March 31, 2015

Apple's Gay CEO Tim Cook Wants to Boycott Indiana for Its Allegedly Anti-Gay RFRA, But Will Gladly Sell You an iPhone At Its Boutique in Riyadh, Where They'll Stone You to Death For Being Gay
— Ace

Of course.

I would seriously pin Apple's ears back over this. If you're a stockholder, write to them. Demand they stop selling iPhones in any country in which homosexuality remains a crime. (Homosexuality is an on-the-books crime in most countries, still, not just the ones where they actually stone gays to death.)

Tim Cook, and all the rest of the gay leftwing bullies, are of course bullying people.

As usual.

Few people ever refused service to gays at bakeries before gay marriage. There was not some great scourge of people refusing service to gays.

What people are doing is refusing to take part in a gay marriage ceremony.

They are refusing to endorse a political act. Which is their right.

Gays are not being denied cookies or donuts at a bakery. They are only being denied gay wedding cakes, because the latter, unlike the former, constitutes a political act which violates their religious understanding.

If a printer refused to print up "OBAMA IS A KENYAN COMMUNIST BILLS," would the bullies say the person demanding he print those up could compel him to do so by calling the cops?

Of course not, of course not. The Left's conscience is a sacred thing which must never be offended.

While they meanwhile use Police State tactics to obliterate everyone else's.


Posted by: Ace at 08:47 AM | Comments (1008)
Post contains 287 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Tim Cook is a yammering half-wit.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at March 31, 2015 08:49 AM (8ZskC)

2 HOLY COW! Yesterday, when someone said the MSM will soon blame the NSA gatecrashers of being "Tea Party types," I said they more likely will end up being "Lemon Party types." Hahaha. And just now it was revealed: I WAS RIGHT! http://tinyurl.com/oxxh355 The two crossdressers had been involved in a gay orgy with a 60-year-old guy and then stole his car and took the wrong exit from the freeway and ended up at the NSA gates and panicked. THEY WERE INDEED LEMON PARTY TYPES! Life imitates satire.

Posted by: zombie at March 31, 2015 08:50 AM (K4YiS)

3 Well, well said, Ace.

Posted by: Seems Legit at March 31, 2015 08:50 AM (A98Xu)

4 I've been pushing this all morning, but I'll do it one more time. Link in sig to great Molly Hemingway article listing 10 people who've used these types of religious freedom bills in the past. Hint: It's not a bunch of bible thumping Christians.

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 08:50 AM (MYCIw)

5 If I order bacon in a muslim-owned restaurant, I think they should have to cook it. I'll bring it myself if I have to. Because, anti-discrimination and shit.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at March 31, 2015 08:51 AM (8ZskC)

6 Do as I say not as I do...

Posted by: hello, it's Me Donna ....again at March 31, 2015 08:51 AM (Bn6aD)

7 Corgis called.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i] at March 31, 2015 08:51 AM (DXB+X)

8

Yes, Cook is a hypocrite.

 

But I predict bad things for this thread.

Posted by: Bandersnatch, now half gay at March 31, 2015 08:51 AM (JtwS4)

9 If you want to get the LIVs and the youth vote/internet crowd fired up, just tell them something is "oppressing the gays." Iran could set off a nuke tomorrow and this Indiana crap would still be dominating the news.

Posted by: brak at March 31, 2015 08:52 AM (Tj+s6)

10 Thus proving that liberals don't give a shit about civil rights anywhere except where they, themselves, might live, even when their civil rights are not endangered.  You could also make the case about womyn's rights here and in the muslim world.

Posted by: huerfano at March 31, 2015 08:52 AM (bAGA/)

11

@2

Really? Wow, that's.....that's ridiculously weird.

Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Plush Porcupine at March 31, 2015 08:52 AM (k8xvx)

12 The Left is using the Gay Mafia to cripple Christianity.

And only Christianity.

They don't give a shit about human rights, or even gay rights: it's all about tearing Western Civilization down, making the rubble bounce, and building their new Prison Planet on its ruins -- ruled by Them.

That is all.

Posted by: Beverly at March 31, 2015 08:52 AM (3SiAu)

13 "that's different"...

said by  every leftard caught in a contradiction, ever.

Posted by: redc1c4 at March 31, 2015 08:52 AM (lsWof)

14 9 If you want to get the LIVs and the youth vote/internet crowd fired up, just tell them something is "oppressing the gays." Iran could set off a nuke tomorrow and this Indiana crap would still be dominating the news. Sadly You are right...

Posted by: hello, it's Me Donna ....again at March 31, 2015 08:52 AM (Bn6aD)

15 I want to support the RFRAs, I really do. But what stops them from being used by someone who claims that interracial marriages are contrary to their religion? Or that their religion frowns on black people, so that they won't sell wedding cakes to black couples? Recall that, as part of the RFRA framework, government generally won't inquire into the genuineness or sincerity of the religious belief. And yes, I know, racial discrimination is different than opposition to gay marriage, but it's still discrimination based on an immutable characteristic.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 08:52 AM (XsOa7)

16 Oh, and on-topic: Leftists are hypocrites? With double standards? STOP THE PRESSES! Yes, Ace is right: barrage Apple with emails about this. You should never go full retard -- but always go full Alinsky!

