Elder Oaks speaks at Claremont on religious freedom

[T-Shirt]

27 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

No law is forcing you to print those T-shirts. All the law says if you already sell those printed T-shirts you can't discriminate against those that want to buy them.

I don't sell pre-printed shirts, I sell custom shirts. Our business model is designing and printing what the customer wants on his shirts.  This is the same as the bakery.  They sold custom cakes.  I would have gladly sold the Skin Heads T-Shirts that had a different design on them.  I don't see a difference.

It seems to me that people are okay with me refusing service to someone for what most people find repulsive, but not for what they feel is acceptable.

[rockpond]

For the record, I do find the idea of a skin head wearing a t-shirt with a picture of a black person nailed to a cross to be repulsive.

And, I find gay marriage to be acceptable (both from a political viewpoint and based on sincerely held religious beliefs).

Just as I don't believe you should be forced to make the skin head t-shirt, I also don't think you should be required to make custom t-shirts for a gay wedding party that, for example, had a picture of two brides marrying one another.

It's hard for me to relate to an objection to the latter example on account of my personal beliefs, but I respect your right to refuse both.

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

 But in general, I don't think gay couples should give their business to bakers who believe that baking a cake is a violation of religious principles.  It strikes me as odd.

I don't think this is about anyone giving their business to another. It is, unfortunately, about punishing those who fall not down and worship despite hearing the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, and dulcimer of the gay-rights movement. And that's far less odd ... and, to some of us, certainly more sinister.

Edited March 31, 2016 by Hamba Tuhan

[rockpond]

7 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I don't think this is about anyone giving their business to another. It is, unfortunately, about punishing those who fall not down and worship despite hearing the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, and dulcimer of the gay-rights movement. And that's far less odd ... and, to some of us, certainly more sinister.

Asking a baker to bake a cake isn't asking them to fall down and worship the gay rights movement.  That's a ridiculous comparison.

[Hamba Tuhan]

4 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Asking a baker to bake a cake isn't asking them to fall down and worship the gay rights movement.

Intentionally picking a Christian-run bakery and then suing the owners into bankruptcy when they refuse certainly is.

Edited March 31, 2016 by Hamba Tuhan

[rockpond]

Just now, Hamba Tuhan said:

Intentionally picking a Christian bakery and then suing the owners into bankruptcy when they refuse certainly is.

Certainly is sinister.  Yes.  But it still isn't asking them to fall down and worship the gay rights movement.  We can fight for right, speak truth, and seek clarity without resorting to extreme rhetoric.

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

It is all about the tone and content of what you post and what you say in the posts Scott.

That is the best I can do. I am sure you will reject it. 

The readers can decide for themselves.

So you can't back it up then.

 

[Scott Lloyd]

5 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Asking a baker to bake a cake isn't asking them to fall down and worship the gay rights movement.  That's a ridiculous comparison.

It's exhibiting a chip-on-the-shoulder mentality.

 

[Storm Rider]

9 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Asking a baker to bake a cake isn't asking them to fall down and worship the gay rights movement.  That's a ridiculous comparison.

Actually Rock, it is not.  It is not a cake off the shelf - it is a custom made cake to celebrate what some people find repulsive or obscene.  You find no problems with it; so did 20 other bakers in Oregon, but those bakers were not asked to bake the wedding cake were they?  No, the religious person was asked to make a custom made cake.  Not surprisingly the request was refused.  And the court supported the fact that their conscientious objection, their feelings were of no merit.  If they were going to make a custom made cake for one wedding they needed to make a custom made cake for all weddings.  

I have said all along that the response they gave providing the reason why they were refusing was the real issue.  What they should of said is, Sorry I don't have time to make your cake.  However, gay's bakery across the street also makes custom cakes and JuJu's down on the corner and Mark's two blocks to the east also does a good job.  In fact, here is a list of twenty other bakeries that I am sure would have time to make your cake.  Have a nice day.  

We live in a society where we have to be smarter than the average bear.  Never give a reason; never share your thoughts; never, ABSOLUTELY NEVER say a negative word or give a negative opinion about sacred cows of the Progressives that believe and teach tolerance.  They are anything except tolerant and the activist judges are supporting this agenda.  

[Jeanne]

5 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

Actually Rock, it is not.  It is not a cake off the shelf - it is a custom made cake to celebrate what some people find repulsive or obscene.  You find no problems with it; so did 20 other bakers in Oregon, but those bakers were not asked to bake the wedding cake were they?  No, the religious person was asked to make a custom made cake.  Not surprisingly the request was refused.  And the court supported the fact that their conscientious objection, their feelings were of no merit.  If they were going to make a custom made cake for one wedding they needed to make a custom made cake for all weddings.  

