Politics And Current Events

[columbia]

It's Team Cake, not boob cake.

[tifosi77]

Hmmm... the cake thing is interesting. She offered to make the cakes, just not write hate speech on it. I'm reading in articles that William Jack asked for Bible verses to "Kill all [homophobic slur]" and everything in between, so I'm not sure what he really asked her to put on the cake. Now trying to tie that to a wedding cake discussion we've had before in Indiana... well, I don't know how many weddings you've been to, but rarely do the cakes have writing on them. Her approach was very similar to a suggestion that I offered earlier in the thread. Agree to do the bare minimum to provide the service to that particular customer, but if it goes beyond a cake that you would normally make, then feel free to say no.

It's still a denial of service. So can a religious bake shop refuse to make a same-sex couples cake, but give them ingredients and say "here you go, make it yourself!"

This is why that hypothetical posed by Rick Santorum is apples-oranges. He wondered if a gay baker would be forced to bake a cake for the Westboro Baptist Church that says 'God hate f*gs' absent a RFRA. And I would say that's a very different kettle of fish than simply baking a cake for WBC. One, because it's hate speech and I don't think anyone can be compelled to engage in an expression of hate speech. Two, because as a homosexual, the baker would be forced to disparage himself in preparing the cake. That's a fair bit different from providing a service to someone whose practices you have religious disagreements.

[tifosi77]

One of these is a gay wedding cake, one is a straight wedding cake:

Can you tell the difference?

That second cake looks almost exactly like my wedding cake.

OMG, I'm gay married!!

[count2infinity]

lol, the second one actually was the gay cake.

[PFiDC]

Hmmm... the cake thing is interesting. She offered to make the cakes, just not write hate speech on it. I'm reading in articles that William Jack asked for Bible verses to "Kill all [homophobic slur]" and everything in between, so I'm not sure what he really asked her to put on the cake. Now trying to tie that to a wedding cake discussion we've had before in Indiana... well, I don't know how many weddings you've been to, but rarely do the cakes have writing on them. Her approach was very similar to a suggestion that I offered earlier in the thread. Agree to do the bare minimum to provide the service to that particular customer, but if it goes beyond a cake that you would normally make, then feel free to say no.

It's still a denial of service. So can a religious bake shop refuse to make a same-sex couples cake, but give them ingredients and say "here you go, make it yourself!"

This is why that hypothetical posed by Rick Santorum is apples-oranges. He wondered if a gay baker would be forced to bake a cake for the Westboro Baptist Church that says 'God hate f*gs' absent a RFRA. And I would say that's a very different kettle of fish than simply baking a cake for WBC. One, because it's hate speech and I don't think anyone can be compelled to engage in an expression of hate speech. Two, because as a homosexual, the baker would be forced to disparage himself in preparing the cake. That's a fair bit different from providing a service to someone whose practices you have religious disagreements.

I have to disagree with the last part. The religious business owner forced to make a cake for a ceremony they think is against their religion would also be disparaging to their faith which, in most cases I would assume, is very very near and dear to them. We are warned against contributing or participating in ceremonies, events, rituals, etc. which go against our faith. Telling them "Well you're just going to have to evolve your religious beliefs" is a bit harsh. Remember, were I a baker, I would make the gay cake no questions asked.

[PFiDC]

I kinda want to open a bakery called Gay Cake

[tifosi77]

EDIT: I did not fact check the quotes.

I view these talks from a very realpolitik perspective.

Heard this analysis on the radio yesterday, and found it compelling. Iran is getting the bomb. Nothing we, or any other nation-states do is going to change that. No country has ever gotten this far down the developmental path and not gotten the bomb. A parallel observation: Make a list of all the nuclear powers in the world, and highlight the ones who have developed their nuke capacity in the full view of public scrutiny. Tl;dr --- None of them have. Not even Israel, who developed nukes despite international watchdogs trying to prevent them doing so. So if you accept that as a fact, that Iran is getting the bomb, the best practice would be to create an environment in which Iran is disincentivized to actually use their nukes... and you do that by welcoming Iran back into the fold of the international community of nations, where they can behave like responsible actors. Look at India and Pakistan; fierce, bitter rivals that both have nukes.... and yet I don't think anyone has any real fear that either will start tossing nukes across the border at the other. That's in large part because they each have a bigger stake in not doing so. You will note that this has not been done with North Korea, and they are still widely considered an unpredictable rogue state.

(And, wow, Google Chrome has realpolitik in its dictionary but not disincentivized. As a result, I have no idea if I spelled that correctly. Thanks, Google... ptooey.)

[grunthy]

another solution is to get our missile defense system almost impenetrable.

[PFiDC]

another solution is to get our missile defense system almost impenetrable.

Anyone else read this in the voice of Grand Moff?