Posted by: zombie at March 31, 2015 08:53 AM (K4YiS)

17 Barack Obama is a SCOAMT.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 08:53 AM (kff5f)

18 They have no conscience, Its just hanger ons kicking it with the 'in' crowd to stay relevant. by relevant i mean to hang out at political cocktail parties and stay immensely rich . Their flagrantly political acts are to make certain they are always at the power players tables.

Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 08:53 AM (nqBYe)

19

The invite said "Respondez S'il Vous Plait" and they did.

 

What's the problem?

Posted by: Bigby's Ring Finger at March 31, 2015 08:54 AM (3ZtZW)

20 The Left's conscience is a sacred thing which must never be offended.

I've also noticed that Hobby Lobby isn't allowed to have a conscience because it's a (privately owned) business, but (publicly owned) Apple can and must.

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at March 31, 2015 08:54 AM (/kI1Q)

21 Burn it down. Scatter the stones. Salt the earth where it stood.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 08:54 AM (kff5f)

22 I really find it sad that so many people want to force others to participate in gay weddings. I don't think they'll change their minds until we start making them participate in things that they don't like.

Posted by: Draki at March 31, 2015 08:54 AM (0eidE)

23 If you want to get the LIVs and the youth vote/internet crowd fired up, just tell them something is "oppressing the gays." I wonder why homosexuality is such a compelling cause to them. On the face of it, it seems an unlikely issue to get people worked up so easily.

Posted by: Grey Fox at March 31, 2015 08:55 AM (4hIUY)

24 I asked a gay friend of mine (46 y.o.a.) what he thought about the moslems tying gay men to chairs, throwing them off of roofs, and stoning them to death. He paused just a hair, then said, "Why do they have to tie them to chairs?" in an irritated tone. Irritated with me, that is.

I said, "Doesn't it BUG you that they're killing gay men?" and he literally shrugged.

They're motivated by hate (of Christians and the West), not by love (of their fellow homosexuals).

Posted by: Beverly at March 31, 2015 08:55 AM (3SiAu)

25 Or that their religion frowns on black people, so that they won't sell wedding cakes to black couples?" Which religion is this...?

Posted by: Head Football Coach Howard Schnellenberger at March 31, 2015 08:55 AM (fMSaY)

26 I propose that "Apple's Ostentatiously Gay CEO" should be the AoSHQ stylebook standard for Tim Cook.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at March 31, 2015 08:55 AM (8ZskC)

27 Better than this is the CT governor who will ban state activity with IN while CT's got the same law.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 08:55 AM (MMC8r)

28 #22 Allen, that belongs on Drew's post!

Posted by: Draki at March 31, 2015 08:55 AM (0eidE)

29 19 You have to a real asshole to support anything Apple. Posted by: unbuntu Not true. I buy their products because they "just work" and are easy to use and make my life simpler. But even so, I can turn around and criticize them. Capitalism (at which Apple is very very good) trumps social politics (at which it is very very bad) every time.

Posted by: zombie at March 31, 2015 08:55 AM (K4YiS)

30 fuck 'em all. that's all I got. fuck 'em all.

Posted by: ghost of hallelujah at March 31, 2015 08:55 AM (7RXcs)

31

 "But what stops them from being used by someone"

 

Posted by: JoeShmoe99

 

Wow, utter horseshit. Try applying this to the precious Dear Leader. No one in the Federal government ives one flying frig about this.

 

Obama has "a pen and a phone".

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 31, 2015 08:55 AM (Spluw)

32 Look, a hippocritopotamus!

Posted by: Muldoon, a solid man at March 31, 2015 08:55 AM (NeFrd)

33 God I hate the celebrity-worship culture that we have gotten to in the US. Who cares what this guy says? Why is he featured in the WaPo? Because he is a celebrity (CEO of an iconic company). Also he gets soapbox points because he himself is gay, which of course has no bearing on his actual argument. Our country is fu***d. SMOD 2016.

Posted by: dan-O at March 31, 2015 08:55 AM (D0bIN)

34 Of course you could always just not overpay for inferior product and stop buying Apple. I want to support the RFRAs, I really do. Yes, and you have voted Conservative since Calvin Coolidge in your Christian Conservative Republican household, I'm sure.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 08:56 AM (39g3+)

35 "I wonder why homosexuality is such a compelling cause to them. On the face of it, it seems an unlikely issue to get people worked up so easily." Because they're told it's just like the 60s Civil Rights movement, it's being on the right side of history, and it imbues you with irretrievable moral goodness to support it.

Posted by: Head Football Coach Howard Schnellenberger at March 31, 2015 08:56 AM (fMSaY)

36 So will they close all Apple stores in Indiana?

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 08:56 AM (MMC8r)

37 This is allllll good for Hillary! This isn't a squirrel, it's a giant, sabertoothed, ghey eating, muzzie hating squirrel. Rock on MFM.

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at March 31, 2015 08:56 AM (5buP8)

38 *ahem* You have no Right to what someone else must produce (a good) or provide (a service). We have a term for an economic system in which some *do* have a Right to what someone else must produce or provide. We abolished that economic system in the 19th century, here in the United States.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 08:56 AM (kff5f)

39

So I went to Godaddy but "gaydivorcecourt.com" was already taken.

Posted by: wth at March 31, 2015 08:57 AM (wAQA5)

40 >>Yesterday, when someone said the MSM will soon blame the NSA gatecrashers of being "Tea Party types," I said they more likely will end up being "Lemon Party types." Hahaha.

