whites only" drinking fountain.. might as well go around the corner and use you're own.

OK, let's try to make the comparison a little more analagous. So let's then assume that whoever owns/runs the "whites only" drinking fountain can control the quality of the water that comes out for each individual. And let's say that the the owner/operator of the drinking fountain said that he doesn't want you to drink from it. Do you really still want to drink from it, knowing that the owner/operator who openly dislikes you can choose to give you poor quality water? I'm not talking poison water, but just poorer quality (maybe not as clean, maybe warm, maybe it has that strong well water taste, whatever....lots of ways to have substandard water without endangering your health, and even more so for a cake).

Yeah, the guy is an asshole, but better for everyone to know that, rather than him being forced to serve people. If he cares more about his hate than the business, then he's going to do a terrible job on purpose. Especially when it comes to food, why would you want this? If I need to send food back at the restaurant, I try to be as pleasant as possible, even apologizing for the inconvenience. I can take out my disdain after my correct meal has been served.

MiamiSpartan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
yeah - if they won't let you drink out of the "whites only" drinking fountain.. might as well go around the corner and use you're own.

OK, let's try to make the comparison a little more analagous.  So let's then assume that whoever owns/runs the "whites only" drinking fountain can control the quality of the water that comes out for each individual.  And let's say that the the owner/operator of the drinking fountain said that he doesn't want you to drink from it.  Do you really still want to drink from it, knowing that the owner/operator who openly dislikes you can choose to give you poor quality water?  I'm not talking poison water, but just poorer quality (maybe not as clean, maybe warm, maybe it has that strong well water taste, whatever....lots of ways to have substandard water without endangering your health, and even more so for a cake).

Yeah, the guy is an asshole, but better for everyone to know that, rather than him being forced to serve people.  If he cares more about his hate than the business, then he's going to do a terrible job on purpose.  Especially when it comes to food, why would you want this?  If I need to send food back at the restaurant, I try to be as pleasant as possible, even apologizing for the inconvenience.  I can take out my disdain after my correct meal has been served.

you seem to think that religion can't be based in racism.

it'll be fun when some fine white 'christian' folks are refused service somewhere because of their hate-filled bigoted values.

what would be really cool and intellectually honest (like that's gonna happen) - would be if all of these hate-filled religious bigots would put a sign on their door announcing a list of the people they plan on legally discriminating against.

that way, straight, upper-middle class white guys like me who think nobody should be legally discriminated against could make our financial decisions based on their intent to discriminate.

but, yeah.. I suspect their jesus-lovin' selves enjoy cash a little too much to really express how much they support "religious freedom".

Miami, I'm trying to follow this from the opposite side that I believe in. Can you tell me what the difference is between me being gay and me being black? If the cake shop said no because I was black, are you saying because it's private enterprise they can do that? My whole world is turned upside down on this case. I thought America was beyond discrimination. What law did those two break that the bake shop was able to successfully say they won't serve them.

Bob is so right. They enjoy the money so much they won't go all in because they know it'll hurt the bottom line.

msugolfguy wrote:Bob is so right. They enjoy the money so much they won't go all in because they know it'll hurt the bottom line.

this would be a cool sign for all of those who value their {ahem} sincerely held religious beliefs:

Because of Our Sincerely Held Religious Beliefs, Whitey McHateBigot's Cake Emporium Will Not Serve the Following People:

Queers
Lesbians
Gays
Blacks
Women
Hispanics
Latinos
Anyone with a Hispanic/Latino-Sounding Name
Anyone From a Shithole Country
Non-Whites
Non-MAGA Supporters
Those Who Supporting Kneeling For the National Anthem
White People Who Have a Compassionate Enthusiasm of Those Less Fortunate Than Them
Gun Control Advocates
Pro-Choice People
Those Who Oppose the Death Penalty
Those Who Support Healthcare For Everyone

.. and anyone else we see fit to legally discriminate against.

Thoughts and Prayers,

the Management

You left out transgender and methodists.

DWags wrote:You left out transgender and methodists.  

gonna be a long list..

kinda like the list that the right wing patriots boycott because they get their feelings hurt. I think we lost track once they started blowing up their coffee makers.

No, I think they blew up coolers, they shot their coffee makers. Or maybe the opposite. It had to do with gun powder and being mad cause somebody said something that hurt their feelings.

DWags wrote:No, I think they blew up coolers, they shot their coffee makers.  Or maybe the opposite.   It had to do with gun powder and being made cause somebody said something that hurt their feelings.

yeah - I get confused with the various ways they choose to document their rage.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

MiamiSpartan wrote:
OK, let's try to make the comparison a little more analagous.  So let's then assume that whoever owns/runs the "whites only" drinking fountain can control the quality of the water that comes out for each individual.  And let's say that the the owner/operator of the drinking fountain said that he doesn't want you to drink from it.  Do you really still want to drink from it, knowing that the owner/operator who openly dislikes you can choose to give you poor quality water?  I'm not talking poison water, but just poorer quality (maybe not as clean, maybe warm, maybe it has that strong well water taste, whatever....lots of ways to have substandard water without endangering your health, and even more so for a cake).

