Christian Man Asks Thirteen Gay Bakeries To Bake Him Pro-Traditional Marriage Cake

[kmoney]

So we should ask people what they plan to do with anything they purchase? As problematic or, failing, as hypocritical. We only need to be concerned if someone lets us know?

Who knows, that linen may be used in a gay wedding. Those steak knives? What are you buying that sugar and flour for? Are you thinking of baking a cake for a gay wedding? lain:

:idunno: That's a discussion one can have, but I don't tend to think one would have to investigate everyone to see in what way someone is using their purchase. And I might even say that it's advisable not to, with keeping Matt 7:1-2 in mind.

Let's say I'm walking past a homeless person and give him some money. I walk past another one a block away and as I start to give him money he says that anything I give him will be used to go buy drugs. Do I have to give it to him anyway because I'd be a hypocrite for not asking what the previous beggar was going to use it for? :idunno:

 

[kmoney]

the purpose of the cake is to be used for a sin in their view?

Yes. Either that or a more narrow concern about being associated with a religious ceremony that goes against their religious beliefs.

what other reason are they being denied? if not for gay marriage being a sin according to their faith?

I'm not saying that homosexuality or gay marriage being sinful is not part of it.

I am trying to follow....but I will go back to just because we can do something legally does not mean we should.

Agreed, here.

 

[Quincy]

If I were a gay baker, I'd have made the cake for the man. Cake is precious and decadent. We should use cake to bring mankind together (and make a profit), not tear us apart. So, some people think same-sex marriage is wrong and want a cake. I'd happily take their money and :chuckle: .

 

[Jose Fly]

Which religion?

Just as some Christians derive their anti-gay beliefs from the Bible, so do some racist Christians.

Is it in the Bible or is it not? It's pretty simple. Of course, the courts can't seem to understand the Constitution, so there is that.

I can't find anywhere in the Bible that says it's forbidden to bake cakes for a same-sex wedding.

Can you back that assertion up?

HERE. As long as a person is a member of a protected class, they cannot be denied equal services and accommodations.

 

[Jose Fly]

Exactly right, which is why they should not be civilly penalized for refusing to bake a cake for a religious ceremony that they rightly find repugnant.

Sorry, that doesn't make any sense. The fact remains, in many localities, businesses open to the public cannot refuse service based on a customer's sexual orientation.

That's the law. If you don't like it, try and change it.

What is legal and what is rational are often not synonymous.

It may not be a compelling legal argument in a season in our country where we no longer value the freedom of religion but it is nevertheless a completely rational argument.

That's your opinion, but society has decided otherwise.

They can go somewhere else and in reality the reason they went to the conservative Christian baker is because they wanted to punish the baker for his religious views and wanted to use the punitive authority of the state to do it.

Maybe so, but that's irrelevant to the legal question at hand. The bakery, being a for-profit business open to the public, cannot deny service to customers based on their sexual orientation.

No, I'm saying that Christians should not be forced to participate or contribute to a religious ceremony that they find morally repugant.

No one's forcing them to. If they don't want to ever be faced with the prospect of baking a cake for a same-sex wedding, then they shouldn't open a bakery in an area where sexual orientation is protected class in the relevant anti-discrimination laws.

The abridgment of the "free exercise thereof" should not be either positive or negative. One should not be prevented from worshiping according to their own conscience nor should someone be compelled to participate in anything that violates their faith.

The courts have ruled otherwise.

See, Jose, the reason why this argument is a total failure is because those who use it refuse to acknowledge that race and sexual behavior aren't synonymous.

See Dialogos, this is why your side keeps losing in court. No one is saying race and sexual orientation are synonymous. The point is, the legal principles are the same. Just as a Christian baker who believes the Bible teaches separation of the races cannot deny an interracial couple his services, a Christian baker who believes the Bible teaches opposite-sex marriage only cannot deny a same-sex couple his services.

Do you understand? It's the legal principles that are the same, not the people being discriminated against.