And just now it was revealed: I WAS RIGHT!



Dang, zombie, I was sure it would be Tea party - now I have to google Lemon party, huh?

Posted by: Lizzy[/i] at March 31, 2015 08:57 AM (TLTHv)

41 But what stops them from being used by someone who claims that interracial marriages are contrary to their religion? Or that their religion frowns on black people, so that they won't sell wedding cakes to black couples? Please cite specific examples of religions that currently do this, and the doctrine they're basing it on

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 31, 2015 08:57 AM (DXzRD)

42 I'm a Mac guy, but they can stick the iWatch up their liberal asses

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 08:57 AM (rDqRv)

43 Better than this is the CT governor who will ban state activity with IN while CT's got the same law. And the president who personally worked to pass the same law while he was a state senator in Illinois. The hypocrisy only burns if you're on the right though. You can't be hypocritical if you have no integrity or honor to begin with.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 08:57 AM (39g3+)

44 "But what stops them from being used by someone who claims that interracial marriages are contrary to their religion" Nothing, but that doesn't mean that the person will be successful in their appeal. All religious freedom laws do is require the government to prove that they a) have a legitimate reason for banning/requiring and act and b)are acting in the least restrictive manner when doing something that infringes upon the expression of religion. If someone says "I don't want to marry no biracial couple because God told me it's a sin!" the state can come back with a claim about its role in protecting the rights of citizens, it's role in marriage, ect. It's not a "be a bigot for free" card. And most states do require some test of the earnestness of the person's beliefs. There was a case involving some pot heads who said they belonged to the Church of Potheads or some made up crap, and they were promptly laughed out of court.

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 08:57 AM (MYCIw)

45 Angie's List is on the bully bandwagon too.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 31, 2015 08:57 AM (DXzRD)

46 "Our country is fu***d. SMOD 2016. " but I don't think I can wait that long

Posted by: Head Football Coach Howard Schnellenberger at March 31, 2015 08:57 AM (fMSaY)

47 You have to have the current correct thoughts. 

Posted by: Penfold at March 31, 2015 08:57 AM (Fbt5B)

48 Posted by: Draki at March 31, 2015 01:55 PM (0eidE) It should be there. It's one of my 2 standard posts (along with Barack Obama is a SCOAMT).

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 08:57 AM (kff5f)

49 Well at least the fascist mask has slipped off completely now.

If the left is resorting to comparing a baker refusing to make a specifically gay themed marriage cake to Jim Crow even they know they're just agitating hate and are abandoning all pretense of facts and a moral cause.

Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 08:58 AM (TJ8HB)

50 By even discussing this we are engaging in the left's two minutes of hatred.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 08:58 AM (XUKZU)

51 Ace -- you see Gabe's surprisingly well written piece (not so shocking was the condescending 'tude) at the Federalist where he defended the legislation? Shocker, I tell ya.

Posted by: SE Pa Moron [/i] at March 31, 2015 08:58 AM (xQX/f)

52 now I have to google Lemon party, huh? Posted by: Lizzy at March 31, 2015 01:57 PM (TLTHv) If you value your sanity- just don't.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 08:58 AM (kff5f)

53

@45

Great points, Lauren.

Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Plush Porcupine at March 31, 2015 08:58 AM (k8xvx)

54 Angie's List is on the bully bandwagon too. Ditto Yelp's CEO. Social Justice Warrior is the new black.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at March 31, 2015 08:58 AM (8ZskC)

55  I want to support the RFRAs, I really do. But what stops them from being used by someone who claims that interracial marriages are contrary to their religion? Or that their religion frowns on black people, so that they won't sell wedding cakes to black couples? Recall that, as part of the RFRA framework, government generally won't inquire into the genuineness or sincerity of the religious belief.

And yes, I know, racial discrimination is different than opposition to gay marriage, but it's still discrimination based on an immutable characteristic.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 01:52 PM (XsOa7)

 

 

-----------------------------------------------

 

 

You're really reaching,  aren't you.   What religion, of the top of your head, is prejudice against blacks?  What religion demands non-service to any race?  

 

This isn't about race, it's about  one's own religious morality.  But something tells me you  know nothing about that.

Posted by: Al Roker at March 31, 2015 08:59 AM (/HX7u)

56 DON'T GOOGLE LEMON PARTY.

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 08:59 AM (MYCIw)

57 Above and beyond Cook's hypocrisy, I am annoyed that he felt the need to comment on this at all, just as I am annoyed by NASCAR.

This is getting to be choreographed Two Minutes of Hate sessions for whatever "controversy" the MSM cooks up.

Posted by: Lizzy[/i] at March 31, 2015 08:59 AM (TLTHv)

58 We have a term for an economic system in which some *do* have a Right to what someone else must produce or provide. We abolished that economic system in the 19th century, here in the United States.

And then in the 1930s, FDR brought "the right to what someone else must produce/provide" back with his damnable Four Freedoms.

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at March 31, 2015 08:59 AM (/kI1Q)

59 If someone says "I don't want to marry no biracial couple because God told me it's a sin!"... Then they're an idiot and do not understand the Bible, but they should be free to be so. Under no circumstances does anyone have the right to compel service from another. Ever. You might have the legal power to do so, in certain specific circumstances, but no right.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 08:59 AM (39g3+)

60 Angie's List is desperately attempting to divert attention from the lawsuits against for misleading its members about reviews.