I have said all along that the response they gave providing the reason why they were refusing was the real issue.  What they should of said is, Sorry I don't have time to make your cake.  However, gay's bakery across the street also makes custom cakes and JuJu's down on the corner and Mark's two blocks to the east also does a good job.  In fact, here is a list of twenty other bakeries that I am sure would have time to make your cake.  Have a nice day.  

We live in a society where we have to be smarter than the average bear.  Never give a reason; never share your thoughts; never, ABSOLUTELY NEVER say a negative word or give a negative opinion about sacred cows of the Progressives that believe and teach tolerance.  They are anything except tolerant and the activist judges are supporting this agenda.  

In your last paragraph here.  If you change the word society to church and Progressives to church, it will still have the same meaning.  And I can definitely agree with that.

Edited March 31, 2016 by Jeanne

[Teancum]

20 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

So you can't back it up then.

 

Whatever conclusion you wish to draw is fine with me.   As noted the readers can decide for themselves.

[Hamba Tuhan]

5 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

In your last paragraph here.  If you change the word society to church and Progressives to church, it will still have the same meaning.

So the Church where you live has the ability to bring the full weight of the law crashing down on a person's conscience and livelihood???

Edited March 31, 2016 by Hamba Tuhan

[Scott Lloyd]

9 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Whatever conclusion you wish to draw is fine with me.   As noted the readers can decide for themselves.

The obvious and inescapable conclusion is that you can't substantiate your claim that I cried "persecution" because somebody disagreed with me.

For reference, here is the post you made:

Quote

Talk away.  Advocate away.  Set the rules of your own religion as long as it does not harm others.  But don't expect the rest of society to buy into it nor support it just because you think your God says so.  This is fairly clear on the SSM issue.  The Church overall has lost this debate.  It can set its own rules for its own members as it clearly has. Members can seek to change the law within legal bounds.  No problem with that.  But don't cry persecution just because the majority of society disagrees with you and perhaps even ignores you. 

 

Edited March 31, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Jeanne]

6 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

So the Church where you live has the ability to bring the full weight of the law crashing down on a person's conscience and livelihood???

The essential meaning of your post has two sides.

[rockpond]

42 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

Actually Rock, it is not.  It is not a cake off the shelf - it is a custom made cake to celebrate what some people find repulsive or obscene.  You find no problems with it; so did 20 other bakers in Oregon, but those bakers were not asked to bake the wedding cake were they?  No, the religious person was asked to make a custom made cake.  Not surprisingly the request was refused.  And the court supported the fact that their conscientious objection, their feelings were of no merit.  If they were going to make a custom made cake for one wedding they needed to make a custom made cake for all weddings.  

Did you also notice where I said that intentionally choosing a bakery you know wouldn't want to make the cake (when there are other bakeries that would) and then suing them into bankruptcy was sinister?

All I'm saying is that it is hyperbole (and unnecessary) to claim that they are demanding that people "fall down and worship the gay rights movement".  It's that type of extreme rhetoric that keeps us from ever reaching solutions.

I've gone on record saying that I think a bakery should not be forced to make a custom cake for a gay wedding if they have religious objections (even though I find those religious objections to be be without merit).  Similarly, I went on record saying the T-Shirt shouldn't have to print custom shirts for a gay wedding.

[Hamba Tuhan]

14 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I've gone on record saying that I think a bakery should not be forced to make a custom cake for a gay wedding if they have religious objections (even though I find those religious objections to be be without merit).

I wish more people understood how essential this point is to any meaningful concept of freedom of conscience.

[cinepro]

Is there any reason the baker couldn't bake the cake but have it not turn out so well?  What if they delivered a cake that looked like this?

 

 

 

  I do some DJing, and if someone compelled me to DJ for an event that I didn't want to I would just go and play polka music (unless it was a polka, in which case I would play normal music).  My contract for the event would have some iron-clad language about not being liable for how the event goes under any circumstances.  Likewise, a photographer could photograph the entire event and forget to take the lens cap off.  The baker could forget to put sugar in the cake.  In other words, I see how you can force someone to provide a service, but I don't see how you can force them to provide a good service.

[thesometimesaint]

4 hours ago, T-Shirt said:

I don't sell pre-printed shirts, I sell custom shirts. Our business model is designing and printing what the customer wants on his shirts.  This is the same as the bakery.  They sold custom cakes.  I would have gladly sold the Skin Heads T-Shirts that had a different design on them.  I don't see a difference.

