Yeah but they could and it'd be just as legal as if a straight person declined service to a gay person. It's their business they can run it how they want.
@Thatbright, sure but I still think it’s a bit of a dìck move to say get out of my store because you don’t agree with a certain lifestyle. Gay people need milk too. And cereal.
@Nosferatu Zodd, it is a dick move for sure, however it's still not illegal as far as I can tell
@Thatbright, it is currently illegal to discriminate against people for their race, gender, religion, or country of origin in private businesses of public accommodation such as hotels, restaurants, and stores under the civil Rights act of 1964. However, sexuality is currently not covered under that law though some states have passed laws effectively doing so. I would argue that we should add sexuality to the CR Act of '64 because in my opinion it falls in the same category as the others. No one really chooses their sexuality, so discriminating against it seems like discriminating against the other things.
@Nosferatu Zodd, there hasn't been a case where gays have been refused service out right. The cases all were about not wanting to be a part of weddings (religious ceremony), which falls into religious freedom of the business owner
@Robin the Tactician, some religions believe sexuality is a choice
@Blargetha, ok and some religions believe women shouldn't drive.
@Robin the Tactician, that’s true as well
@Robin the Tactician, and it isn’t illegal for members of that religion to not allow acting female members of their religion to drive.
Religious freedom is pretty much an absolute right...religious organizations don’t have to send their children to school, religious people can perform rituals with animal sacrifices, religious organizations CAN discriminate when they hire employees (I.e. a church can have only male priests, or only female priests.)
If you are wondering, all of the above are cases that were decided 9-0 by the US Supreme Court (and some weren’t that long ago either.)
@Thatbright, and if they want to be an ass. Then they are also willing to accept the consequences of their actions when someone posts online what they did. Because you know free speak to complain about bad service and all.
@Nosferatu Zodd, well, to be honest, sexuality really shouldn't be manifest in a groceey store. As such, I imagine the only way to tell is if somebody is trying to create problems.
@talmet, Funny how the super religious b!tch when people boycott them for not serving a gay couple. But those same groups of people say. Let the market decide. The thing those people forget about the market. Its open for people to complain online about bad service. So you know. Goes both ways.
@Thatbright, how many places would refuses to make a neo nazi or white suprematist cake? How many would(and already have) refused to put the rebel flag on a cake or something? If I was a business owner I would be incredibly pissed off and would also refuse to put my time and effort to create something celebrating something that I am completely against religiously or otherwise
@Oujosh29, did you see the case from colorado about that same thing. Its going to the Supreme Court. On one hand the shop owner is exercising religious freedom and on the other it would be consider discrimination.
@Thatbright, I think the joke was that gays are indeed "fvcking" assholes
@Seohn, huh? First, not all religious people are in favor of the open market....some examples are groups like Wiccans, Practitioners of Voodoo, some fundamental Christian groups, Muslims, etc....
Also, there is a huge difference between the market and government. If you want to boycott a business because they don’t service gay weddings, go for it, nobody is going to try and stop you. But getting the government to imprison the owners is going to be A LOT harder to do, and you’re going to get pushback from other people.
@Eltrompetista, yeah, theres been a couple of those cases. Who knows how they'll rule, but in my opinion its an easy ruling in favor of the business owner. Its one thing if they refuse service to gays completely, quite another to not want to be part of a religious ceremony that goes against your beliefs. Its completely unamerican to force that on business owners
@Seohn, I haven't seen the business owners complain about customers boycotting, only the goverment getting involved and trying to force them.
@Thatbright, The bakers didn't flat out refuse to service the gay people, they were more than willing to sell them any cake they wanted, they just did not want to make a custom cake with a homosexual theme. The bakers weren't discriminating, they just didn't want to be forced to create something that went completely against their core beliefs.
@Robin the Tactician, you have alot of dislikes for stating nothing but facts without opinions and that perplexes me
@talmet, religious organizations are different than restaurants or stores. Churches are exempt from at least the religion portion of the civil rights act but I don't know about the others.
@Robin the Tactician, depends on the way the business is set up. Some small businesses are legally the same as the owner. And individuals have religious freedom protections as well as churches. I.e. religious people don’t have to let doctors treat their sick children (which is grounds for charges of neglect to anyone else.)
@Richard Cypher, being a nazi or white supremacist is a choice. Being gay isn't. Refusing service to gay people is discrimination.
@GrrBarkWooF , Question: Would it be discrimination if they refused to make a wedding cake for a black man's wedding because they believe that god doesn't want black men to marry white women?
@Depressed Panda, That's a different situation. As I said they were willing to sell them any cake they wanted, they just did not want to custom make a wedding cake with a homosexual theme.
@GrrBarkWooF , Well, what if they were willing to sell that couple any cake that didn't depict a black man and white woman getting married?