Posted by: Penfold at March 31, 2015 08:59 AM (Fbt5B)

61 Gays and Lesbians should have additional rights because of the torture they had to endure while Bush was Presdent.

Posted by: Mary Clogginstein from Brattleboro, VT at March 31, 2015 08:59 AM (Sd++4)

62 I hope that the states the GOP took over in the last election start enacting copies of CT's RFRA law.

Posted by: Iblis at March 31, 2015 09:00 AM (9221z)

63 In Utah our gov just signed a bill similar to RFRA but it also addresses increasing protections for gays. Is very strong on first amendment rights, and they wrote the bill so you could not keep in the gay rights stuff but strip out the religious first amendment stuff; to do so voided the whole bill. The LDS church leaders wholeheartedly endorsed the bill, which helped its passage. Looks like we got it passed in the nick of time, before the crazy train on this issue left the station!

Posted by: LizLem at March 31, 2015 09:00 AM (yRwC8)

64 Off shitty-panted sock

Posted by: Soona at March 31, 2015 09:00 AM (/HX7u)

65 It was completely manifest that the gheys sponsored by the radical left would have behaved like spoiled brats once they started getting some grounds. It was a clear cut case of give them an inch and they take a mile. In retrospect, it was a mistake to even grant them civil unions because, any half intelligent person knows where we are heading to. There is also another aspect which was extremely easy to guess: MSM will cover up, misinform, muddle up any lie said by any representative of Big Anus (TM), in this case Tim Cook. He flat out told lies in his statement but nobody is calling him out on it, exactly like they would do with a Democrat politician. Same for the Dolce and Gabbana statement. An entirely legit opinion turned into a feces throwing match (one-way) from the ever tolerant ghey left. And consider that Elton John beside being a fag, he was perceived to be not extremely leftist (based on his opinion of Israel and the Rush Limbaugh marriage). Dissent is forbidden. Again, entirely predictable. I hope all the idiots that have said for decades that they have no opinion on ghey marriage or that it does not change their lives altogether are intellectually honest enough to admit that they are responsible for the consequences. So the only reason why you still deny that this will lead to the entire criminalization of people with some religious conscience is that you too want to eliminate religion altogether. For the rest, you have been 200% idiot, it is like voting Barak Obama twice. There are no excuses.

Posted by: fromabroad at March 31, 2015 09:00 AM (rnV3B)

66 How long before iPay makes automatic payments to the gay charity/lobby of Apple's choice?

Posted by: Fritz at March 31, 2015 09:00 AM (ty633)

67 One other one: I was talking to an old lefty friend two days ago (in her 60s, intelligent, in some ways quite well informed) and said, "Israel has Gay Pride Day; the Palestinians torture and kill them. Why do you hate the Israelis?" She said two insane things:

1. The Israelis are "invading and oppressing" subject peoples. They're like the English colonizing Ireland, she snapped (she's [remotely] Irish Canadian).

2. She shrugged off the moslems' torture and killing of gays. Didn't even address it.

3. Then said, venomously, "Sooo -- the JEWS can't do anything wrong. They're ALWAYS the victims. Yeah."

She's a Jew-hater, plain and simple. Yes, that really is part of the Left's New Deal. They don't give a shite about human rights, women's rights, gay rights, or any of that noise, because they drop them instantly if their Paleo pals violate all the above.

Their "rights" jihads are simply, only, and ALWAYS just a bludgeon to beat the crap out of anyone who opposes their lust for power. Power first, power last, power always.

Posted by: Beverly at March 31, 2015 09:00 AM (3SiAu)

68 Under no circumstances does anyone have the right to compel service from another. Ever. Do tell.

Posted by: Ollie McClung's Barbecue at March 31, 2015 09:00 AM (8ZskC)

69 In case anyone thinks comment #2 was just a joke -- it wasn't: Motel 'party' with strangers preceded spy agency shooting ORT MEADE, Md. (AP) — Two cross-dressing men who were shot at by National Security Agency police when they disobeyed orders at a heavily guarded gate had just stolen a car from a man who picked them up for a motel "party," police said Tuesday. One suspect was killed and the other was injured, along with an NSA police officer, as the driver of the stolen SUV apparently tried to get away from the guards. The SUV's owner, a 60-year-old man from Baltimore who has not been publicly identified, told investigators that he had picked up the two strangers in Baltimore. They arrived around 7:30 a.m. Monday to "party" at the nearby Terrace Motel in Elkridge, Howard County Police said. Police spokeswoman Mary Phelan told The Associated Press on Tuesday that she "can't confirm there was any sexual activity involved," and declined to elaborate on whether drugs or alcohol were part of their "party." The SUV owner told police that he went to the bathroom about an hour after checking in to a room, and when he came out, the others were gone, along with his car keys. He called police to report the stolen car. Minutes later, just before 9 a.m., the men took a highway exit that leads directly to a restricted area at the NSA entrance at Fort Meade. The FBI said Monday that agents do not believe terrorism was their motive. No one has explained yet why the men ended up outside the NSA. However, the new timeline suggests they may have simply taken a wrong turn while fleeing the motel, about 12 minutes away.

Posted by: zombie at March 31, 2015 09:00 AM (K4YiS)

70 Angie's List is on the bully bandwagon too.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke

 

I was NOT paid to do this.....And if you say so, I'll have your legs broken

Posted by: Angie at March 31, 2015 09:00 AM (Spluw)

71 I reckon homosexual rights is tied in with skanks' rights and cads' rights. The LIVs supporting it are really supporting their own right to "choose", namely their choice to bang the bass-player and not raise the bastard. Or, for that matter, the bass-player's right to bang skanks. Don't you judge THEM!

