rico Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/06/03/baker-forced-to-make-gay-wedding-cakes-undergo-sensitivity-training-after.html tl;dr, baker refuses to make a wedding cake for a gay couple and is now forced by the government to "rehabilitate" his business is this not a blatant breach of the right to refuse service? a business owner should not be forced to unwillingly go against his religion to serve a couple that defies his moral rights. shit, he might lose business due to this, but he's willing to put his faith above all, even at the risk of PR. what many do not understand is that the Christian faith (along with most others) relies on putting God above all, and as long as he is not harming the community, i don't see anything wrong with his actions and I find it absurd that the government is rehabilitating him for his actions. thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tobiased Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Well a true God should be willing to accept all. But the law of force is rather unneccessary. To be honest, you must be willing to adapt in order to succeed. This was probably taken more serious then it should have been since the legalization of gay marriage. Freedom my ass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobsplosion Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Businesses reserve the right to refuse business for anyone, but they are not allowed to discriminate based on sexual preference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puddingkip Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Can't he just say no I don't want to? And yes I think he should have that right. I also think that makes him a bigot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Professional Map Painter Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Any sensible person would have served them, it's not like he's being forced to actively support gay marriage etc. Also, as this is Fox News I wouldn't be surprised if something has been exaggerated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gent♥ Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 There's right to refuse service, and there's right to freedom from discrimination. Pick a side, you've seen which one your government's picked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rico Posted June 30, 2015 Author Share Posted June 30, 2015 Businesses reserve the right to refuse business for anyone, but they are not allowed to discriminate based on sexual preference. and they shouldn't be allowed to? the PR issues alone would probably hurt his business enough already; he should be allowed to serve whom he pleases, regardless of basis. this is also a common example of how many fail to understand the religious values associated with homosexuality that are defied. granted, you could make the counter-argument that hypothetically, something as absurd having a face could violate a religious value, but 1. it doesn't, and 2. Christians put their faith above all and will not crumble to adjust to society's standards. negotiating with devout Christians is borderline impossible. they would be willing to go out of business for the sake of keeping their faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gent♥ Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Christians put their faith above all and will not crumble to adjust to society's standards. If they won't adjust to society's values, why the hell should society adjust to theirs? Serves the buggers right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rico Posted June 30, 2015 Author Share Posted June 30, 2015 Any sensible person would have served them, it's not like he's being forced to actively support gay marriage etc. Also, as this is Fox News I wouldn't be surprised if something has been exaggerated. even as a Christian myself, reading the part about how he offered the couple any other baked good seemed like an exaggeration Fox News decided to incorporate to attempt to get liberals to sympathize with the baker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobsplosion Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 and they shouldn't be allowed to? They should not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rico Posted June 30, 2015 Author Share Posted June 30, 2015 If they won't adjust to society's values, why the hell should society adjust to theirs? Serves the buggers right. because society ISN'T adjusting to theirs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Professional Map Painter Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 and they shouldn't be allowed to? the PR issues alone would probably hurt his business enough already; he should be allowed to serve whom he pleases, regardless of basis. this is also a common example of how many fail to understand the religious values associated with homosexuality that are defied. granted, you could make the counter-argument that hypothetically, something as absurd having a face could violate a religious value, but 1. it doesn't, and 2. Christians put their faith above all and will not crumble to adjust to society's standards. negotiating with devout Christians is borderline impossible. they would be willing to go out of business for the sake of keeping their faith. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African-American_Civil_Rights_Movement_(1954%E2%80%9368) "Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it" - George Santayana Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gent♥ Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 because society ISN'T adjusting to theirs? Then why are you making a fuss about exactly that? If we agree why does this thread exist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Дебра Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 I dont want to let muslims in my store because they are all terrorists. Same concept but this for some weird reason is considered wrong? What makes discriminating gays any different to discriminating muslims, blacks or anyone else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecityburns2day Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 I dont want to let muslims in my store because they are all terrorists. Same concept but this for some weird reason is considered wrong? What makes discriminating gays any different to discriminating muslims, blacks or anyone else? The right to refuse service is supposed to be used for when someone is being difficult, or a history of being difficult. More often than not though, its used by biggots to deny service to a minority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperqube Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 reading up on the matter (as european, I'm not too familiar with U.S. law), a snip from a random website (colorring is mine: green = valid reason, red = invalid reasons, blue equals explenation) When Can You Refuse Service? While the right to refuse service is not a get out of jail free card allowing businesses to turn away people they don’t want to serve, there are some valid reasons for asking customers to leave. Individuals or groups who are causing trouble or being disruptive may be asked to leave, while restaurants or other businesses with a capacity limit can turn away customers to prevent this limit from being exceeded. Businesses can also refuse service to those who come in just before closing time or to those who are not making any purchases during their visit. There are various other examples – the key thing to note is that in each example, the decision to refuse service is not arbitrary or based upon an individual’s specific characteristics. Declining to serve someone has to be reasonable and justifiable. If customers are not properly dressed, you can ask that they leave, but if a person is wearing reasonable religious apparel and you dislike their beliefs, you can’t use that as an excuse to send them on their way. If there are safety concerns, or someone is harassing your staff members, then a business can refuse service. Likewise, if the way a person is dressed violates health codes, you cannot legally serve them, and if their clothing does not match your business’ clear standards – if someone wears jeans to a black tie dinner, for example – then you have a clear and justified reason for your refusal. For example, a court in California found that a bar was justified in refusing service to biker gangs who refused to remove their “colors†– marks of affiliation to certain gangs – because the bar had a legitimate concern that fights would break out. In this case, the refusal was specific and acted to protect a legitimate business interest. In reading this, as far as I get it, if you provide a service, you can refuse to do so, if it would harm your establishment or your ability to provide service. But you can't refuse service because you don't like your customer (or aspects of them). If, however, it would be a good idea to buy food of someone who obviously doesn't want to make it for you ... well ... doubtful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gent♥ Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 -snip- So it's not even a breach of the right to refuse service, it's bigots trying to hide behind laws they don't understand. The more this gets exposed the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Lowell Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 As a person from Indiana (where our governor passed the infamous Restoration of the Freedom of Religion Act, which was just a gift to the people who lost the gay marriage debate), I feel that the idea of refusal of service based on religion is a terrible idea. This allows business owners to refuse service based on an assumption, which may not be true. Even if it is true, it shouldn't happen because everyone should be equal, and not be discriminated against, and that kind of profiling is a clear violation of rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin the Chicken God Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 fox news opinion article isn't really the best source I think that this is overextending the state government's rights, there's no reason to force this guy to provide a service for something he disagrees with, even if it makes him bigoted or whatever. He loses money and business, and it isn't like nobody in the area would bake cakes. Bigoted people should have the right to refuse service because it's just screwing them over more than it is the customer. They should reserve the right to lose business based on their religious beliefs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gent♥ Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 I think that this is overextending the state government's rights reading up on the matter (as european, I'm not too familiar with U.S. law), a snip from a random website (colorring is mine: green = valid reason, red = invalid reasons, blue equals explenation) When Can You Refuse Service? While the right to refuse service is not a get out of jail free card allowing businesses to turn away people they don’t want to serve, there are some valid reasons for asking customers to leave. Individuals or groups who are causing trouble or being disruptive may be asked to leave, while restaurants or other businesses with a capacity limit can turn away customers to prevent this limit from being exceeded. Businesses can also refuse service to those who come in just before closing time or to those who are not making any purchases during their visit. There are various other examples – the key thing to note is that in each example, the decision to refuse service is not arbitrary or based upon an individual’s specific characteristics. Declining to serve someone has to be reasonable and justifiable. If customers are not properly dressed, you can ask that they leave, but if a person is wearing reasonable religious apparel and you dislike their beliefs, you can’t use that as an excuse to send them on their way. If there are safety concerns, or someone is harassing your staff members, then a business can refuse service. Likewise, if the way a person is dressed violates health codes, you cannot legally serve them, and if their clothing does not match your business’ clear standards – if someone wears jeans to a black tie dinner, for example – then you have a clear and justified reason for your refusal. For example, a court in California found that a bar was justified in refusing service to biker gangs who refused to remove their “colors†– marks of affiliation to certain gangs – because the bar had a legitimate concern that fights would break out. In this case, the refusal was specific and acted to protect a legitimate business interest. In reading this, as far as I get it, if you provide a service, you can refuse to do so, if it would harm your establishment or your ability to provide service. But you can't refuse service because you don't like your customer (or aspects of them). If, however, it would be a good idea to buy food of someone who obviously doesn't want to make it for you ... well ... doubtful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
get miked m8 Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 So it's not even a breach of the right to refuse service, it's bigots trying to hide behind laws they don't understand. The more this gets exposed the better. this entirely. However the story being fox news, I don't trust a single point on it. It seems unlikely that the gay couple "was thrilled with the ruling." as it makes them seem cruel and out to harm the guys business, otherwise known as fox news far right agenda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♠Derpeh♤ Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 I'm not sure how making a cake for a gay couple goes against Christianity. Marriage is between 2 people who have agreed to be together for the rest of their lives, having or not having a cake doesnt mean anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Explosion-chan Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Not sure why it's such a big deal. I sure as hell wouldn't want to be served by someone who didn't want to serve me, so why should it even matter why? Just find another baker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Дебра Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Not sure why it's such a big deal. I sure as hell wouldn't want to be served by someone who didn't want to serve me, so why should it even matter why? Just find another baker How would you feel if you walked into walmart and got kicked out because they don't like your eye colour etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Explosion-chan Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 How would you feel if you walked into walmart and got kicked out because they don't like your eye colour etc? I'd just go to another Walmart, like really. Fuck them, but it's no big deal, there's more than one Walmart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.