business discrimination, nutjob Christians, and fabulous gays...

[jackmormon]

What if a member of a white supremacist church refused to make a wedding cake for an interracial couple because of their religious beliefs that races should not intermarry?

[DestinFlPackfan]

When gays start wearing the baggy underwear showing jeans, it's over for me . No more tolerance on my part.

[Jackrabbit]

People have been taught that they are entitled and have a RIGHT to nearly anything they want...If something has become a RIGHT, then the people forced into providing whatever good or service are ENSLAVED.  Who's rights are more important?   Which side are the intolerant ones?  Is govt wise enough to know? 

 

Sure there should be some exceptions but govt should stay the hell out of our business.

[Jackrabbit]

What if a member of a white supremacist church refused to make a wedding cake for an interracial couple because of their religious beliefs that races should not intermarry?

What if it were a black supremacist church?

[jackmormon]

What if it were a black supremacist church?

Same question.

[DestinFlPackfan]

What if it were a black supremacist church?

You couldn't wear the latest Vera Wang white hooded/veiled gowns or suits.

[AndroidAggie]

Kind of a long shot. Feels like that's more of a silly and exaggerated example meant to discredit the position.

I think billings' what if's are more compelling.

Incidentally, I'm not prepared to frame the argument as 'what if sinners who sinned want you to sin with them, the dirty sinners' every bit as much as I'm not prepared to conjure up particularly unlikely scenarios in which mostly defunct racist organizations somehow manage to leave aside their normal violence and abhorrent practice and replace it with cake decorating.

[jackmormon]

So not all religious freedom is created equal?

[AndroidAggie]

sure, i guess, man.

 

your example is silly, so i don't really want to play the game.

[HR_Poke]

What if a member of a white supremacist church refused to make a wedding cake for an interracial couple because of their religious beliefs that races should not intermarry?

what if the Catholic Church required counseling before getting married in their church. Or required you raise your children catholic. Does that mean their religious beliefs are more important than mine as a non catholic? What a retarded argument.

[HR_Poke]

sure, i guess, man.

your example is silly, so i don't really want to play the game.

it's a pretty dumb argument.

[Boise fan]

The situation with the baker is being over-complicated and distorted by religious undertones, imo.

It's really about service, not religion. It's a cake, she wasn't marrying them. Allowing that kind of discrimation is akin to an Arab baker refusing to provide a service to a Jew, or a Rush Limbaugh fanatic refusing service to a customer wearing a pro Clinton t-shirt.

The point of anti-discrimination laws is to stop bias and prejudice from interfering with regular commerce.

[happycamper]

People have been taught that they are entitled and have a RIGHT to nearly anything they want...If something has become a RIGHT, then the people forced into providing whatever good or service are ENSLAVED. Who's rights are more important? Which side are the intolerant ones? Is govt wise enough to know?

Sure there should be some exceptions but govt should stay the hell out of our business.

keep preaching your anarchist manifesto.

[happycamper]

I think this should be left to the states (and the market).

If Indiana through its legislators wants to allow religious conviction as a defense to a claim of discrimination against a group not specifically protected, let them.

Just like it's OK for New Mexico and Colorado through their legislators to make the religious person serve a class of people the states have voted to protect.

I know the US Supreme Court declined to take up the New Mexico photographer case, but interestingly the photographer did not claim protection for her religious beliefs.

A case will make it to the Supremes eventually. Will be fascinating now that the Hobby Lobby case has been decided.

I don't think that leaving civil rights issues up to the market is very smart. The market only finds profitable solutions and in cases like civil rights, profitable solutions can be idiotic otherwise. Money is amoral.

[HR_Poke]

I don't think that leaving civil rights issues up to the market is very smart. The market only finds profitable solutions and in cases like civil rights, profitable solutions can be idiotic otherwise. Money is amoral.

you have no sense of adventure

[jackmormon]

what if the Catholic Church required counseling before getting married in their church. Or required you raise your children catholic. Does that mean their religious beliefs are more important than mine as a non catholic? What a retarded argument.

Is this in a retail setting that is open to the public?

[HR_Poke]

Is this in a retail setting that is open to the public?

your white supremacist church is a public retail setting?

[DestinFlPackfan]

No shirt , no shoes , no service. How would that play out in this threads scenario ?

[happycamper]

No shirt , no shoes , no service. How would that play out in this threads scenario ?

Public health. Pretty cut and dried there

[jackmormon]

sure, i guess, man.

your example is silly, so i don't really want to play the game.

If someone of your religion refuses to make a wedding cake citing religious freedom, doesn't that open the door for someone to refuse to bake a cake for an interracial couple citing the same freedom.

Are your religious beliefs more valid than theirs?

PS: Can you think of any mainstream religions that in the not to distant past considered interracial marriage a sin?