Posted by: boulder terlit hobo at March 31, 2015 09:00 AM (uYUVu)

72 Left just wants to use Gay Marriage as a weapon to attack Christians. They want the State to destroy Christianity.

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 09:01 AM (ZPrif)

73 I wonder why homosexuality is such a compelling cause to them. Because it goes to the heart of issues about what it means to be human and to be a family. Destroy those meanings, and you can manipulate damn near everything.

Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 09:01 AM (EaH5U)

74 No chaps, no pink cowboy hat, NO SERVICE.

Posted by: Castro Street Bakery at March 31, 2015 09:01 AM (wAQA5)

75 Angie's List is on the bully bandwagon too. *** So is NASCAR.

Posted by: Muldoon, a solid man at March 31, 2015 09:01 AM (NeFrd)

76 "OBAMA IS A KENYAN COMMUNIST BILLS," Inquiring to purchase your honorable catch-phrase for T-shirt printing, please, thank you.

Posted by: Crazy English T-shirt Co. from Japan[/i] [/b] at March 31, 2015 09:01 AM (JBzwC)

77

The difference between Indiana and China/ Saudi Arabia? The Christians are not perceived as the ones doing the oppressing. Therefore Tim Cook simply doesn't care.

Kinda like how feminists here in the States as so angry at the oppressive Judeo-Christian patriarchy but don't make two hoots in hell over worse regimes in the Middle East and elsewhere.

Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Plush Porcupine at March 31, 2015 09:02 AM (k8xvx)

78

It's why I got a Samsung Galaxy. Haven't used anything apple since the 80's when we used an Apple ][e. This substandard slimeball slithers to the top of Apple, and suddenly he thinks he's Alan Turing. F*ck you, Cook. Your crap company is redundant.

Posted by: Bruce Jenner at March 31, 2015 09:02 AM (xkSSa)

79 Free market tends to work these things out, you don't need to lawyer up----gays who want Christians to make them wedding cakes, I'm looking at you! Go to another bakery. But nooooooo, those Christians must conform!

Posted by: Seems Legit at March 31, 2015 09:02 AM (A98Xu)

80 The Left obsesses over Gay Marriage for the same reason they obsess over Evolution, but not Particle Physics. The Left only cares about Gay Marriage and Evolution cause they think they are useful weapons to attack Christians. The use Evolution to attack certain Protestant sects. It's not effective against Catholics since the Catholic Church is cool wit Evolution. Catholic Church isn't cool with Gay Marriage, though, so Gay Marriage is a useful weapon to attack them.

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 09:03 AM (ZPrif)

81 Ace Ace Ace, don't you know you can't use the term "bully" anymore?

Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at March 31, 2015 09:03 AM (YYJjz)

82 And then in the 1930s, FDR brought "the right to what someone else must produce/provide" back with his damnable Four Freedoms. Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at March 31, 2015 01:59 PM (/kI1Q And if I could go back in time and strangle him, I'd be mighty tempted to do so. But I will say until my dying day: You have no right to what someone else must produce or provide. Whether society hears it or not, I don't know; I'm just one voice. But I'll say it all the same.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 09:03 AM (kff5f)

83 I demand Ace publish pro-Obama articles!

Posted by: Puffington Host at March 31, 2015 09:03 AM (LISuA)

84 As for why they care so much about this, it's really simple. Their dads oppose it.

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 09:03 AM (MYCIw)

85 The two crossdressers had been involved in a gay orgy with a 60-year-old guy and then stole his car and took the wrong exit from the freeway and ended up at the NSA gates and panicked. - So homophobia claims another victim.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 09:03 AM (XUKZU)

86 The two crossdressers had been involved in a gay orgy with a 60-year-old guy and then stole his car and took the wrong exit from the freeway and ended up at the NSA gates and panicked. - So homophobia claims another victim.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 09:03 AM (XUKZU)

87 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 01:52 PM (XsOa7)

In short: anti-discrimination laws dealing with black civil rights were first aimed at legal discrimination (e.g., Jim Crow laws were laws that demanded discrimination) and private discrimination (e.g., private businesses discriminating) and argued that even though they did violate the right of association, assembly, speech, religion, etc they were necessary because discrimination against blacks was so intense and pervasive in society that blacks could not vote, get a good job, participate in society, etc.
Gays do not face such discrimination.  Not even close.  They don't warrant was was supposed to be a special, one-time use of state power to over-ride freedoms enumerated in the bill of rights.  But this is the very thing Barry Goldwater feared with the Civil Rights Act of '64.  And he was right.  Now such things are done commonly and not in reaction to massive oppression of basic rights.

In short: getting denied a wedding cake is not the same as Jim Crow.

Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 09:03 AM (nyxv/)

88 I really have no confidence the idiots who write these types of bills (lawyers/legislators) are capable of doing so in a way that cannot eventually be overturned in court. I think it's part of the game for many of them. Take home to your constituents, the fact that you supported religious freedom! While on the other side they take home to theirs that they saved gays from discrimination! Meanwhile, nobody ever has their lives improved, except the parasites in the Legal Industrial Complex.

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2015 09:03 AM (Dj0WE)

89 Well I never used Angie's list and they're going bankrupt anyway. Firefox is hitting the skids Apple will follow. Unless Cook is jettisoned.

Posted by: Iblis at March 31, 2015 09:03 AM (9221z)

90 Gays are not being denied cookies or donuts at a bakery. They are only being denied gay wedding cakes, Exactly the same bullshit we went through with Sandra Fluck: Women weren't being denied birth control. They were being denied free birth control available at their whimsy.

Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 09:03 AM (FRLeJ)

91 You really should try our glazed donut.

Posted by: Castro Street Bakery at March 31, 2015 09:03 AM (wAQA5)

92 The problem with modern people is that they do not comprehend that liberty necessarily has an ugly side. Back when the left was more about liberty, they would say they'd fight to the death to defend your right to say something even if they disagreed with it. Even just 10 years ago you'd hear them talk about tolerance, which is putting up with things you don't personally like and disagree with. Today, everyone seems to think that you can't hold positions or believe things that are unpopular or politically incorrect. That this isn't just mistaken but is evil and must be stopped by government power and legal action. The line has been crossed between swinging your fist and hitting my face when you compel people to violate their conscience. And it has been crossed even more when you try to legally compel businesses to serve and do things they do not care to.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 09:03 AM (39g3+)

93 HotAir.com @hotairblog 2m We're "disappointed" in Indiana for passing RFRA, says NASCAR http://hotair.com/?p=3779993

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 09:03 AM (ZPrif)

94 "So is NASCAR." way to know your constituency fucking idiots

Posted by: Head Football Coach Howard Schnellenberger at March 31, 2015 09:04 AM (fMSaY)

95 So it's really about access, again. Access to impose YOUR will upon Other.

Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 09:04 AM (FRLeJ)

96 What religion demands non-service to any race?

Nation of Islam forbids interracial marriages.

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at March 31, 2015 09:04 AM (/kI1Q)

97 Money matters.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at March 31, 2015 09:04 AM (W5DcG)

98 By even discussing this we are engaging in the left's two minutes of hatred. Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 01:58 PM (XUKZU) great point. Hey why would anyone want to give business to someone who doens't want to deal with them anyway? I never understood that?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 09:04 AM (rDqRv)

99 Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 02:01 PM (EaH5U) This. Posted by: Muldoon, a solid man at March 31, 2015 02:01 PM (NeFrd) Obviously NASCAR has forgotten who makes up their biggest demographic.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 09:04 AM (kff5f)

100 So can a Jewish Baker be forced to cater to a Nazi group's event? Or make a cake that says "Heil Hitler! The Holocaust isn't real!"? I have a Mormon friend who shoots video for a living and has been approached to shoot pornography, which he always refuses. If he lives in a state where it's legal, can he be sued if he turns them down?

Posted by: VBJonny at March 31, 2015 09:04 AM (oOsa/)

101 The Indy 500 Shades of Gray.

Posted by: zombie at March 31, 2015 09:04 AM (K4YiS)

102 Posted by: Beverly at March 31, 2015 01:55 PM (3SiAu) I suspect he was annoyed at *you* because at some level he knew he really *should* care and had to face the reality that he didn't.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at March 31, 2015 09:04 AM (GDulk)

103 Free market tends to work these things out, you don't need to lawyer up----gays who want Christians to make them wedding cakes, I'm looking at you! - What food leads to years of anger, resentment and regrets? The wedding cake! Try the veal!

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 09:05 AM (XUKZU)

104 If there's one thing we at NASCAR hate, it's the homophobic, gun-toting, bible-clinging, right-wing, redneck nutjobs that make up the majority of our fanbase.

Posted by: NASCAR at March 31, 2015 09:05 AM (ZPrif)

105 The argument that Indiana is the 20th state so what's the big deal is ridiculous. That just means that 19 other states have a fucked up law. You'll probably see a bunch of those other 19 states move to strike the law from their books.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 09:06 AM (0LHZx)

106 So is NASCAR.

Posted by: Muldoon, a solid man

 

I never thought that they would all turn left.

Posted by: Angie at March 31, 2015 09:06 AM (Spluw)

107 Exactly the same bullshit we went through with Sandra Fluck: Women weren't being denied birth control. They were being denied free birth control available at their whimsy. Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 02:03 PM (FRLeJ) --------- Yes^^ And NASCAR needs to fire their PR people, dumbasses.

Posted by: Seems Legit at March 31, 2015 09:06 AM (A98Xu)

108 Number of times gays (3%) get married (.3%) and go to a baker with religious objections (.0003%, unless it's deliberate lawfare). Contrived social issue, fake crisis, battlefield prep by the Left.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:06 AM (MMC8r)

109 >>Obviously NASCAR has forgotten who makes up their biggest demographic.

I know, right? No who wants to have a conversation about wife beaters during the Super Bowl?!!

Posted by: NFL at March 31, 2015 09:06 AM (TLTHv)

110 This NSA story gets better and better, but for the fact some tranny hooker died in the process.

Posted by: MTF, vote for someone the GOP insiders hate! at March 31, 2015 09:06 AM (LISuA)

111 It's a civil rights issue because they simply can't avoid sticking their dicks in their boyfriends' mouths and anuses or even avoid thinking about it. Why, it's just like "being black." Have I got the logic right?

Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 09:06 AM (EaH5U)

112 Will NASCAR mandate rainbow paint jobs on the cars?

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at March 31, 2015 09:07 AM (W5DcG)

113 Thanks for this post, Ace. I appreciate the fact that even though you personally support gay marriage you can very well see the hypocrisy of Apple's CEO POV. It's all about the money, of course and sticking his finger in the eye of Christians because seriously there is nobody whop couldn't get a cake made for a gay wedding unless a Christian baker who adamantly opposes gay marriage was the only baker around. Huge numbers of people in the baking business and catering are gay.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 31, 2015 09:07 AM (DXzRD)

114 nti-discrimination laws dealing with black civil rights were first aimed at legal discrimination and argued that even though they did violate the right of association, assembly, speech, religion, etc they were necessary because discrimination against blacks was so intense and pervasive in society that blacks could not vote, get a good job, participate in society, etc. Yes, they were unconstitutional and improper in a free society. How blacks were being treated was evil and wrong and never should have happened, particularly in a free society. But violating the constitution and restricting liberty was just as bad and we're paying the price now for that willingness to crush liberty for the sake of being nicer and fairer. Liberty is hard, ugly, and confusing much of the time, which is why people so easily and swiftly surrender it for comfort, ease, and predictability.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 09:07 AM (39g3+)

115 Tim Cook is a yammering half-wit. And a well known liar, at least, well known in his home town.

Posted by: toby928(C) at March 31, 2015 09:07 AM (evdj2)

116 Whatever happened to all those signs that said "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone"? Lots of stores had them when I was a kid, but now, apparently, businesses are the fourth branch of government--you know, the one that the rest of government actually forces to follow its decrees.

Posted by: jwpaine at March 31, 2015 09:07 AM (a3NCX)

117 I really have no confidence the idiots who write these types of bills (lawyers/legislators) are capable of doing so in a way that cannot eventually be overturned in court. IIRC, the exact wording (or close enough) of this bill has been tried at SCOTUS at least once- and very specifically stood up to judicial review.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 09:07 AM (kff5f)

118 I give Angie one-and-a-half stars.

Posted by: Angie's first husband at March 31, 2015 09:07 AM (NeFrd)

119 The Left only cares about Gay Marriage and Evolution cause they think they are useful weapons to attack Christians. - I agree. They are suing a sword and object if we use a shield.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 09:07 AM (XUKZU)

120 "That just means that 19 other states have a fucked up law. " Why do you want to make Indian children cry at their pow wows?

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 09:08 AM (MYCIw)

121 73 Left just wants to use Gay Marriage as a weapon to attack Christians. They want the State to destroy Christianity. Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 02:01 PM (ZPrif) This is part of the endgame. It's an intersection of several of the 45 Communist goals that were read into the Congressional Record in 1963.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 09:08 AM (2Ojst)

122 >>Number of times gays (3%) get married (.3%) and go to a baker with religious objections (.0003%, unless it's deliberate lawfare).

The lawsuits are about intimidation - putting others on notice the Must Not Dissent or they will be destroyed.

It's about banishing a view from the discussion.

Posted by: NFL at March 31, 2015 09:08 AM (TLTHv)

123 I never understood that? Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 02:04 PM (rDqRv) ------- Because it's not about a friggen cake, they were targeted for political reasons.

Posted by: Seems Legit at March 31, 2015 09:08 AM (A98Xu)

124 Tim Cook...doing the h8 comfortably in America, which would get him beheaded in Saudi Arabia....or pretty much anywhere else in the mid east. What a brave soul.

Posted by: Russkilitlover at March 31, 2015 09:08 AM (K1mhl)

125 101 So can a Jewish Baker be forced to cater to a Nazi group's event? Or make a cake that says "Heil Hitler! The Holocaust isn't real!"? I have a Mormon friend who shoots video for a living and has been approached to shoot pornography, which he always refuses. If he lives in a state where it's legal, can he be sued if he turns them down? Posted by: VBJonny at March 31, 2015 02:04 PM (oOsa/) ___________ A better example would be a Mormon (or anyone for that matter) who refuses to shoot gay porn but will do straight porn. Simply refusing to shoot porn isn't the same, since it's not discriminating against a group of people. But refusing to shoot GAY porn, that is the same as refusing to sell a cake for a gay wedding. Now that would be an interesting court case.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 09:09 AM (0LHZx)

126 If there's one thing we at NASCAR hate, it's the homophobic, gun-toting, bible-clinging, right-wing, redneck nutjobs that make up the majority of our fanbase. - You said it! - The GOPe

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 09:09 AM (XUKZU)

127 Will NASCAR mandate rainbow paint jobs on the cars? **** Dude!!??

Posted by: Jeff Gordon's brother-in-law at March 31, 2015 09:09 AM (NeFrd)

128

The Left is using the Gay Mafia to cripple Christianity.

 

And only Christianity.

 

They don't give a shit about human rights, or even gay rights: it's all about tearing Western Civilization down, making the rubble bounce, and building their new Prison Planet on its ruins -- ruled by Them.

 

That is all.

 

Posted by: Beverly at March 31, 2015 01:52 PM (3SiAu)

 

I submit that they're not all that concerned about ruling their Prison Planet.  All they're concerned about is that all the Christians (and Jews) are dead when the rubble stops bouncing.

