Page 34 of 107 FirstFirst ... 2432333435364484 ... LastLast
Results 331 to 340 of 1066

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

  1. Top | #331
    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 ZiprHead View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post

    I've been through this a dozen or more times over thirty pages.

    A pink and blue cake, made to the specifications Scardina wanted, symbolised gender transition. The message is not as obvious as words written in English, but the message is still exactly that, because Scardina imbued the symbolism on it and told Phillips that's what the symbolism was.
    A pink and blue cake symbolizes many things. That the baker chose to believe it symbolized a trans person transition is discrimination of the illegal kind.
    First of all, no, believing a cake symbolised something is not discrimination 'of the illegal kind'.

    Second, the baker didn't choose to believe it. He was told, by Scardina, that that's exactly what it symbolises. It doesn't matter that blue and pink can symbolise other things to other people or symbolise nothing at all except being a colour combination that appeals to some people. White is a colour symbolising mourning in some cultures, whereas it is a colour symbolising purity in others.

    I want to understand the stasis of this disagreement. Do you think Phillips should be forced to write the words 'Happy gender transition' on the cake? Because my argument is that Scardina's actions are equivalent to asking him to do that. The symbolism is not as obvious as words written in English, but it is nevertheless there.

  2. Top | #332
    Veteran Member KeepTalking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    St. Louis Metro East
    Posts
    4,222
    Archived
    3,057
    Total Posts
    7,279
    Rep Power
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu View Post
    You did have a way of making a correct probabilistic assessment that it was almost certainly not relevant given the content of my reply. But I was not asking for an apology (and by the way I wasn't saying you were being irrational, but that would be irrational on my part to change my mind on that basis).
    I didn't think you were, just wanted to make it clear that I don't regret providing the information. Bad phrasing on my part.

  3. Top | #333
    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 Angra Mainyu View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by laughing dog View Post
    NO, we do not have any evidence that a transgender celebration cake is the same as a birthday cake for a transgender person in the eyes of the baker. None - as any rational person can see.

    Your conjecture may be right. Then again, it might not.

    .
    But that has nothing to do with what I said. It is not my "conjecture".
    You are wrong on both counts but it really does not matter.

  4. Top | #334
    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 ZiprHead View Post

    So the trans person is celebrating the transition but the baker is not discriminating against that person for doing the transition celebration.

    I wonder if the baker was told to say he's just objecting to the cake by his lawyer.
    No, he is not discriminating against the trans person on account of the their being a trans person. Rather, he is refusing to make a gender transition cake. If the gender transition cake had not been ordered by Scardina but by one of Scardina's friends, the baker would have refused just as much. And if a Woke non-trans person had requested a 'trans celebration cake' to use, say, in a demonstration in support of trans claims, the baker would have refused as well.
    What part of full and equal enjoyment do you and others who hate the law when it doesn't benefit you not understand? It's not only unreasonable but also ridiculous to expect the law to be interpreted based on uninvolved parties to the case (like the imaginary friends you mentioned).

  5. Top | #335
    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 ZiprHead View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post

    I've been through this a dozen or more times over thirty pages.

    A pink and blue cake, made to the specifications Scardina wanted, symbolised gender transition. The message is not as obvious as words written in English, but the message is still exactly that, because Scardina imbued the symbolism on it and told Phillips that's what the symbolism was.
    A pink and blue cake symbolizes many things. That the baker chose to believe it symbolized a trans person transition is discrimination of the illegal kind.
    First of all, no, believing a cake symbolised something is not discrimination 'of the illegal kind'.

    Second, the baker didn't choose to believe it. He was told, by Scardina, that that's exactly what it symbolises. It doesn't matter that blue and pink can symbolise other things to other people or symbolise nothing at all except being a colour combination that appeals to some people. White is a colour symbolising mourning in some cultures, whereas it is a colour symbolising purity in others.

    I want to understand the stasis of this disagreement. Do you think Phillips should be forced to write the words 'Happy gender transition' on the cake? Because my argument is that Scardina's actions are equivalent to asking him to do that. The symbolism is not as obvious as words written in English, but it is nevertheless there.
    I believe he should be forced . It's called law enforcement for a reason.

  6. Top | #336
    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

    First of all, no, believing a cake symbolised something is not discrimination 'of the illegal kind'.

    Second, the baker didn't choose to believe it. He was told, by Scardina, that that's exactly what it symbolises. It doesn't matter that blue and pink can symbolise other things to other people or symbolise nothing at all except being a colour combination that appeals to some people. White is a colour symbolising mourning in some cultures, whereas it is a colour symbolising purity in others.

    I want to understand the stasis of this disagreement. Do you think Phillips should be forced to write the words 'Happy gender transition' on the cake? Because my argument is that Scardina's actions are equivalent to asking him to do that. The symbolism is not as obvious as words written in English, but it is nevertheless there.
    I believe he should be forced . It's called law enforcement for a reason.
    Right. Well, if you think the State should force somebody to write words they don't want to write, I think we're at a standstill in the argument. I don't think the State should do any such thing.

