Page 17 of 107 FirstFirst ... 715161718192767 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 1066

Thread: Should bakers be forced to make gender transition celebration cakes?

  1. Top | #161
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    7,051
    Archived
    10,974
    Total Posts
    18,025
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by Gospel View Post
    That's your take and your take is a private one of which you are not offering a service to the public. While I don't agree with or celebrate bris it's not my place (unless the law provides) for me to deny a service I'm providing to the general public because I don't like what my services are being used for.
    Whether it is legal or not (to selectively withhold goods and services if you don't like where it's going) is a separate question to whether it should be illegal.

    For example, I DJ parties on the side. I was asked to DJ at a house that was a friend of one of my neighbors. The guy had a confederate flag flying and other paraphernalia I didn't agree with when I went to assess the site. I wasn't surprised because that neighbor (who passed away) had one too. Ultimately they all had a blast and talked about music and the stupid shit they did when kids. They knew I wasn't excited about that confederate shit but it did not get in the way of my offering my service and getting paid $500 for 6 hours of dumbfuckery. If I was really bent out of shape about it I could donate $100 to the black panthers or some shit.
    If you were really bent out of shape about it, you ought have the legal right to refuse to DJ that party.

  2. Top | #162
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    18,853
    Archived
    41,943
    Total Posts
    60,796
    Rep Power
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by Bomb#20 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by laughing dog View Post
    I wrote "under your reasoning" which means the same as "applying your reasoning" I did not say you said it. So, it is a not as straw man.
    So you'll even put words in your own mouth. You wrote "under #Bomb20's interpretation", knowing perfectly well that's not how I'd interpret it.
    I did not know perfectly well how you'd interpret anything. If you meant that art is protected under the 1st amendment, then under your interpretation of that statement, if serving coffee is performing art, then it would be protected under the 1st amendment. In other words, assuming the premise is true, then your interpretation means serving coffee is protected under the 1st amendment.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bomb#20 View Post
    Get stuffed. You departed from my reasoning from your very first words, "If cake is art", knowing perfectly well that I'd said "the cake in question is an artwork", not "cake is art".
    I see where the problem is. In your world, either artwork is not art or you were not reading in context (i.e. cake should have been interpreted as "the cake").

  3. Top | #163
    Content Thief Elixir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Mountains
    Posts
    16,504
    Archived
    707
    Total Posts
    17,211
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by TomC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Elixir View Post
    Maybe people who want to make art cakes that express their opinions shouldn't call their store a cake shop, but rather an "ephemeral art gallery".
    Could Scardina's request meet that standard of honesty and disclosure? Did she really want a cake at all?
    I don't think so, I think she lied about that part to get what she really wants, a performance art piece she'll get paid for doing.
    Tom
    Yeah - my point is that nobody is going into art galleries and demanding that artists create things that are counter to their views.
    I remember when Andy Warhol had a gallery in Sausalito. I wonder what he'd have said if someone went in there and demanded a different brand of soup can?
    Maybe if artists advertised that they'd paint/sculpt/create anything on demand, it would be a different story. Or if bakers who wanted to restrict their offerings to that of which they approved, billed themselves as artists instead of cake vendors...
    Again, this is SO important (to libtards and conservotards alike).

  4. Top | #164
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    7,051
    Archived
    10,974
    Total Posts
    18,025
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by Elixir View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by TomC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Elixir View Post
    Maybe people who want to make art cakes that express their opinions shouldn't call their store a cake shop, but rather an "ephemeral art gallery".
    Could Scardina's request meet that standard of honesty and disclosure? Did she really want a cake at all?
    I don't think so, I think she lied about that part to get what she really wants, a performance art piece she'll get paid for doing.
    Tom
    Yeah - my point is that nobody is going into art galleries and demanding that artists create things that are counter to their views.
    I remember when Andy Warhol had a gallery in Sausalito. I wonder what he'd have said if someone went in there and demanded a different brand of soup can?
    Maybe if artists advertised that they'd paint/sculpt/create anything on demand, it would be a different story. Or if bakers who wanted to restrict their offerings to that of which they approved, billed themselves as artists instead of cake vendors...
    Again, this is SO important (to libtards and conservotards alike).
    It's important if you value free expression.

  5. Top | #165
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buenos Aires
    Posts
    3,257
    Archived
    7,588
    Total Posts
    10,845
    Rep Power
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by Gospel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post

    No--to refuse the cake based on what it's going to be used for is discrimination.
    So, you believe a baker should be forced to bake a cake for a bris?
    Not all bakers are Christian, so many of them won't feel forced at all. My question is what religious beliefs is the refusal based on? How does one prove it's a religious belief and not just an excuse for bigotry? If the Baker is a Christian they'll have a hard time finding scripture to support their claim because there will be 20 other verses in the same book to the contrary.
    What do you mean an "excuse" for bigotry?
    The question is not whether the person is religious, or rather, that is the constitutional question perhaps (I'm not an expert on the constitutional standing of moral objections not based on religion), but Metaphor is asking a moral question. What if he believes that celebrating a transition is immoral, but not because they have a religion? Should they be forced to bake a cake? That's a moral question (though that question is not very clear to me, either, due to the very usual moral passive voice, but that's another matter).

