Remember The Oregon Bakery?

[california boy]

What are you talking about?

This is about tolerance.  Making a Cake is an artistic expression, and a Baker has every right to not make a cake in a manner and in support of things that he has no interest in making a cake for.

This is not about "not serving gays", it's entirely about not wanting to make a Gay Wedding Cake for a Gay Wedding.  Period.

 

As to your question, absolutely.  A Bakery or any business has the right to serve anyone they want, and not serve anyone that want.  If they don't want to serve someone who beat their wife, they have every right to.

Homosexuality is not a protected class.  As much as some claim or think they are born that way, there are plenty who aren't born that way, thus a business has every right to refuse service to people based on "character".

 

The Gospel teaches to love the person but hate the sin.  They weren't hating "gays", they were hating the sinful act of a gay marriage.

No Christian is under any obligation to support, serve, promote sinful activities.  And they should never be, nor should ANYONE else for whatever is morally against their concious.

Is this a Free Country or not, where we have the right to worship and do things according to our own consious, as long as we aren't doing them "to" people against their right to exist?

 

Forcing someone to bake a cake is not a human right.

Wrong. The civil rights laws were passed over 50 years ago. A business can not refuse service simply based on a persons race, religion, sex etc. in the majority of states a business can not discriminate based on sexual orientation. The baker broke the law. as the courts have pointed out, a persons religious beliefs does not mean you can break the law. Read the ruling.

If you don't like the civil rights act then work to get it appealed. That may prove unpopular. Most Americans are against discrimination. And like the courts, most Americans do not think that religion should be above the law.

You have no scriptural support for your religious position. Christ taught a gospel of serving everyone including sinners. Baking a cake for a sinner is not a sin.

The gay couple was not asking for a gay wedding cake. They were asking for a wedding cake just like any other wedding cake the baker makes. Sorry but all of your objections have absolutely no merit. And the lawyers who defended the bakery had no merit in their defense in why the bakery could break the discrimination laws. That is why they LOST.

[thesometimesaint]

Thought you might like this.

SEE http://www.rawstory.com/2014/07/rachel-maddow-christian-segregationists-would-be-confused-by-hobby-lobby-ruling/

[williamsmith]

Wrong. The civil rights laws were passed over 50 years ago. A business can not refuse service simply based on a persons race, religion, sex etc. in the majority of states a business can not discriminate based on sexual orientation. The baker broke the law. as the courts have pointed out, a persons religious beliefs does not mean you can break the law. Read the ruling.

If you don't like the civil rights act then work to get it appealed. That may prove unpopular. Most Americans are against discrimination. And like the courts, most Americans do not think that religion should be above the law.

You have no scriptural support for your religious position. Christ taught a gospel of serving everyone including sinners. Baking a cake for a sinner is not a sin.

The gay couple was not asking for a gay wedding cake. They were asking for a wedding cake just like any other wedding cake the baker makes. Sorry but all of your objections have absolutely no merit. And the lawyers who defended the bakery had no merit in their defense in why the bakery could break the discrimination laws. That is why they LOST.

 

I'm not talking about "civil rights law", I'm talking about the fact that business can refuse service for reasons other than the protected classes.

We are not talking about gays buying a cake, or asking to have a cake baked, etc.

We are talking about gays requesting a "specific" type of cake (with gay themes on it), and for a "specific" type of event (a gay wedding).

 

Nobody can rightly be forced to bake a paticular type of cake, nor for a particular type of event.

People still have their rights.....  You are effectively taking away peoples rights.

 

It is you who are not being "Christian".

Nobody is stopping gays from buying a cake.

Nobody is stopping gays from buying a cake and using it how they want.

But a person has the CIVIL RIGHT to not be forced to provide a service, or use their creative works for something against their value system.

You wouldn't think a person should be forced to make a cake with a "penis" on it would you if a gay person wants it for their wedding?

You wouldn't think a person should be forced to make a cake for a KKK Birthday party would you?

Yet, that's exactly what you're saying concerning homosexual "activities".

 

We aren't talking about denying service to people for just "existing", we are talking about VALUES, behaviors, actions.

Nobody can be rightly forced to provide services for value systems they don't agree with.

Civil Rights is about denying service for people "existing" as they are.  It's not about providing services outside of that specific scope.

Edited August 15, 2015 by williamsmith

[california boy]

I'm not talking about "civil rights law", I'm talking about the fact that business can refuse service for reasons other than the protected classes.

We are not talking about gays buying a cake, or asking to have a cake baked, etc.

We are talking about gays requesting a "specific" type of cake (with gay themes on it), and for a "specific" type of event (a gay wedding).

Nobody can rightly be forced to bake a paticular type of cake, nor for a particular type of event.

People still have their rights..... You are effectively taking away peoples rights.

It is you who are not being "Christian".

Nobody is stopping gays from buying a cake.

Nobody is stopping gays from buying a cake and using it how they want.

But a person has the CIVIL RIGHT to not be forced to provide a service, or use their creative works for something against their value system.

You wouldn't think a person should be forced to make a cake with a "penis" on it would you if a gay person wants it for their wedding?

You wouldn't think a person should be forced to make a cake for a KKK Birthday party would you?

Yet, that's exactly what you're saying concerning homosexual "activities".

We aren't talking about denying service to people for just "existing", we are talking about VALUES, behaviors, actions.

Nobody can be rightly forced to provide services for value systems they don't agree with.

Civil Rights is about denying service for people "existing" as they are. It's not about providing services outside of that specific scope.

I don't know where you got the idea that any of these cases are about special custom designed cakes. In each case is all the gay couple was requesting is the same type of wedding cake the baker bakes for all his other customers. THAT was what was denied them. THAT is what the courts have convicted the bakers of breaking the law for. THAT is what is a violation of the civil rights act

NO ONE is suggesting a baker is required to bake a specially designed cake for a gay couple or anyone else. No one is suggesting that a baker is forced to decorate or write anything on the cake that goes against their personal beliefs. This is not what these cases are about. What event the cake is used for is irrelevant as long as no special design or wording is required. Bakers don't have a right to ask WHO will be eating their standard cakes they offer to the public or what event is being celebrated

Edited August 16, 2015 by california boy