Vae on 15/11/2016 at 08:47
Quote Posted by Renzatic
The Civil Rights Act of '64 prevents any company operating in the commercial sphere from discriminating against their customers over race, sex, creed, orientation, or nationality. Any exceptions to it now only serves to open up room for more exceptions later.
Exactly!...That means if someone comes into a Jewish bakery and wants a Nazi cake, they'll have to give it to them!
demagogue on 15/11/2016 at 08:51
Only if they provide Democrat and Republican cakes.
It's an equal protection case.
They're allowed to have no political cakes at all.
But if they provide them to one group, it should be to all.
Well there are some loopholes that might get them out of it even then.
Vae on 15/11/2016 at 08:55
You are correct, dema!...I was wondering if anyone would catch that detail.
If they make any political cakes, they must make the Nazi cake!
...or face the consequences!...:grr:
Matthew on 15/11/2016 at 09:34
Huh, thanks for pointing that one out to me.
Vivian on 15/11/2016 at 10:11
I don't think conflating being gay with being a nazi is going to help anyone.
Tony_Tarantula on 15/11/2016 at 14:58
Quote Posted by Yakoob
At the risk of sounding bigoted, I'm a little torn about this ruling. I'm all for LGBTQ rights, but I also support "freedom to refuse service" of a business. Maybe the fault is the business explained why, which is what is indeed discriminatory? Would it have been ok if they just said "no" and refused to explain why?
Not baking a cake is not quite like separate bathrooms or refusing to hire someone ala Jim Crowe laws, but I see how it's a slippery slope that could very well lead to that. So maybe play it safe on the side of non-discrimination in this case?
Ridiculous. According to TTLG, anything relating to a slippery slope argument is automatically invalid.
Quote:
Quite simply, if you want permission to operate a business servicing the public, then you need to provide that service to the public, which means you can't refuse services to people because they are gay, or black, or Canadian. Social cohesion depends on it, so there is a vested public interest in prohibiting this type of unresonable discrimination
So how do you feel about refusing to provide service to anyone that has a Trump sticker on their car? Would it be standing up against bigotry I assume?
Now how about if the religion in question is Westboro Baptist Church?
*using example because I am attempting to put the shoe on the other foot for you.
Vivian on 15/11/2016 at 15:14
Come on dude, 'being gay' and 'being in the westboro baptist church' are not equivalent states either.
Renzatic on 15/11/2016 at 15:14
Being a Nazi or Trump supporter are political stances, not religions or states of being, which aren't covered by the Civil Rights Act, and thus can be denied service. If, say, a white Christian couple walks into an Islamic bakery wanting some Halal food, and the owner doesn't like white people or Christians, he'd still have to serve them, regardless of his feelings, because being white and Christian are protected classes.
And yes, this includes the Westboro Baptist Church folk, providing they're minding their manners.
Tony_Tarantula on 15/11/2016 at 15:34
Quote Posted by Vivian
Come on dude, 'being gay' and 'being in the westboro baptist church' are not equivalent states either.
I think Renz answered your question. Westboro is technically a religion, which means they get covered under that law. Plenty of evidence may exist that they're really just running a lawsuit scam but that doesn't change the legal reality that they're a "religion".
Also note that you're conflating "being gay" with "participating in a gay wedding". I shouldn't need to explain the difference between the two from a civil liberties standpoint. You shouldn't be able to force people to participate in a gay wedding any more than you should be able to force gays to become straight.
Vivian on 15/11/2016 at 15:36
Tony, please explain the difference between being gay and participating in a gay wedding from a civil liberties standpoint. Then explain which one making a cake for someone is.
The issue I take with this is you are denying service to someone based on what they ARE, rather than what they think or what they do. So going ooooh well what if a nazi wanted a cake then, or a member of some religious shitfaces who think Satan makes IKEA furniture, what then Mr Gay Cake, it just seems stupid to me. Obfuscation. Like santorum and his box turtle comment.
ANYWAY. My original point was that getting worked up over having to sell a cake to people you don't like suggests that, given whats now going on, you might want to check your priorities.