It seems to me that people are okay with me refusing service to someone for what most people find repulsive, but not for what they feel is acceptable.

That isn't the question. You're already sell custom designed T-shirts. The law is quite clear you can't refuse to sell your custom designed T-shirts on the bases of their race. creed, color, religion, national origin, sex, and increasingly sexual orientation. IE; You are fully within your rights to make any T-shirt you want, but not to who you sell them.

Edited March 31, 2016 by thesometimesaint

[thesometimesaint]

2 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I wish more people understood how essential this point is to any meaningful concept of freedom of conscience.

Once you open your doors to the public. You loose that right to determine your customers.

[thesometimesaint]

1 hour ago, cinepro said:

Is there any reason the baker couldn't bake the cake but have it not turn out so well?  What if they delivered a cake that looked like this?

 

 

 

  I do some DJing, and if someone compelled me to DJ for an event that I didn't want to I would just go and play polka music (unless it was a polka, in which case I would play normal music).  My contract for the event would have some iron-clad language about not being liable for how the event goes under any circumstances.  Likewise, a photographer could photograph the entire event and forget to take the lens cap off.  The baker could forget to put sugar in the cake.  In other words, I see how you can force someone to provide a service, but I don't see how you can force them to provide a good service.

You are opening up yourself to civil as well as criminal charges.

[ttribe]

7 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

That isn't the question. You're already sell custom designed T-shirts. The law is quite clear you can't refuse to sell your custom designed T-shirts on the bases of their race. creed, color, religion, national origin, sex, and increasingly sexual orientation. IE; You are fully within your rights to make any T-shirt you want, but not to who you sell them.

 

3 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

Once you open your doors to the public. You loose that right to determine your customers.

 

1 minute ago, thesometimesaint said:

You are opening up yourself to civil as well as criminal charges.

Uggh. You aren't a law expert, please stop trying to play one on the Internet.

BTW, it's "lose", not "loose".

[thesometimesaint]

24 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Uggh. You aren't a law expert, please stop trying to play one on the Internet.

BTW, it's "lose", not "loose".

I never claimed to be, but I do know how to read what has been written by those that are.

[Hamba Tuhan]

35 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

Once you open your doors to the public. You loose that right to determine your customers.

And I'm OK with that as long as those customer don't hold a legal gun to my head and demand that I sell them something that violates my conscience.

[Storm Rider]

10 hours ago, Jeanne said:

In your last paragraph here.  If you change the word society to church and Progressives to church, it will still have the same meaning.  And I can definitely agree with that.

Almost, however the church does not teach tolerance of all things whereas Progressives do.  Regardless, I understand your position.

[Anijen]

12 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

I have said all along that the response they gave providing the reason why they were refusing was the real issue.  What they should of said is, Sorry I don't have time to make your cake.  However, gay's bakery across the street also makes custom cakes and JuJu's down on the corner and Mark's two blocks to the east also does a good job.  In fact, here is a list of twenty other bakeries that I am sure would have time to make your cake.  Have a nice day.  

I agree, but still lying would probably be against the bakers standards as well. 

In the case of Masterpiece Cake, initially only one person came in and asked if he would do their wedding cake, the baker said he would and later the couple called the bakery and gave them the details of the same sex marriage cake. It was then that the baker said he would not do it.

In my opinion, by the tactics used in this case, tells me, this bakery was targeted when there were many other bakers to choose from whom would, without hesitation, bake the cake.  I feel  it wasn't that the couples feelings were hurt, but after hearing of this bakers strong religious beliefs, they actively sought out this particular bakery for the purpose of litigation. They knew the statute that basically said a business cannot deny service to a customer even if their business philosophy goes against their own religious standards. Unfortunately, these days a business is mandated to violate their own religious beliefs to use their artistic skills and are compelled (forced) to comply to the law or face punishment (which is usually significant fines). Then if they don't cave in, the outcome is fines, bankruptcy, and legal fees. IMO; you bet this was a sinister plan by the same sex couple.

I am not against an anti-discrimination statute. However, like "hearsay laws" there are many exceptions. Why could there not be an exception to this law? And if you think about it, this statute, that says you cannot discriminate, can now become the precedent to stop private universities from disallowing SS married couples in off campus housing (thinking BYU honor code here), then from there to outlawing SS marriages in the temples. One can argue many valid reasons this isn't the LGBT's agenda, but as a cynic I don't see them stopping just at wedding cakes.