 

[Jose Fly]

​

Never said it was. Law that requires Christians to craft symbols representative of forces working actively against the Christian faith is bad law.

That's your opinion, and you're free to have it. Fortunately, society is moving away from discrimination rather than towards it.

That's not a good analogy.

Yes it is. The legal principles are exactly the same.

Try this one. A Christian baker is asked by belligerent LGBTQ/rainbow coalition people to bake a wedding cake with two grooms/brides, a clear symbol of anti-Christianity, and they aren't forced by bad law to do it.

And this is why your side keeps losing in court. No one buys that a wedding cake is actually a "clear symbol of anti-Christianity". That argument only resonates with your fellow fundamentalists.

A Jewish baker oughtn't be forced by any law to craft a wedding cake as a black swastika on a white circle on a crimson background. That's all I'm saying. Don't we agree ?

Are Nazi's a protected class in anti-discrimination laws?

 

[Jedidiah]

Law that requires Christians to craft symbols representative of forces working actively against the Christian faith is bad law.

That's your opinion...

Explain for me and others how this is an opinion. In what way is it an opinion ? I can only figure one way in which it is an opinion, and that is if we take your own apparent opinion as factual, that somehow, in some way, forcing Christians to craft for those militant against the historic Christian faith, symbols representative of that, is good. Do you really feel as if you're in the right here ? Or are you just trying to cause trouble ?

...Fortunately, society is moving away from discrimination rather than towards it...

The discrimination that we are moving towards -- and that apparently you are just fine with -- is against Christians, when laws attempt to force Christians to create symbols that perpetuate the myth that LGBTQ voluntary behaviors and lifestyle choices are safe, harmless, and even good, in direct contradiction to what the historic Christian faith has always believed and taught.

Emperor worship.

...Yes it is. The legal principles are exactly the same...

The legal principles would be exactly the same if there were today a symbol representing loving disapproval of LGBTQ-marriage, such as the Christian Cross in times past, and LGBTQ bakers were forced by law to create this symbol even if they feel it militates against them and their behaviors and lifestyle. Do you support the right of the LGBTQ baker to deny service to customers who make such a request ?

I do.

...this is why your side keeps losing in court. No one buys that a wedding cake is actually a "clear symbol of anti-Christianity". That argument only resonates with your fellow fundamentalists...

A cake is just a cake. A cake made with a black swastika on a white circle on a crimson background upon it, is not just a cake. And I've never argued anything otherwise.

I'm not talking about cakes, I'm talking about symbols. Two grooms/brides is a symbol. A Cross is a symbol. A rainbow is a symbol. A black swastika breaking to the right, upon a white circle, upon a crimson background, is a symbol. And if a customer desires a baker to craft a cake with a symbol repugnant to the baker's religious sensibilities, then there oughtn't be any law to force that baker to oblige that customer. You don't agree ?

A Jewish baker oughtn't be forced by any law to craft a wedding cake as a black swastika on a white circle on a crimson background. That's all I'm saying. Don't we agree ?

...Are Nazi's a protected class in anti-discrimination laws?

Do you agree with me, or don't you ?

 

[jeremysdemo]

If I were a gay baker, I'd have made the cake for the man. Cake is precious and decadent. We should use cake to bring mankind together (and make a profit), not tear us apart. So, some people think same-sex marriage is wrong and want a cake. I'd happily take their money and :chuckle: .

^this.

if i were a gay cake maker I would say tho, "I'll make the cake for ya but I ain't writing that on there! you'll have to write your own hate diatribes for your ceremonies."

 

[resodko]

Let's say I'm walking past a homeless person and give him some money. I walk past another one a block away and as I start to give him money he says that anything I give him will be used to go buy drugs. Do I have to give it to him anyway because I'd be a hypocrite for not asking what the previous beggar was going to use it for? :idunno:

you could just give him drugs instead of money :idunno:

 

[jeremysdemo]

I just buy them beer, I know that's what they are going to spend it on anyway! lol

 

[Jose Fly]

​

Explain for me and others how this is an opinion. In what way is it an opinion ?

