Masterpiece Cakeshop Is Fighting For The First Amendment, Not Against Gay Marriage

[ayin jade]

1 minute ago, Anonymous Aristotle said:

Where is discrimination permitted in the U.S Constitution? Would you link that article please? 

You are in error when you claim it is discrimination. It is refusing to do one wedding cake that honors something the baker regards as sinful based on his religious beliefs. It is not discriminating against gays. He serves them other products that do not honor a sinful activity. He also declines to make cakes for halloween because it honors something he regards as sinful. 

1st ammendment says that the feds cannot interfer with a persons right to practice their religion. The baker is being denied his right to practice his religion by being forced to go against his religious beliefs. 

[Anonymous Aristotle]

Just now, ayin jade said:

You are in error when you claim it is discrimination. It is refusing to do one wedding cake that honors something the baker regards as sinful based on his religious beliefs. It is not discriminating against gays. He serves them other products that do not honor a sinful activity. He also declines to make cakes for halloween because it honors something he regards as sinful. 

1st ammendment says that the feds cannot interfer with a persons right to practice their religion. The baker is being denied his right to practice his religion by being forced to go against his religious beliefs. 

I am not in error as to the definition and application of discrimination in this case. 

Furthermore, the baker isn't practicing his religion when he's a baker. He happens to be a baker who's religion is Christianity. 
Trick or Treaters are not a protected class of persons. The religious are. Homosexuals are. A number of persons are. 

He has a right not to offer a Halloween design cake. However, he cannot refuse to make a wedding cake for homosexual customers. And that is what he's doing here. 

Because unlike the Halloween cake, he couldn't even have a display of wedding cake styles that did not include something for homosexuals. Because there is no such thing as a homosexual wedding cake. There is only wedding cake styles offered by a baker in a bakery in their service to the secular public. 

 

[Guest shiloh357]

10 minutes ago, Anonymous Aristotle said:

I would say the SCOTUS will rule against the baker. If this baker was serving homosexuals before and regularly as you claim, then he has no religious discrimination argument, religious conviction argument, to refuse the wedding cake.

Because he served homosexuals who are an abomination according to scriptures. Regularly, every day, as you claimed. 

Yes, he does have a religious discrimination argument.   He should be forced to violate his faith.   Simply serving gays who are regular patrons doesn't violate his faith, quite the opposite.   It should also be pointed out that he does not necessarily know who is or is not gay when they enter his bakery.  He has served everyone who comes through the door regardless of their sexual orientation, religion or anything else.   In the Christian faith we hate the sin but love the sinner, so serving cookies or birthday cakes or other kinds of cakes doesn't violate his Christian faith and no claim of discrimination can be credibly made against him.

But a Christian must draw a line when it comes to serving an event that violates their faith.   No one asks Muslim bakers to make gay wedding cakes and they would not if asked, but for some reason that gets a pass. 

 

Quote

Then he refused a wedding cake for them. Did you ever think the homosexuals who were being served regularly by this baker naturally thought he would have no issue with the cake order? If he served them regularly on other items for sale.  But when a homosexual customer asked for a wedding cake the baker refused on religious grounds. 

Since he had served them and since he did not ban homosexuals from his bakery, then they should return the courtesy by respecting his religious beliefs and simply go down the street to another baker who will do it.   It's that simple.  They are manufacturing a discrimination issue that doesn't exist.  This is being pushed by radical LGBT activists, not the average gay person.   It is being painted to be something it is not.

There is a kosher deli I love and they make great pastrami sandwiches.   I would never, as a Christian, even think about asking them to provide a service that violates their faith.   It is a matter of respect.  The fact that a Jewish baker or a Jewish deli manager will not make a Christian wedding cake or a provide me with a ham and cheese sandwich doesn't offend me in the least.   If I want ham I know another deli in town that will do it.  
 

Quote

 

The Bible says marriage is between one man and one woman. The new testament says Homosexuals will not see the kingdom of Heaven unless they repent. Sexual immorality is a sin. 

This baker served the sexually immoral that God condemned as an abomination on a regular daily basis. He had no religious moral objection to that being they were homosexual and buying something other than a wedding cake. But when they asked for a wedding cake, that is when he invoked his religious convictions and refused. 

His convictions were not consistent with scripture. He's going to lose this case. He has to. It isn't a first amendment case of free speech. It isn't a first amendment case of freedom of religion. 

 

That is completely fallacious reasoning.  And that is not how a Christian thinks or lives. First of all, it is not like they have to show a "gay" ID card and inform him that the person he is serving is gay.   He doesn't know (unless they told him for some reason) that they are gay.   Do you think every gay person walks into a bakery and trumpets, "I am a gay person?"    I mean, there is a difference between serving the regular generic fare of a bakery like cookies and donuts or sour dough bread, and an event-specific item like a gay wedding cake. 

By your logic if a gay person was dying of thirst and a Christian  gave that person some water, he  would be violating the Christian faith.  That is just nonsensical and you are really grasping at straws in that line of argumentation.

 

 

 

[ayin jade]

22 minutes ago, Anonymous Aristotle said:

I am not in error as to the definition and application of discrimination in this case. 

Furthermore, the baker isn't practicing his religion when he's a baker. He happens to be a baker who's religion is Christianity. 
Trick or Treaters are not a protected class of persons. The religious are. Homosexuals are. A number of persons are. 

He has a right not to offer a Halloween design cake. However, he cannot refuse to make a wedding cake for homosexual customers. And that is what he's doing here. 

Because unlike the Halloween cake, he couldn't even have a display of wedding cake styles that did not include something for homosexuals. Because there is no such thing as a homosexual wedding cake. There is only wedding cake styles offered by a baker in a bakery in their service to the secular public. 

