TakeYouToTasker Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 So they do marriages, but not marriages for gay couples, that means they refused service based on sexuality. End of discussion. No, it isn't, because the didn't deny general service to homosexuals. They simply refused to participate in a homosexual marriage celebration. There is a huge difference between the two. You would be correct if the baker in question refuse general service to gay people, because that would be discriminatory; but, as that is not the case, you are wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted July 6, 2015 Author Share Posted July 6, 2015 We're playing a game of RISK now? It's actually a very common tactic that's most often used by those defending a losing argument. If you can't defend your point you defend a point you never made and that no one was arguing. It allows you to save face because you don't have to admit you were wrong and people who agree with your position will usually roll with it anyway out of solidarity even if they see what you're doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 No, it isn't, because the didn't deny general service to homosexuals. They simply refused to participate in a homosexual marriage celebration. There is a huge difference between the two. You would be correct if the baker in question refuse general service to gay people, because that would be discriminatory; but, as that is not the case, you are wrong. They refused a service they offer (cakes for marriages) to a gay couple. It's fun interpreting it different ways back and forth though. I think, though, I'll concede on my general points, and let you guys have the floor. I do have things to attend to. It's actually a very common tactic that's most often used by those defending a losing argument. If you can't defend your point you defend a point you never made and that no one was arguing. It allows you to save face because you don't have to admit you were wrong and people who agree with your position will usually roll with it anyway out of solidarity even if they see what you're doing. You're right, and I concede my points. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 If you do a google search for "religious texts advocating violence" you'll have an answer... but basically the Abrahamic religions tend to be pretty violent in their texts. I don't know much about Eastern religions though. If I stick to your plan of a Google search, it tells me that the three "major (Abrahamic) religions" are Judaism, Christianity and Islam. In what ways do those religions, in your words, promote "exclusion and violence towards those who are different?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 If I stick to your plan of a Google search, it tells me that the three "major (Abrahamic) religions" are Judaism, Christianity and Islam. In what ways do those religions, in your words, promote "exclusion and violence towards those who are different?" Jews and Palestinians, Muslims and everyone, and Confederate-flag-waving Christians and blacks. Friggin' duh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 They refused a service they offer (cakes for marriages) to a gay couple. It's fun interpreting it different ways back and forth though. I think, though, I'll concede on my general points, and let you guys have the floor. I do have things to attend to. You're right, and I concede my points. Cheers They offer cakes for traditional marriages, not cakes for any and all marriages. They never offered cakes for any and all marriages. They are more than happy to sell a wedding cake to a homosexual who wished to use it for a traditional marriage. What you are actually arguing is that they are now obligated to expand the offerings of their business into a niche market they have never serviced before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 What you are actually arguing is that they are now obligated to expand the offerings of their business into a niche market they have never serviced before. I kinda feel badly for the bakery. I mean, of all the bakeries in all the world, the gay couple finds the one Christian baker who won't accommodate their request. I mean..what are the odds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted July 6, 2015 Author Share Posted July 6, 2015 What I learned today is that if a black baker in Harlem bakes a Black Panthers cake he is rightfully obligated to bake a KKK cake if so requested. Otherwise he's discriminating based on race and should be subjected to public shaming as well as legal repercussions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 What I learned today is that if a black baker in Harlem bakes a Black Panthers cake he is rightfully obligated to bake a KKK cake if so requested. Otherwise he's discriminating based on race and should be subjected to public shaming as well as legal repercussions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 What I learned today is that if a black baker in Harlem bakes a Black Panthers cake he is rightfully obligated to bake a KKK cake if so requested. Otherwise he's discriminating based on race and should be subjected to public shaming as well as legal repercussions. Unless said cake is a form of hate speech... Why do I keep coming back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 Unless said cake is a form of hate speech... I always thought it was a form of confection... Why do I keep coming back. For your sake, you shouldn't have. Could have avoided the whole "cake as hate speech" ridiculousness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 Could have avoided the whole "hate speech" ridiculousness. Fixed that for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 Unless said cake is a form of hate speech... Why do I keep coming back. Because the almost universal refutation of your opinions only reinforces the world as "close-minded." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 What I learned today is that if a black baker in Harlem bakes a Black Panthers cake he is rightfully obligated to bake a KKK cake if so requested. Otherwise he's discriminating based on race and should be subjected to public shaming as well as legal repercussions. yes he has to bake a cake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 (edited) yes he has to bake a cake How it that position, which conscripts individuals against their will and forces them to do work they are opposed to with the threat of violence metered out by the government for non-compliance, more meritorious than respecting the freedom of individuals to associate as they see fit based on their own belief systems? Edited July 6, 2015 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 How it that position, which conscripts individuals against their will and forces them to do work they are opposed to with the threat of violence metered out by the government, more meritorious than respecting the freedom of individuals to associate as they see fit based on their own belief systems? public businesses have to sell goods to the general public, of course they don't have to modify the product in unusual ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 (edited) public businesses have to sell goods to the general public, of course they don't have to modify the product in unusual ways. What is a "public business?" A guy can walk up to a black cake-maker, demean him with racist language, and the cake maker is still forced to serve him? What? I swear, some of those opinions are actually scary. Does a business owner not own the goods or services he is providing? Edited July 6, 2015 by FireChan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 What is a "public business?" A guy can walk up to a black cake-maker, demean him with racist language, and the cake maker is still forced to serve him? What? I swear, some of those opinions are actually scary. Does a business owner not own the goods or services he is providing? you are adding **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 you are adding **** I think you meant a private business. You know, the type owned by private citizens. The government is a public good, the bakery is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 Because the almost universal refutation of your opinions only reinforces the world as "close-minded." Ah, universal. Well then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts