On Thursday, July 9, 2015 at 10:05:01 PM UTC-5, Ashton Crusher wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jul 2015 06:04:14 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, July 8, 2015 at 4:37:02 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
How come it's acceptable to be a bigot if you do it in the name of
your religion?

Why do you consider practicing ones freedom of choice to be equivalent
to being a bigot?

If baking a "gay cake" is offensive because my bible
tells me that why should the religious person get to refuse service

Business owners should have the right to determine what sort of services
they will offer and not offer. If baking a "gay cake" isn't a service
they offer, why should anyone try to usurp the business owners rights to
what services they will provide? A straight person might also want to
order a "gay cake" and they would also be turned down.

The service would be equally denied to straight or gay people. There
would not be anything illegal in doing so.

but someone who is not religious but also finds gays offensive not be
similarly allowed to refuse them the service? And if my bible says
blacks are inferior why should I be able to refuse service to blacks.


The race argument is moot.

--
Maggie

+1

I said before what my solution is. Get govt out of this altogether.
You should be able to refuse service today to anyone, for any reason.
I can see the need for outlawing discrimination 50 years ago, when
blacks were denied access to most lodging, had separate counters for
food service, had to ride the back of the (public) bus. It was widespread.
Therefore I can see a valid reason for the govt to step in. Today,
the situation is totally reversed. It's not like 90% of bakers won't
bake you a gay wedding cake. In fact, almost all will, the few that
have moral or religious objections generally have been where they don't
want to help cater at a gay wedding. That is exactly the case in Oregon.
And you have the other 99% of bakers that will do it anyway. So, there
is no widespread problem of unfairness that needs to be fixed and the
heavy handed solution is far worse than the minimal problem.

So, let businesses do what they want. If you want to deny service
to gays, Latinos, blacks, Jews, whatever, I say it's your right.
Expect that most of your other customers would evaluate what you're
doing and most of them would probably be offended and take their
business somewhere else. You could also expect the arrival of
protesters disrupting your business, people calling for boycotts,
lots of negative publicity, etc. In other words, very, very few
businesses are going to do it. And those that do, so what.

What is far worse, is the "solution". In Oregon a couple owns a
bakery. They have gay customers, have sold them cakes, etc. Along
comes a gay couple that wanted them to help cater their wedding,
actually being at the wedding. They declined for religious reasons.
The govt went after them, hit them with a $130K fine. And if that
isn't bad enough, the court put a gag order on them. They came up
with a list of speech from interviews where they voiced their opinions
that they didn't think being gay was moral, etc. The court actually
*banned* them from saying any similar things in the future.

Folks, it's getting really, really scary......


Yeah, not being allowed to exercise your bigotry is really really
scary. God forbid you have to serve a black person.

I would never serve a Black person, many of my friends are Black and cannibalism is a horrid illegal practice. I've heard they don't taste that good anyway. O_o

[8~{} Uncle Canibal Monster