?????????? You said it "is a bad law". That's a matter of opinion.

forcing Christians to craft for those militant against the historic Christian faith, symbols representative of that, is good.

Again, no one is forcing Christians to do anything. If a fundamentalist Christian baker can't serve the public, then why is he opening a business?

Do you really feel as if you're in the right here ? Or are you just trying to cause trouble ?

Of course I feel I'm in the right. And our society agrees with me.

The discrimination that we are moving towards -- and that apparently you are just fine with -- is against Christians, when laws attempt to force Christians to create symbols that perpetuate the myth that LGBTQ voluntary behaviors and lifestyle choices are safe, harmless, and even good, in direct contradiction to what the historic Christian faith has always believed and taught.

Wow...you sure do read a lot more into a simple wedding cake than is actually there.

The legal principles would be exactly the same if there were today a symbol representing loving disapproval of LGBTQ-marriage, such as the Christian Cross in times past, and LGBTQ bakers were forced by law to create this symbol even if they feel it militates against them and their behaviors and lifestyle.

Religion is also a protected class under anti-discrimination laws. So a gay baker can't refuse to bake a cake for a Christian either.

Do you support the right of the LGBTQ baker to deny service to customers who make such a request ?

To serve Christians? Of course not.

A cake is just a cake. A cake made with a black swastika on a white circle on a crimson background upon it, is not just a cake. And I've never argued anything otherwise.

And you miss the entire legal point.

I'm not talking about cakes, I'm talking about symbols. Two grooms/brides is a symbol. A Cross is a symbol. A rainbow is a symbol. A black swastika breaking to the right, upon a white circle, upon a crimson background, is a symbol. And if a customer desires a baker to craft a cake with a symbol repugnant to the baker's religious sensibilities, then there oughtn't be any law to force that baker to oblige that customer. You don't agree ?

Not in this case. Just as I think it's wrong for a banker to refuse to give home loans to gay couples, I think it's wrong for a baker to refuse to bake wedding cakes for gay couples.

 

[genuineoriginal]

If a fundamentalist Christian baker can't serve the public, then why is he opening a business?

The Christian baker serves the public. He said he would sell anything his store offers to homosexuals except a wedding cake.

Wow...you sure do read a lot more into a simple wedding cake than is actually there.

No, it is you that is reading less into a wedding cake than is actually there.
The wedding cake is a symbol of a ceremony that is based on the practice of marriage, which a Christian has to believe is between one man and a woman according to the longest held doctrines of the Christian faith.

Religion is also a protected class under anti-discrimination laws.

Which is why no Christian baker should be forced to make the choice to close up his shop or violate his conscience by acting against one of the longest held doctrines of the Christian faith.

I think it's wrong for a baker to refuse to bake wedding cakes for gay couples.

That is only because you are an anti-Christian bigot who delights in tormenting Christians.

 

[Jose Fly]

The Christian baker serves the public. He said he would sell anything his store offers to homosexuals except a wedding cake.

IOW, he's refusing that service to a member of the public solely because of their sexual orientation. That's illegal in the same way that a racist baker refusing to bake a wedding cake for an interracial couple is.

The wedding cake is a symbol of a ceremony that is based on the practice of marriage, which a Christian has to believe is between one man and a woman according to the longest held doctrines of the Christian faith.

Other Christians disagree. There is no requirement in Christianity to not bake wedding cakes for gay couples.

Which is why no Christian baker should be forced to make the choice to close up his shop or violate his conscience by acting against one of the longest held doctrines of the Christian faith.

The Christian baker isn't being discriminated against. He's being held to the same legal requirements as everyone else. Ironically, it's the fundamentalists who want "special treatment", i.e., a special exemption that allows them to violate the law and discriminate against gays.

That is only because you are an anti-Christian bigot who delights in tormenting Christians.

Oh brother....

 

[genuineoriginal]

IOW, he's refusing that service to a member of the public solely because of their sexual orientation. That's illegal in the same way that a racist baker refusing to bake a wedding cake for an interracial couple is.