@Oujosh29, Down voting your comments because weddings can be religious or civil services, aka for gaining state rights given to married people. Just that fact alone should be a good enough reason for not allowing discrimination because that is very similar to what Depressed Panda is saying about discrimination against black people.
@GrrBarkWooF , you’re not answering the question
@griffinstorme, I think that that should be allowed, though I think it's a dumb thing to do, it should still be their right to do that. If I was a cake maker, I would hate being forced by the government to make special made cakes with swastikas and confederate flags on it if a customer asked for that.
@Nosferatu Zodd, he is right, it’s a dick move but every person has the right to choose not to serve anyone they want. It’s an awful business model but i mean I wouldn’t want to spend my money somewhere run by someone who hates me for something about me. Though this particular case doesn’t exclude me as a straight person but I would feel pretty offended if it did so I normally just side with the ones being excluded since I would hope they would do the same for me.
@Thatbright, yeah there was a Cake shop near my town that refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. It made national news and ran them out of business. They were nice people that didn't deserve what they got. Now, they were Christians that didn't believe in gay marriage. They did not insult them and drive them out of the store, they just didn't want to make a WEDDING cake for something they didn't believe to be true. They didn't barr them from any other service.
Would a gay shop sell something for someone who was a member of the KKK? Probably. Would they make a cake that was designed and intended specifically for KKK hate rally? Maybe not. They cake shop owners did not refuse sale because it was a gay person. They chose not to participate in a specific event that was against their beliefs.
@Mkb617, First off, being gay and being a member of the KKK are wildly different. You don't choose to be gay. Secondly, they're still refusing service to a couple because they're gay. Even if they'll offer other services, they're still discriminating.
@Depressed Panda, it is not the same you are correct. But the one specific service that they refused had to do with going against something they believed in. They did not believe in gay marriage. Whether or not someone thinks that is a stupid belief or not is irrelevant. As long as their belief was pure, and not just an excuse to be an a$$hole, they should not have to be forced to participate.
@Mkb617, religious beliefs don't excuse discrimination.
@Depressed Panda, how is choosing not to participate in an event discrimination? If it had been a tailor who refused to make a baptism outfit for a baby, saying that they didn’t believe in forcing Catholicism on a child who isn’t old enough to make their own choice, no one would have even batted an eye at it. They would have just said that their are plenty of other tailors around
@Mkb617, refusing to provide a service based on the client's sexual orientation is discrimination. And it doesn't matter if there are other options, none of them are allowed to discriminate.
@Depressed Panda, obviously you aren’t getting it. They didn’t refuse to sell the cake because they people were gay. They refused to make a cake that was made to be a part of a gay wedding. They would not have sold the cake to a straight person who was having it made for that reason either. The refusal to make it had nothing to do with the sexual orientation, which is shown by the offer to sell them other products. The refusal to sell it was about the use to which it was going to be put.
@Mkb617, I am getting what you're saying. I'm saying that it is still discrimination refusing to make a wedding cake for a gay wedding is discriminatory to gay people. And still selling them other things doesn't mean they aren't discriminating. For example: in the 60s diners would serve black people, but wouldn't let them sit at the counter. Non-discrimination means offering the same goods/services to everyone regardless of how they were born.
@Depressed Panda, I respect your opinion and the fact that we had a discussion without insults. After this comment I am done, mostly because I should be doing homework and not on funny pics. I understand your example, but not allowing people equal choices in where to sit is not the same thing as trying to force someone to actively participate. If I am a painter and a fan of a particular college, no one can force me to paint the mascot of my rival. Someone else should not be forced to bake a cake and actively participate in something that is against their beliefs
One of my Pastors had an interesting perspective on this. Responding to the cake maker who wouldn't bake the cake for a gay couple, he said "Dude just make the cake." He saw it as a missed opportunity for outreach that could have resulted in two people growing closer to God. Instead it was just another example of the church failing to do what it's supposed to be doing.
@SimonPetrikov, he wouldn’t bake a cake for the wedding, anything else he would have. Baking a cake for the wedding would have said “I’m celebrating your sin”, I believe he also does not bake divorce cakes.
@SimonPetrikov, Your pastor sounds like a wise and loving guy.
@SimonPetrikov, just to be clear. The baker wouldn’t make a CUSTOM cake celebrating their gay marriage as it’s against his religious views. However he offered them any other cake not specifically custom that was available in the store.
@Blargetha, Perspective is everything. However theres a point where some people use it to be an ass. Because he’s just baking a cake.
By his logic if he bakes a cake for a crime boss. That means he was celebrating crime. If he baked a cake for a murderer. That means hes celebrating murder. If he’s going to apply that kind of logic to one thing. He has to apply it to everything. It can’t be one way or the other. Thats when it becomes a prejudice or discrimination.
