re: Cake baker loses appeal... Must bake for all people

quote:

---

individual rights trump local govt trumps state govt trumps fed govt

---

I'm glad to see you're in favor of gay marriage. Welcome.

As to the rest of your post, personal attack. I RAed.

quote:

---

Ayn Rand,

---

quote:

---

The basic and crucial political issue of our age is: capitalism versus socialism, or freedom versus statism. For decades, this issue has been silenced, suppressed, evaded, and hidden under the foggy, undefined rubber-terms of “conservatism” and “liberalism” which had lost their original meaning and could be stretched to mean all things to all men.

The goal of the “liberals”—as it emerges from the record of the past decades—was to smuggle this country into welfare statism by means of single, concrete, specific measures, enlarging the power of the government a step at a time, never permitting these steps to be summed up into principles, never permitting their direction to be identified or the basic issue to be named. Thus statism was to come, not by vote or by violence, but by slow rot—by a long process of evasion and epistemological corruption, leading to a fait accompli.

---

fait accompli: a thing accomplished and presumably irreversible

Wht if the couple wanted a cake in the shape of a man's arse being pummeled by a penis? Should the government be able to force the baker to make a butt sects cake?

quote:

---

Aren't you also a states right person? These are local and state laws.

---

How does states rights having any fricking thing to do with whether someone believes a private business should be able to do business with whomever it chooses

quote:

---

As to the rest of your post, personal attack. I RAed.

---

You're pathetic. Feel free to RA me as well.

I hope a baker poops in your wedding cake.

quote:

---

Link? Or are you being willfully dishonest?

---

Mark 7:19. This isn't complicated...you threw a hanging curveball with that one.

LINK

quote:

---

His point was, if a Christian cannot service a gay wedding because sex between people of the same sex is a sin, then to be consistent, he must also deny service here because premarital sex is a sin.

---

You really don't get it, do you? It has nothing to do with the couple being "sinners". The issue is that the baker views the same-sex wedding as a sin and does not wish to actively participate.

In your scenario where the bride is pregnant, the baker did not participate in, or in any way aid and abet, the premarital sex. So you're comparing apples to kumquats.

I noticed that this story is a media cause shitstorm, but the Muslim baker who refused to do this gets no press.

We need to play liberals and Muslims against each other more. Many liberal hypocrisies can be exploited through their refusal to attack Islam with the same fervor with which they attack Christianity.

So does this ruling include an order forcing the assholes who were refused service eat this baker's damned cake? (J/k but that would be true justice.)

quote:

---

Now you're being willfully obtuse. His point was, if a Christian cannot service a gay wedding because sex between people of the same sex is a sin, then to be consistent, he must also deny service here because premarital sex is a sin.

But you knew that. You may not have known Jesus was a Jew and remained kosher, but you knew premarital sex was a sin.

Eta: a better analogy might be marriage where one or both was previously married. Jesus said that was an adultery and we know adultery is an abomination.

Thus to be a truly consistent Christian one cannot bake a cake at a wedding where at least one person was a divorcee. Unless his name is Revelator who apparently has been given a pass by Jesus.

---

Why does a business owner have to be consistent on how he chooses to do business? If business owner feels bad for a homeless person one day, does that mean he can NEVER refuse service again lest he be deemed inconsistent and compelled to always serve the homeless even if it drives away other customers?

Can't he refuse people who wear red shirts on Tuesday but allow it on Wednesday since IT'S HIS PROPERTY AND HIS WORK! He shouldn't have to pass a logical litmus test.

Or how about this--the government can start compelling people to take actions against their will if their reasoning is inconsistent...as soon as the government's reasoning is fully consistent. I can live with that.