Yeah, the guy is an asshole, but better for everyone to know that, rather than him being forced to serve people.  If he cares more about his hate than the business, then he's going to do a terrible job on purpose.  Especially when it comes to food, why would you want this?  If I need to send food back at the restaurant, I try to be as pleasant as possible, even apologizing for the inconvenience.  I can take out my disdain after my correct meal has been served.

you seem to think that religion can't be based in racism.

it'll be fun when some fine white 'christian' folks are refused service somewhere because of their hate-filled bigoted values.

You seem to think you know what someone is saying, but don't bother reading what they wrote to actually find out. It's really ironic coming from you that is always talking about how America is a stupid country, how people don't pay attention, etc.

Try re-reading my post again, including what Rake had posted, which you responded to, which prompted my response. Seriously, where do you even get that from my post? Do you typically like to pay people who hate you to fix food for you?

Sometimes you guys on here seem to get so wrapped up in the Us vs Them stuff, that if someone doesn't simply say "Yeah, right on, Bob", then you just assume they're on the complete opposite side of an issue from you, without even paying attention to what they write?

MiamiSpartan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
you seem to think that religion can't be based in racism.

it'll be fun when some fine white 'christian' folks are refused service somewhere because of their hate-filled bigoted values.

You seem to think you know what someone is saying, but don't bother reading what they wrote to actually find out.  It's really ironic coming from you that is always talking about how America is a stupid country, how people don't pay attention, etc.

Try re-reading my post again, including what Rake had posted, which you responded to, which prompted my response.  Seriously, where do you even get that from my post?  Do you typically like to pay people who hate you to fix food for you?

Sometimes you guys on here seem to get so wrapped up in the Us vs Them stuff, that if someone doesn't simply say "Yeah, right on, Bob", then you just assume they're on the complete opposite side of an issue from you, without even paying attention to what they write?  

was just my opinion, dude.

DWags wrote:Miami, I'm trying to follow this from the opposite side that I believe in.  Can you tell me what the difference is between me being gay and me being black?   If the cake shop said no because I was black, are you saying because it's private enterprise they can do that?  My whole world is turned upside down on this case.  I thought America was beyond discrimination.   What law did those two break that the bake shop was able to successfully say they won't serve them.  

As is the case with Bob, you seem to be so wrapped up in the Us vs Them nature of this sub-board that you automatically think that anyone that doesn't agree with what you wrote, must be on the opposite side of the spectrum.

I was only saying that if the fact that private businesses are serviced/protected by government organizations means that they are beholden to the same laws as the government entities themselves, then there would be no such thing as private enterprises. That's it. Nothing hidden in what I said. Not setting anyone up for a "gotcha". Just saying why the use of those services have nothing to do with this. There are laws to govern what private businesses can and can't do, as there should be (this specific case obviously falls into a grey area).

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

MiamiSpartan wrote:
You seem to think you know what someone is saying, but don't bother reading what they wrote to actually find out.  It's really ironic coming from you that is always talking about how America is a stupid country, how people don't pay attention, etc.

Try re-reading my post again, including what Rake had posted, which you responded to, which prompted my response.  Seriously, where do you even get that from my post?  Do you typically like to pay people who hate you to fix food for you?

Sometimes you guys on here seem to get so wrapped up in the Us vs Them stuff, that if someone doesn't simply say "Yeah, right on, Bob", then you just assume they're on the complete opposite side of an issue from you, without even paying attention to what they write?  

was just my opinion, dude.

What was your opinion? Attributing bullshit to someone without reading their post?

MiamiSpartan wrote:

DWags wrote:Miami, I'm trying to follow this from the opposite side that I believe in.  Can you tell me what the difference is between me being gay and me being black?   If the cake shop said no because I was black, are you saying because it's private enterprise they can do that?  My whole world is turned upside down on this case.  I thought America was beyond discrimination.   What law did those two break that the bake shop was able to successfully say they won't serve them.  

As is the case with Bob, you seem to be so wrapped up in the Us vs Them nature of this sub-board that you automatically think that anyone that doesn't agree with what you wrote, must be on the opposite side of the spectrum.