@Seohn, that's incorrect logic by you though. He didn't say "you're gay so I won't make it" he said he wouldn't make a cake that was targeted at promoting a gay relationship. By that logic, he could serve a murderer, but not make a cake promoting murder. He is essentially "accepting the sinner but not the sin".
@Richard Cypher, so would he make a cake for two divorcees who are marrying?
@TheMonkeyGod, depends on what he believes, Jesus says divorce is okay when there is sexual immorality (Matthew 19:9). But then I think there are people who got divorced before they were born again or saved or came to know God or however you prefer to put it and now they’re remarrying once they’re saved. It just depends his view on divorce.
@TheMonkeyGod, unless your catholic, thats not a sin. But at least one of the cases the bakers didnt work second marriages
@SimonPetrikov, your pastor seems off in his logic. Baking the cake doesnt bring the couple closer to god, its taking part in a religious ceremomy (the under god part) that goes against whats in the bible. This isn't a perfect analogy, but it would be like if the couple invited the bakers for a gang bang, your pastor would be like "just go bang them, it'd bring them closer to god". Umm, no dude, no it wouldn't.
And the bakers aren't the church, so i don't see how the church failed.
@Seohn, um no. According to his logic he wouldn't make a custom cake for a crime boss saying "congrats on your crimes bro!". You are way over generalizing the situation haha. As others have said he was perfectly willing to sell the couple any non custom cake in the store, but drew the line at making one specifically for the gay wedding.
@Blargetha, who gets a divorce cake?
@SpicyCracka, I see your point. And thats what makes this a difficult topic. As someone in a different comment mentioned. He did essentially says. You’re gay so I wont offer the same service I offer other people.
@TR8R, This is one of those really grey areas. I think thats what make some people upset. That he refused to provide the same service he would anyone else.
Some see it like this too. Even if he made the cake. He specifically wasn’t celebrating anything. Its just making a cake.
So I guess the lawsuit that came about was whether its discrimination to deny a service to some people and not others. Since he didn’t want to provide custom cake service.
Its a difficult line to draw. But if they can show that the bakery made cakes with other religions themes. Then they crossed that line. Since their religion also says all other religions are false. To make a custom cake with any other religious theme is to say they are ok going against there religion except when its gay people. And thats how one could prove or not if they were discriminating.
@Seohn, the other problem is that it didn't have the same conclusion when turned around. A guy started calling "gay bakeries" and asked them to bake a cake that said "gay marriage is wrong" and none of them would because it was against their belief and they didn't want to make a cake contrary to their lifestyle. That's my problem with it, it's incredibly one sided and hypocritical and that bothers me. You can't expect to have others cater to you if you're not willing to do the same.
@Oujosh29, divorce is a sin. Check your old testament.
@SpicyCracka, Oh I understand this issue and it cant be one sided. But thats where the line is. You can’t discriminate purely because you hate a group of people. The trick is figuring out who genuinely believes it. And who is using it as an excuse to hate on other people.
One of the thing about those protections is they apply both ways. If its legal for one store to deny service. It makes it legal for other stores of opposing viewpoints to also deny service too. Which means if they wanted to they could deny service to anyone who doesn’t believe on their religion.
@SpicyCracka, But here’s the situation that arises if there aren’t some protections against discrimination. What if every business in town decided we’re not going to serve a certain group of people. Including grocery stores denying service. How would you suppose someone living in this town should handle the situation. I can no longer buy food or gas.
@Seohn, that's a lot of ifs. And even "if" they prove that it just means he disagrees more with gay marriage. Disagreeing with something and not wanting to show support for it doesn't make you discriminatory.
@SimonPetrikov, I am not going to read all of the comments to this post because I should be studying so if I repeat something I am sorry. I understand the preachers point, but I think he is wrong. If I see someone doing something that could harm them forever, which whether you think it is stupid or not, is what most Christians believe of gay marriage. If I see that person doing something that will harm them it is my duty to try and stop them. If they then continue in that action I must let them. If I decide to help them in that action to harm themselves, knowing that it could hurt them, then I commit a bigger sin than they do.
@Seohn, he did not say “I won’t offer you the same service”, he said that he could not, by his morals, choose to participate in a specific event. If he had refused to bake a cake for a KKK rally, or a satanist event, or if it had been a gay cake maker, refusing to make a cake for politicians celebrating an anti gay law, no one would have cared
I disagree assholes are universal that is all
Well to be fair. Every time a straight couple is doing this. Its still technically the same as gay sex. But to assume gays do that is having your mind in one place. Theres probably a lot more oral involved than with straight couples.
I'm pretty sure there was an instance of a gay coffee shop owner who kicked out some folks due to their stance on abortion, and not in a congenial manner according to the video.
This has already happened