Page 20 of 107 FirstFirst ... 1018192021223070 ... LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 1066

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

  1. Top | #191
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    22,749
    Archived
    16,553
    Total Posts
    39,302
    Rep Power
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    Irrelevant. Someone might refuse to bake a cake with the colour orange because they think it's bad luck.
    Then nobody can get an orange cake.

    If one cake can't express a celebration of what a customer wants then no cake can express a celebration of what a customer wants to celebrate.

    Otherwise discrimination.

    He simply did not want to be forced to express a viewpoint he does not agree with.
    I don't buy this desperate idiocy that the message on the cake is thought of by anyone as some expression of the baker.

    It is the expression of the customer.

    If one customer can't get a cake celebrating something then nobody can. Then there is no discrimination.

  2. Top | #192
    Liberal Rastafarian Gospel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    904
    Archived
    138
    Total Posts
    1,042
    Rep Power
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gospel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by TomC View Post

    One needn't be Christian to find
    pretty gross. Not something I'd like to "celebrate", nothing to do with my religious beliefs(or lack thereof).
    Tom
    No one is asking the Baker to celebrate. They are asking for the cake.
    And if somebody said "I don't think that's something to celebrate and I'm not selling a cake to you or anybody, if it is intended for a bris", do you think they should be compelled by the State to sell it anyway?
    Yes. When you register to do business in a state you do business with everyone said state represents, not your chosen few unless your business is for members only and even then you're screwed if a member wants a cock chopper cake. But that's just my take. Didn't the courts already rule in a baker's favor anyway? Not sure why yall making up a wild scenario that hasn't happened just to force a foolish argument. Business is business suck it up or close up shop. I could give a rat's ass what they ask for on a cake as long as it does not break the law.

  3. Top | #193
    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 untermensche View Post
    I don't buy this desperate idiocy that the message on the cake is thought of by anyone as some expression of the baker.
    Well, the Supreme Court disagrees with you, as do I.

  4. Top | #194
    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
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post

    And if somebody said "I don't think that's something to celebrate and I'm not selling a cake to you or anybody, if it is intended for a bris", do you think they should be compelled by the State to sell it anyway?
    Yes. When you register to do business in a state you do business with everyone said state represents, not your chosen few unless your business is for members only and even then you're screwed if a member wants a cock chopper cake. But that's just my take. Didn't the courts already rule in a baker's favor anyway? Not sure why yall making up a wild scenario that hasn't happened just to force a foolish argument. Business is business suck it up or close up shop. I could give a rat's ass what they ask for on a cake as long as it does not break the law.
    The Supreme Court ruled in the baker's favour for the 'same sex wedding' case. The current case is not before the Supreme Court and has not yet been decided.

    But, I disagree. If someone does not want to make and sell a bris cake, even when they are in the business of making cakes, I don't think the State has any right to force them to do it.

  5. Top | #195
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    18,856
    Archived
    41,943
    Total Posts
    60,799
    Rep Power
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gospel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post

    And if somebody said "I don't think that's something to celebrate and I'm not selling a cake to you or anybody, if it is intended for a bris", do you think they should be compelled by the State to sell it anyway?
    Yes. When you register to do business in a state you do business with everyone said state represents, not your chosen few unless your business is for members only and even then you're screwed if a member wants a cock chopper cake. But that's just my take. Didn't the courts already rule in a baker's favor anyway? Not sure why yall making up a wild scenario that hasn't happened just to force a foolish argument. Business is business suck it up or close up shop. I could give a rat's ass what they ask for on a cake as long as it does not break the law.
    The Supreme Court ruled in the baker's favour for the 'same sex wedding' case.
    The SCOTUS decision was based on the perceived anti-religious bias of the Colorado agency, not on the constitutionality of the Colorado law.

  6. Top | #196
    Liberal Rastafarian Gospel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    904
    Archived
    138
    Total Posts
    1,042
    Rep Power
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gospel View Post

    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?
    Read the article again. The article is about a man who refused to make a cake for a same-sex couple based on religious belief and then declined to do a gender transition cake for the same reason. So yes, it's about a person and their religion.

  7. Top | #197
    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 Enigma View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Elixir View Post

    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.
    If you are refusing to aid and abet an illegal act you're not "discriminating". You don't to decide that celebrating a trans surgery or whatever is an illegal act.
    That's for the Republican-dominated courts to decide.
    Because it's so important, right?

  8. Top | #198
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buenos Aires
    Posts
    3,258
    Archived
    7,588
    Total Posts
    10,846
    Rep Power
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by untermensche View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu View Post
    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.
    Nope.

    It is not one person harming another.

    Morality has nothing to do with it.

    A person owns their body.
    That is not the point.

    First, someone might think that a person's transition party is immoral not because of anything related to the trans person's body, but for the promotion of the belief that trans men are men or that trans women are women or both, etc.

    Second, whether the belief is held rationally is not the point. For that matter, in the religious case the Christian may believe that transition is wrong because it's disobedience of God's orders or whatever. That's irrational, but that would not matter in the context of my reply to Gospel (to which you were replying).

  9. Top | #199
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    22,749
    Archived
    16,553
    Total Posts
    39,302
    Rep Power
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by untermensche View Post
    I don't buy this desperate idiocy that the message on the cake is thought of by anyone as some expression of the baker.
    Well, the Supreme Court disagrees with you, as do I.
    Not the first time a tiny few people have been wrong about something.

    Is the sign painter also considered the author?

    Absurd!

  10. Top | #200
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    22,749
    Archived
    16,553
    Total Posts
    39,302
    Rep Power
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by untermensche View Post

    Nope.

    It is not one person harming another.

    Morality has nothing to do with it.

    A person owns their body.
    That is not the point.

    First, someone might think that a person's transition party is immoral not because of anything related to the trans person's body, but for the promotion of the belief that trans men are men or that trans women are women or both, etc.
    Nobody is harmed by that.

    If nobody is harmed there cannot be any immorality.

    Second, whether the belief is held rationally is not the point. For that matter, in the religious case the Christian may believe that transition is wrong because it's disobedience of God's orders or whatever. That's irrational, but that would not matter in the context of my reply to Gospel (to which you were replying).
    It is the point in a secular society with a separation between religious delusion and state.

    People can have religious delusions but they can't use them to discriminate in business.

Posting Permissions

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