[MWB]

How does one determine if it's discriminatory and has the right to refuse service?

How is it discriminatory for a business to say they won't write derogatory things on a cake? Who is being discriminated against?

I'm playing devils advocate here.

She made a boob cake for a birthday party. Many women find that derogatory towards women, but refuses to make a cake with wording from the bible that she finds derogatory.

Disriminatory and derogatory aren't the same thing. Being hateful to a group isn't the same as being, what some would consider, tasteless.

[grunthy]

Honestly there should be no protected class of people. It basically says they are more equal than others.

Again I'd like to reiterate, in no way shape or form do I condone discrimination. I would never do it, but let a-holes be a-holes.

[grunthy]

If it's a government entity, that is where I believe that they cannot discriminate against anyone. If it's not owned or operated by the government, go right ahead.

[MWB]

Honestly there should be no protected class of people. It basically says they are more equal than others.

Again I'd like to reiterate, in no way shape or form do I condone discrimination. I would never do it, but let a-holes be a-holes.

In a vacuum, I agree. But given the country's history and the hateful nature of some people, I think discrimination laws are better than having no laws on it.

[Freddy Rumsen]

another solution is to get our missile defense system almost impenetrable.

Anyone else read this in the voice of Grand Moff?

[tifosi77]

another solution is to get our missile defense system almost impenetrable.

Anyone else read this in the voice of Grand Moff?

Did you recognize nobody's foul stench the moment you were brought on board?

[tifosi77]

Hmmm... the cake thing is interesting. She offered to make the cakes, just not write hate speech on it. I'm reading in articles that William Jack asked for Bible verses to "Kill all [homophobic slur]" and everything in between, so I'm not sure what he really asked her to put on the cake. Now trying to tie that to a wedding cake discussion we've had before in Indiana... well, I don't know how many weddings you've been to, but rarely do the cakes have writing on them. Her approach was very similar to a suggestion that I offered earlier in the thread. Agree to do the bare minimum to provide the service to that particular customer, but if it goes beyond a cake that you would normally make, then feel free to say no.

It's still a denial of service. So can a religious bake shop refuse to make a same-sex couples cake, but give them ingredients and say "here you go, make it yourself!"

This is why that hypothetical posed by Rick Santorum is apples-oranges. He wondered if a gay baker would be forced to bake a cake for the Westboro Baptist Church that says 'God hate f*gs' absent a RFRA. And I would say that's a very different kettle of fish than simply baking a cake for WBC. One, because it's hate speech and I don't think anyone can be compelled to engage in an expression of hate speech. Two, because as a homosexual, the baker would be forced to disparage himself in preparing the cake. That's a fair bit different from providing a service to someone whose practices you have religious disagreements.

I have to disagree with the last part. The religious business owner forced to make a cake for a ceremony they think is against their religion would also be disparaging to their faith which, in most cases I would assume, is very very near and dear to them. We are warned against contributing or participating in ceremonies, events, rituals, etc. which go against our faith. Telling them "Well you're just going to have to evolve your religious beliefs" is a bit harsh. Remember, were I a baker, I would make the gay cake no questions asked.

I guess the real question is twofold: As I recall, the first miracle Jesus performed was turning water into wine at a wedding. If it had been a gay wedding; 1) would he and Mary have even gone? and 2) if he had, would he have said, "Don't give any of the wine to the married couple"?

[grunthy]

Should churches be allowed to refuse to perform gay marriage?

[Silentom]

another solution is to get our missile defense system almost impenetrable.

Anyone else read this in the voice of Grand Moff?

Did you recognize nobody's foul stench the moment you were brought on board?

Charming, to the last.

[tifosi77]

Should churches be allowed to refuse to perform gay marriage?

The answer to that depends largely on the answer to my two questions. So I'll wait to hear responses to that before chiming in here.

[grunthy]

Should churches be allowed to refuse to perform gay marriage?

The answer to that depends largely on the answer to my two questions. So I'll wait to hear responses to that before chiming in here.

I don't know. I didn't know Jesus when he was alive to ask him...

[tifosi77]

Should churches be allowed to refuse to perform gay marriage?

The answer to that depends largely on the answer to my two questions. So I'll wait to hear responses to that before chiming in here.

I don't know. I didn't know Jesus when he was alive to ask him...

Use what you know of your faith in the man and his teachings to make an informed guess.

[count2infinity]

Should churches be allowed to refuse to perform gay marriage?

should they be allowed? yes. should they be forced? no.

[grunthy]

jesus would probably attend, but one is not forbidden to attend it...

[columbia]

Obama is going to close down all of the churches on his way out the door, so it won't be an issue in the future.

[grunthy]

Should churches be allowed to refuse to perform gay marriage?

should they be allowed? yes. should they be forced? no.

How is that different than a religious store owner?