 

Hmm I practice my religion all the time. My beliefs govern my actions (mostly, unless, for example, someone cuts me off in traffic in which case I sometimes say things I shouldnt). Any Christian will try to follow what the Lord wishes all the time. If the baker believes that it is against his practice of his religion to make such a cake, then the feds are interfering with the practice of his religion. 

[Anonymous Aristotle]

1 hour ago, ayin jade said:

Hmm I practice my religion all the time. My beliefs govern my actions (mostly, unless, for example, someone cuts me off in traffic in which case I sometimes say things I shouldnt). Any Christian will try to follow what the Lord wishes all the time. If the baker believes that it is against his practice of his religion to make such a cake, then the feds are interfering with the practice of his religion. 

Christians live their faith and live with their faith. However, this bakers religious moral objection wasn't demonstrated with consistency. He served homosexuals who were still an abomination to God due to their immoral sin, every day according to some. He had no problem at all making anything a homosexual customer wanted until they wanted a wedding cake. 

It is discrimination when he serves homosexuals but refuses to serve them a wedding cake. 

[Anonymous Aristotle]

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

Yes, he does have a religious discrimination argument.   He should be forced to violate his faith.   Simply serving gays who are regular patrons doesn't violate his faith, quite the opposite.   It should also be pointed out that he does not necessarily know who is or is not gay when they enter his bakery.  He has served everyone who comes through the door regardless of their sexual orientation, religion or anything else.   In the Christian faith we hate the sin but love the sinner, so serving cookies or birthday cakes or other kinds of cakes doesn't violate his Christian faith and no claim of discrimination can be credibly made against him.

But a Christian must draw a line when it comes to serving an event that violates their faith.   No one asks Muslim bakers to make gay wedding cakes and they would not if asked, but for some reason that gets a pass. 

 

Since he had served them and since he did not ban homosexuals from his bakery, then they should return the courtesy by respecting his religious beliefs and simply go down the street to another baker who will do it.   It's that simple.  They are manufacturing a discrimination issue that doesn't exist.  This is being pushed by radical LGBT activists, not the average gay person.   It is being painted to be something it is not.

There is a kosher deli I love and they make great pastrami sandwiches.   I would never, as a Christian, even think about asking them to provide a service that violates their faith.   It is a matter of respect.  The fact that a Jewish baker or a Jewish deli manager will not make a Christian wedding cake or a provide me with a ham and cheese sandwich doesn't offend me in the least.   If I want ham I know another deli in town that will do it.  
 

That is completely fallacious reasoning.  And that is not how a Christian thinks or lives. First of all, it is not like they have to show a "gay" ID card and inform him that the person he is serving is gay.   He doesn't know (unless they told him for some reason) that they are gay.   Do you think every gay person walks into a bakery and trumpets, "I am a gay person?"    I mean, there is a difference between serving the regular generic fare of a bakery like cookies and donuts or sour dough bread, and an event-specific item like a gay wedding cake. 

By your logic if a gay person was dying of thirst and a Christian  gave that person some water, he  would be violating the Christian faith.  That is just nonsensical and you are really grasping at straws in that line of argumentation.

 

 

 

 Yes, well, we'll just have to wait and see what SCOTUS decides. 

[ayin jade]

4 minutes ago, Anonymous Aristotle said:

Christians live their faith and live with their faith. However, this bakers religious moral objection wasn't demonstrated with consistency. He served homosexuals who were still an abomination to God due to their immoral sin, every day according to some. He had no problem at all making anything a homosexual customer wanted until they wanted a wedding cake. 

It is discrimination when he serves homosexuals but refuses to serve them a wedding cake. 

To the baker it is wrong for him to make a cake that celebrates a gay marriage (which is a sin). The bible says that those who do what they know to be wrong, for them it is a sin. So the baker would be sinning if he made that cake. You are not convicted the same way the baker is. Which isnt a slur on your salvation. I just mean that you do not see things the way the baker does. So it really is wrong for him to make that cake. It violates his freedom to practice his religion, as the constitution protects. 

[Guest shiloh357]

3 hours ago, Anonymous Aristotle said:

Christians live their faith and live with their faith. However, this bakers religious moral objection wasn't demonstrated with consistency. He served homosexuals who were still an abomination to God due to their immoral sin, every day according to some. He had no problem at all making anything a homosexual customer wanted until they wanted a wedding cake. 

It is discrimination when he serves homosexuals but refuses to serve them a wedding cake. 

Wrong.  That is not how discrimination works.   If he served everyone except homosexuals, then you could accuse him of discrimination.

Serving homosexuals by allowing them to purchase products like cookies and cupcakes to take home and consume isn't a violation of his faith and trying to paint that as the same thing as a making a wedding cake for homosexuals is an irrational argument.

Or, if he made a wedding cake for a satanic wedding, or if he made a wedding cake for Atheists who wanted a cake that proclaimed that God did not exist, or  if he was asked to make a cake to celebrate an abortion, or any other event that violated his faith EXCEPT for a gay wedding, then you could claim discrimination.

 

[Anonymous Aristotle]

Washington Supreme Court rules against florist in same-sex wedding case Last Updated Feb 16, 2017

(Sic)"...The court rejected several arguments put forth by Stutzman, including the assertion that since other florists were willing to serve the couple, no harm occurred.

“As every other court to address the question has concluded, public accommodations laws do not simply guarantee access to goods or services. Instead, they serve a broader societal purpose: eradicating barriers to the equal treatment of all citizens in the commercial marketplace,” the court wrote. “Were we to carve out a patchwork of exceptions for ostensibly justified discrimination, that purpose would be fatally undermined.”" 

[ayin jade]

Since the case before the supreme court is in colorado and not washington, it doesnt matter what the washington court says