No, he is refusing to violate his conscience by going against one of the longest held doctrines of the Christian faith.
It is illegal to prevent him from practicing his religion.

Other Christians disagree.

They have no say in the matter.

There is no requirement in Christianity to not bake wedding cakes for gay couples.

Sure there is. (Exodus 23:2)

The Christian baker isn't being discriminated against.

Of course the Christian baker is being discriminated against.
He is being denied the right to practice his religion, which is protected under the First Amendment to the supreme law of the land.

 

[Jose Fly]

No, he is refusing to violate his conscience by going against one of the longest held doctrines of the Christian faith.
It is illegal to prevent him from practicing his religion.

You have not demonstrated that not baking cakes for gay weddings is "one of the longest held doctrines of the Christian faith", nor have you demonstrated that baking one effectively prevents a Christian from being a Christian.

They have no say in the matter.

Why not?

Sure there is. (Exodus 23:2)

Nope. Doesn't say a word about cakes, weddings, or gays.

Of course the Christian baker is being discriminated against.
He is being denied the right to practice his religion, which is protected under the First Amendment to the supreme law of the land.

Nope. He's being held to the same standard of law as everyone else. IOW, he's being treated equally. What you're demanding is "special rights".

 

[genuineoriginal]

You have not demonstrated that not baking cakes for gay weddings is "one of the longest held doctrines of the Christian faith", nor have you demonstrated that baking one effectively prevents a Christian from being a Christian.

Baking a wedding cake for gays would require the baker to violate his conscience on one of the longest held doctrines of the Christian faith.
Do you want proof about the doctrine?
Here is what Jesus said about marriage:

Mark 10:6-9 6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. 7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; 8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. 9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.​

You did notice that Jesus specifically said male and female, right?

Why not?

Why don't people have a say in whether a person's strongly held religious beliefs are right when they don't have the same beliefs?
Because they don't have the same beliefs, of course.

Nope. He's being held to the same standard of law as everyone else. IOW, he's being treated equally. What you're demanding is "special rights".

Wrong, again.
He is only wanting to be able to practice his religion in peace, which your buddies want to prevent him from doing.
He is not refusing them service except for the one thing that would cause him to violate his strongly held religious beliefs.
You are asking for an exception to the law that permits him to practice his religion, which is you demanding special rights.

 

[TracerBullet]

Any business, organization, or individual should not only be free to discriminate against homosexuals, but it is the right thing to do. The behavior does not deserve equal rights, but equal justice with those who commit murder, child molestation, adultery, rape, etc.

Do you agree with that sentiment Traci?

of course not, I'm not a bigot

Can you prove this?

Can you prove otherwise?

Why would he want to go anywhere else?

Didin't ans my question at all

That's assuming homosexuality is as natural as skin, hair, eye, etc. color.

Can you prove it's not?

 

[TracerBullet]

Nothing to do with hate. It has to do with homosexuals being no different than child molesters, rapists, murderers, adulterers, etc. To not treat them the same as any other abhorrent criminals is an injustice to society. Allowing homosexuality to be celebrated is no different than give hearty approval to abortion.

Nothing but hate here

Again, why should your choice to hate trump others rights to be treated equally?

 

[TracerBullet]

Fatalism.

Did you choose your orientation?

 

[TracerBullet]

When someone steals, we refer to them as a "thief", if they murder, we call them a "murderer", or commit adultery, an "adulterer". They are defined by the act committed, that is, their evil behavior. There are not names to define those who do not commit those acts, because it makes no sense to label an individual for something they did not do.

When God created man, He created them male and female (Gen 1:27). He did not create them "straight" or "heterosexual". Those terms were created with the intention to legitimize homosexuality as an identity rather than a behavior. There is no such thing as a heterosexual, and the only people who are "gay" are those whose behavior is cheery or joyful. There is nothing joyful about evil behavior.

So you didn't choose to be hetersexual