  7. Top | #337
    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 Gospel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ZiprHead View Post

    So the trans person is celebrating the transition but the baker is not discriminating against that person for doing the transition celebration.

    I wonder if the baker was told to say he's just objecting to the cake by his lawyer.
    No, he is not discriminating against the trans person on account of the their being a trans person. Rather, he is refusing to make a gender transition cake. If the gender transition cake had not been ordered by Scardina but by one of Scardina's friends, the baker would have refused just as much. And if a Woke non-trans person had requested a 'trans celebration cake' to use, say, in a demonstration in support of trans claims, the baker would have refused as well.
    What part of full and equal enjoyment do you and others who hate the law when it doesn't benefit you not understand? It's not only unreasonable but also ridiculous to expect the law to be interpreted based on uninvolved parties to the case (like the imaginary friends you mentioned).
    Okay, a few points.

    First, the charge that I hate the law when it does not benefit me is unwarranted, as there is nothing in my posts suggesting that.
    Second, the charge that I hate the law when it does not benefit me is false. If it were true, I would have to hate for example American laws (how do they benefit me?), or (just in case there is an objection with the existence of America as it is or whatever), I would have to hate a law recently pass here that decriminalized abortion in the first 14 weeks of pregnancy. I do not hate it. I think it was a good idea - one of the very few pushed by the current president here. But it does not benefit me in any non-negligible manner (except you could say we all benefit for having a slightly more just legal system, but that's not what you're talking about).

    Third, of course the imaginary friends I mention are meant to explain what he is actually basing his discrimination on. It's about the psychology of the baker, because that is what matters when it comes to what the Baker is doing. In other words, he is not discriminating against the lawyer because the lawyer is transgender. As for the law, it has to be interpreted on the basis of the meaning of the words. If it is ambiguous, well I'd say go for the more just interpretation.

  8. Top | #338
    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 Gospel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post

    First of all, no, believing a cake symbolised something is not discrimination 'of the illegal kind'.

    Second, the baker didn't choose to believe it. He was told, by Scardina, that that's exactly what it symbolises. It doesn't matter that blue and pink can symbolise other things to other people or symbolise nothing at all except being a colour combination that appeals to some people. White is a colour symbolising mourning in some cultures, whereas it is a colour symbolising purity in others.

    I want to understand the stasis of this disagreement. Do you think Phillips should be forced to write the words 'Happy gender transition' on the cake? Because my argument is that Scardina's actions are equivalent to asking him to do that. The symbolism is not as obvious as words written in English, but it is nevertheless there.
    I believe he should be forced . It's called law enforcement for a reason.
    But this law is unconstitutional, so it is not a law in the sense of "law" used in the US Constitution (because those have to be compatible with the constitution).

    That aside, Metaphor had asked a moral question. It was not about whether the law as it is commands that he be forced. Or do you only think he should be forced because the law says so? If that is the case, then we can ask the following question: Assume the law does not say so (say, in some other state). Do you think lawmakers should pass a law so that he (or others in that situation) is forced?

  9. Top | #339
    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 Metaphor View Post

    First of all, no, believing a cake symbolised something is not discrimination 'of the illegal kind'.

    Second, the baker didn't choose to believe it. He was told, by Scardina, that that's exactly what it symbolises. It doesn't matter that blue and pink can symbolise other things to other people or symbolise nothing at all except being a colour combination that appeals to some people. White is a colour symbolising mourning in some cultures, whereas it is a colour symbolising purity in others.

    I want to understand the stasis of this disagreement. Do you think Phillips should be forced to write the words 'Happy gender transition' on the cake? Because my argument is that Scardina's actions are equivalent to asking him to do that. The symbolism is not as obvious as words written in English, but it is nevertheless there.
    I believe he should be forced . It's called law enforcement for a reason.
    Right. Well, if you think the State should force somebody to write words they don't want to write, I think we're at a standstill in the argument. I don't think the State should do any such thing.
    No one is forcing the baker to register in the state of Colorado to do business. When he registered he accepted the obligation to serve all residents of Colorado. And law enforcement (whether you like what they are there for or not) is something the Baker put in place to protect not only himself from facing discrimination, but others from him if he decides to discriminate. You need to stop acting like the government is some autonomous anomaly not run by the very people who put it in place. This is the USA, not Australia.

  10. Top | #340
    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
    No one is forcing the baker to register in the state of Colorado to do business. When he registered he accepted the obligation to serve all residents of Colorado.
    He did not 'register' to be compelled to express support for things he does not support. The Supreme Court decided he did not have to express messages of support for things he does not want to support.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gospel View Post
    And law enforcement (whether you like what they are there for or not) is something the Baker put in place to protect not only himself from facing discrimination, but others from him if he decides to discriminate. You need to stop acting like the government is some autonomous anomaly not run by the very people who put it in place.
    In what universe am I acting like the government isn't elected by the people? What in my questions and arguments would give you that impression?

    This is the USA, not Australia.
    I cannot guess what you mean by that.

Posting Permissions

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