I was only saying that if the fact that private businesses are serviced/protected by government organizations means that they are beholden to the same laws as the government entities themselves, then there would be no such thing as private enterprises.  That's it.  Nothing hidden in what I said.  Not setting anyone up for a "gotcha".  Just saying why the use of those services have nothing to do with this.  There are laws to govern what private businesses can and can't do, as there should be (this specific case obviously falls into a grey area).  

people have every right to be hate-filled religious bigots.

it's unfortunate, though, that they can now legally discriminate against god's children.

again, it'll be funny when Ma and Pa McHateBigot are asked to leave a place because of the owner's religious beliefs.

MiamiSpartan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
was just my opinion, dude.

What was your opinion?  Attributing bullshit to someone without reading their post?

this was my opinion:

Bobby Sak wrote:you seem to think that religion can't be based in racism.

it'll be fun when some fine white 'christian' folks are refused service somewhere because of their hate-filled bigoted values.

you seem angry.

Not at all Miami. I shouldn't have said "miami" as I'm just addressing a question out loud that I just don't get the answer to. I have always felt that privately owned businesses had to adhere to the rules of law, this being non discrimination, because they serve the general public, which inturn provides services for them. I assumed public tax dollars that support us in our private enterprises i.e., those type of things that lead you up to the private business and which protects them from fraud, theft fire, etc guarantee everyone regardless of race, sex, religion or sexual preference the right to shop or use the private business.

I would have bet money that they couldn't refuse service to the two gay guys. However, a 7-2 court decision tells me I was way wrong. To me it seems like it's just blatant discrimination. Is it a deal where they didn't refuse them business, but refuse to put what they wanted on the cake? I guess I can see that. But if, as I assumed, it was just refusing to do business with them, well, I don't see how they won the case.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

MiamiSpartan wrote:
What was your opinion?  Attributing bullshit to someone without reading their post?

this was my opinion:

Bobby Sak wrote:you seem to think that religion can't be based in racism.

it'll be fun when some fine white 'christian' folks are refused service somewhere because of their hate-filled bigoted values.

you seem angry.

Not angry, but annoyed. I get that way when someone tries to attribute something to me that I didn't say, think, imply, or even talk about. All I was saying was supporting Rake's comment about why would anyone want to do business with someone that hates you. I especially don't understand that when it comes to a product that you wish to enjoy while ingesting it into your body. Setting aside the moral reasons for not wanting to eat this guy's cakes, for my own pleasure and possibly safety, I wouldn't want to.

DWags wrote:Not at all Miami.  I shouldn't have said "miami" as I'm just addressing a question out loud that I just don't get the answer to. I have always felt that privately owned businesses had to adhere to the rules of law, this being non discrimination, because they  serve the general public, which inturn provides services for them.  I assumed public tax dollars that support us in our private enterprises i.e., those type of things that lead you up to the private business and which protects them from fraud, theft fire, etc guarantee everyone regardless of race, sex, religion or sexual preference the right to shop or use the private business.

 I would have bet money that they couldn't refuse service to the two gay guys.   However, a 7-2 court decision tells me I was way wrong.   To me it seems like it's just blatant discrimination.  Is it a deal where they didn't refuse them business, but refuse to put what they wanted on the cake?  I guess I can see that.  But if, as I assumed, it was just refusing to do business with them, well, I don't see how they won the case.

I genuinely mean no offense, but did you read the article linked in the OP? It WAS a case where he didn't refuse them business, but did refuse to put what they wanted on the cake. Or, to be more specific, refused to make it a wedding cake. In the article he claims that he offered to make them anything else (this claim does not appear to be disputed).

But the case was not about whether or not someone can refuse service, the case was about whether or not the baker's rights were violated by the Colorado government due to the "hostility" (to use the word of the Court's majority opinion) with which they addressed his religious objections. Several people from both sides seem to be saying that this makes no judgement about refusing service, but only about the particulars of this case.

In any event, we do have laws that govern private business, and that's a good thing. But there are limits. I had just objected to the notion that it has anything to do with the public services like police, firefighters, roads, sidewalks, etc. Those are used by every person and business, of course, yet people are allowed to discriminate in their personal lives, and some businesses can legally discriminate. Religious establishments, for example. Also, though I'm not sure about discrimination in serving, businesses with less than 15 people can discriminate in hiring (i.e., not subject to EEOC rules).

Miami, I don't think I was referring to you specifically.

My comment was just directed toward hate-filled bigoted jesus freaks.

Unless you're one of them. In which case, I was referring to you.

Either way, no hard feelings G. People are more than welcome to be knuckle-draggin' bigots. And I'm more than welcome to mock them.

If it was a wedding cake that’s bullshit. Make it. If it’s two guys making out, fine refuse it. But if they refused a wedding cake, fuck that. We’re so fucked as a country.

The GOP is electing them to party positions in Washington state.

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/390720-charlottesville-pro-white-marcher-elected-to-gop-position-in-washington

It really is strange when your religious convictions prohibit you from blending flour and water together for someone.