    And you might ask what if the moral objection is an excuse for bigotry, or something like that. But then, if someone refuses to bake the cake because of bigotry, wouldn't that bigotry take the form of a moral objection? How is the bigot's psychology in your question?

  6. Top | #166
    Content Thief Elixir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Mountains
    Posts
    16,504
    Archived
    707
    Total Posts
    17,211
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Elixir View Post

    Yeah - my point is that nobody is going into art galleries and demanding that artists create things that are counter to their views.
    I remember when Andy Warhol had a gallery in Sausalito. I wonder what he'd have said if someone went in there and demanded a different brand of soup can?
    Maybe if artists advertised that they'd paint/sculpt/create anything on demand, it would be a different story. Or if bakers who wanted to restrict their offerings to that of which they approved, billed themselves as artists instead of cake vendors...
    Again, this is SO important (to libtards and conservotards alike).
    It's important if you value free expression.
    Be a fucking artist then. Call your shop a gallery. Nobody will sue you, nobody can make you do shit.
    Don't advertise a service then refuse to perform it.
    But this isn't about "free expression" is it? It's about conservotards who want to control what's in everyone else's pants.

  7. Top | #167
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    22,749
    Archived
    16,553
    Total Posts
    39,302
    Rep Power
    79
    You can't rationally think a transition is immoral.

    Immorality is when one person treats another badly. Like refusing service based on primitive delusions.

    Celebrating something you are proud of is not harming anyone.

  8. Top | #168
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buenos Aires
    Posts
    3,257
    Archived
    7,588
    Total Posts
    10,845
    Rep Power
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by laughing dog View Post
    I did not know perfectly well how you'd interpret anything. If you meant that art is protected under the 1st amendment, then under your interpretation of that statement, if serving coffee is performing art, then it would be protected under the 1st amendment. In other words, assuming the premise is true, then your interpretation means serving coffee is protected under the 1st amendment.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bomb#20 View Post
    Get stuffed. You departed from my reasoning from your very first words, "If cake is art", knowing perfectly well that I'd said "the cake in question is an artwork", not "cake is art".
    I see where the problem is. In your world, either artwork is not art or you were not reading in context (i.e. cake should have been interpreted as "the cake").
    No, a problem is that what you claim follows from B20's posts, does not. If you read his posts, you will see he is not saying that all cakes are artwork, but that it is (or would have been) in this case. This is clear in context (e.g., "And the cake in question is an artwork; a cup of coffee at Woolworth's lunch counter is not an artwork. ", purely for example).

    There is of course another problem (well, among others): it is not true that if a specific cake is an artwork, serving it is performance art. It depends on the context in which the person serves it. Both problems are (independently) decisive: you are wrong.

  9. Top | #169
    New Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    In the Database
    Posts
    39
    Archived
    599
    Total Posts
    638
    Rep Power
    69
    Quote Originally Posted by Elixir View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Elixir View Post

    Yeah - my point is that nobody is going into art galleries and demanding that artists create things that are counter to their views.
    I remember when Andy Warhol had a gallery in Sausalito. I wonder what he'd have said if someone went in there and demanded a different brand of soup can?
    Maybe if artists advertised that they'd paint/sculpt/create anything on demand, it would be a different story. Or if bakers who wanted to restrict their offerings to that of which they approved, billed themselves as artists instead of cake vendors...
    Again, this is SO important (to libtards and conservotards alike).
    It's important if you value free expression.
    Be a fucking artist then. Call your shop a gallery. Nobody will sue you, nobody can make you do shit.
    Don't advertise a service then refuse to perform it.
    Indeed. If I sell rope to the public without typically asking my customer what they are using it for, I am morally, if not legally, obligated to sell rope to the redneck yokels who are loudly talking about using it to "teach them uppity n***ers some good ol' southern hospitality". If I say I sell rope, I should sell rope to everybody.

    To do otherwise would be discriminatory.

  10. Top | #170
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buenos Aires
    Posts
    3,257
    Archived
    7,588
    Total Posts
    10,845
    Rep Power
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by untermensche View Post
    You can't rationally think a transition is immoral.
    That depends on the circumstances (though this one was about celebrating transition, not transition, but that aside), but the point is not that the belief is held rationally.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •