Reply With Quote
who is the arbiter of what qualifies as hateful
is it possible that a devout christian sees gay marriage as hateful against his religion?
In that case yes. You especially can't force someone into creating something hateful.
Should be simple to figure this stuff out.
who is the arbiter of what qualifies as hateful
is it possible that a devout christian sees gay marriage as hateful against his religion?
Can a neo nazi make a jewish cake maker to make a cake celebrating the holocaust?
Because if the courts are ruling that artisans don't have the right to refuse to create works they don't want to make, then that leaves the issue open to all sorts of things. If someone wants them to make a Trump cake and is willing to pay the cost for it, then how does that baker have any more right to refuse it than he does a request for a cake depicting a same-sex wedding?
Can a religious baker refuse to make a cake with the Flying Spaghetti Monster on it?
The court mostly.
Hate speech is communication that carries no meaning other than the expression of hatred for some group, especially in cir stances in which the communication is likely to provoke violence. It is an incitement to hatred primarily against a group of persons defined in terms of race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, religion, sexual orientation, and the like. Hate speech can be any form of expression regarded as offensive to racial, ethnic and religious groups and other discrete minorities or to women
http://definitions.uslegal.com/h/hate-speech/
Sure. That's why he got sued.is it possible that a devout christian sees gay marriage as hateful against his religion?
Slippery. Slope.
Because he's not in the business of making Trump cakes. He's in the business of making wedding cakes. He denied the gays a wedding cake.If someone wants them to make a Trump cake and is willing to pay the cost for it, then how does that baker have any more right to refuse it than he does a request for a cake depicting a same-sex wedding?
Why is this hard to get?
A Christian baker can refuse to make a Muslim cake. He can't refuse service to Muslims for being Muslim.Can a religious baker refuse to make a cake with the Flying Spaghetti Monster on it?
Get it?
There's nothing fallacious about what I said. If you have an issue with it, you should elaborate on what that is.
Who are you talking about? Do you mean this specific guy? If so, I don't know and don't even really care. As I said in my first post in this thread, if the cakes are generic, I can at least understand why people would want the law to step in. If the cakes are customized, that's a different issue. My gripe would be about a law or ruling NOT making that distinction, not really with the general law saying that gay people can buy a cake if it's for sale and they are willing to pay for it.Because he's not in the business of making Trump cakes. He's in the business of making wedding cakes. He denied the gays a wedding cake.
It's as I said above. Generic cake, I can understand the law (while still disagreeing with it). Custom cake, I think it has farther reaching effects than people are understanding.A Christian baker can refuse to make a Muslim cake. He can't refuse service to Muslims for being Muslim.
Get it?
Det slippery slope into Trump cakes and frat party penis cakes
It's nearly text book."Logicians call the*slippery slope*a classiclogical fallacy. There’s no reason to reject doing one thing, they say, just because it might open the door for some undesirable extremes; permitting “A” does not suspend our ability to say 'but not B' or 'certainly not Z' down the line. Indeed, given the endless parade of imagined horribles one could conjure up for any policy decision, the slippery slope can easily become an argument for doing nothing at all. Yet act we do; as George Will once noted, 'All politics takes place on a slippery slope.'.......
http://grammar.about.com/od/rs/g/slipslopeterm.htm
They wanted a wedding cake. Have you ever seen a wedding cake?
I don't know how you would make a gay cake vs a straight cake. The only difference might be two grooms on the top, I guess. Maybe a rainbow?
I don't understand how people don't understand how backwards our society would be if we allowed businesses open to the general public to discriminate based on physical characteristics. It's bad enough people are still ignorant about being born gay vs it being a choice.
Crazy.
How is a Trump cake an extreme?
https://www.google.com/search?q=wedd...+wedding+cakes
Yeah, so it's not like they aren't customizable.
That does count as being different.I don't know how you would make a gay cake vs a straight cake. The only difference might be two grooms on the top, I guess. Maybe a rainbow?
It's not the government's job to stop people from being "backward". That's why the Duck Dynasty guys have a show. It's there to protect the rights and interests of its citizens. And that doesn't just mean its gay citizens.I don't understand how people don't understand how backwards our society would be if we allowed businesses open to the general public to discriminate based on physical characteristics.
This really has no factor in discrimination.t's bad enough people are still ignorant about being born gay vs it being a choice.
Because what kind of bakery would it be without an assorted collection of fine Trump cakes
Bakery should make the cake, but shouldn't be forced to make it themed for a sexual couple in any way.
Would make the issue clear if we could see the cake the fudgpackers wanted, tbh
Point out the ones made for heterosexual weddings.
So a Christian baker can refuse to make a Muslim cake but he can't refuse to make a gay cake? Arbitrary cutoffs are arbitrary
Nope. Re-read or I'll repeat if you need it
was that an issue here?
once you open your doors to welcome the general public in, your individual rights are greatly reduced. You don't get to do whatever you want.It's not the government's job to stop people from being "backward". That's why the Duck Dynasty guys have a show. It's there to protect the rights and interests of its citizens. And that doesn't just mean its gay citizens.
I don't care. It's my own opinion.This really has no factor in discrimination.
Do you know what stare decisis is?
I mean, you're right that the depictions of a male and female character could still be for a gay couple. I don't think that does any work, though, since I have been talking about the cakes themselves and not the clients.
I don't know what you mean by "here". I've said before that my comment was talking about the court ruling and the laws, not about any particular instance.
Yes, that's a basic tenant of all moral and social philosophy. Somehow, you think that the "right" for gay people to get wedding cakes is somehow inalienable, though. We have systems for determining which rights take precedence over others, and intellectually, the cake-makers should have the superseding right in these cases. That the government is flipping the script is always cause for scrutiny, as it's only supposed to do so in extreme cir stances.once you open your doors to welcome the general public in, your individual rights are greatly reduced. You don't get to do whatever you want.
It's fine that you think being gay isn't a choice. I agree with you. But it's not true that you think that being born with a characteristic is the only factor in determining what's discrimination, since you used Muslims as an example in this thread, and religion is obviously not something one is born with.I don't care. It's my own opinion.
Good. Does that change your opinions on the "slippery slope."
If not, why?
This. I didn't realize that cons utional due process protections safeguard life, liberty, and gay cakes.
Most probably don't have tumeric- or coriander-flavored cakes, either. I don't think anyone considers that an ending worthy of a slippery-slope, though.
There's no precedent for anyone being forced to make a Trump cake. Or a frat penis cake.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