Posted by: steveegg at March 31, 2015 09:09 AM (cL79m)

129 I can't believe Pence is folding. Doesn't everyone know by now that the leftist Bully Mob has a short attention span and can't keep up the over-publicized outrage forever? Just wait it out. The moment will pass, the energy will subside. But time and again the targets of their wrath crack under the imaginary "pressure." It's so depressing.

Posted by: zombie at March 31, 2015 09:09 AM (K4YiS)

130 If you sit down and compare the IN law to the federal law, which Obama voted FOR they are essentially the same.


And Pence wants to weaken it?  If so are we going to repeal the federal law?  Or pass a more repressive law like every State on the West Coast have.  Which is why you see the Gaystapo suing everybody there.

Posted by: Vic[/i] We Have No Party at March 31, 2015 09:09 AM (wlDny)

131 I know -- let's all move to Indiana!

Seriously, any Christians who want to support our brothers and sisters in the faith should consider carefully which businesses WE patronize. That sword can cut two ways, and we really do outnumber them. Just take your business to people whom you can respect.

Posted by: Beverly at March 31, 2015 09:09 AM (3SiAu)

132 Dang, zombie, I was sure it would be Tea party - now I have to google Lemon party, huh? Posted by: Lizzy at March 31, 2015 01:57 PM (TLTHv) NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Posted by: RWC - Team BOHICA at March 31, 2015 09:10 AM (fWAjv)

133 I have a Mormon friend who shoots video for a living and has been approached to shoot pornography, which he always refuses. If he lives in a state where it's legal, can he be sued if he turns them down? Posted by: VBJonny at March 31, 2015 02:04 PM (oOsa/) Only if it's gay pr0n.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 09:10 AM (2Ojst)

134 What people are doing is refusing to take part in a gay marriage ceremony. More importantly, the reception. It has the legal status of a party.

Posted by: AmishDude at March 31, 2015 09:10 AM (L2xDv)

135 Free market tends to work these things out, you don't need to lawyer up----gays who want Christians to make them wedding cakes, I'm looking at you! Go to another bakery. But nooooooo, those Christians must conform! Can't wait until they have cowed the Christians. Up next, muzzies. Pass the popcorn. Because they may not want to go after muzzies, but the muzzies WILL certainly want to go after them.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i] at March 31, 2015 09:10 AM (DXB+X)

136 The ultimate goal is to force Christians from the public sphere. Gays are shock troops in the culture war. The next target is marriage. They will start with an obscure denomination and work their way up to the Catholic church.

Posted by: joncelli, sensitive guy at March 31, 2015 09:11 AM (RD7QR)

137 Gay Democrat Billionaire Tim Cook still angry that people in America are allowed to disagree with him. Gay Mafia is well-funded.

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 09:11 AM (ZPrif)

138 Guess what? You can even order wedding cakes online for delivery, in IN too..

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 31, 2015 09:11 AM (DXzRD)

139 I have a Mormon friend who shoots video for a living and has been approached to shoot pornography, which he always refuses. If he lives in a state where it's legal, can he be sued if he turns them down? Posted by: VBJonny at March 31, 2015 02:04 PM (oOsa/) If it's ghey pron. The sophistry (I refuse to call it "logic" or "reasoning") which argues that a cake decorator refusing to bake me a cake must be forced, at the point of a gun, to bake me a cake can necessarily be used against a videographer refusing to make a video of my homosexual sex acts.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 09:11 AM (kff5f)

140 O/T:  Lufthansa knew of co-pilot's depression as early as 2009.

Posted by: Soona at March 31, 2015 09:11 AM (/HX7u)

141 Re: Closing Apple stores. I wish they would. I love my iPhone, I love my iPad, my wife loves her MAC, but I f'ng hate, HATE going into their stores. I had my i6 fixed, 24 hours past the 45 minute wait time. Went in on a Saturday to p/u. It took 45 minutes for a brain-dead millennial to walk it out. The POS wouldn't even look me in the eye. And the place was swarming w/Blue shirted, zit faced, hipsters, all of them staring at i-devices, refusing to provide service. Rant. Over.

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at March 31, 2015 09:12 AM (5buP8)

142 It's why I got a Samsung Galaxy. Same here. Works perfectly from Day One. Pay hundreds more for the apple logo? No thanks.

Posted by: SE Pa Moron [/i] at March 31, 2015 09:12 AM (xQX/f)

143 Looks like Mike Pence is taking my spot for a few days.

Posted by: Emanual Goldstein at March 31, 2015 09:12 AM (WGm5T)

144 Tim Cook is a yammering half-wit.

And a well known liar, at least, well known in his home town.Tim Cook is a yammering half-wit.

And a well known liar, at least, well known in his home town.

Posted by: toby928(C) at March 31, 2015 02:07 PM (evdj2)

-----------------

Sounds interesting - any details?

Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 09:12 AM (nyxv/)

145 Back when Steve Jobs ran Apple it was a conservative success story. He may not have been, and the Apple fanboys may not have been. But Apple itself was run exactly how we should want businesses to be run from a conservative perspective. He did not make corporate donations. It was a pure meritrocacy. He went wherever the supplies and manufacturing was cheapest - and didn't care about social justice. I think I would short Apple. It has now opened itself up to the scrutiny that Ace suggests. Jobs didn't care about this SJ stuff. He was solely focused on building great products. Looks like Apple now has other priorities.

Posted by: SH at March 31, 2015 09:12 AM (gmeXX)

146 I have lost all sympathy for gays.  I used to not care--if a person was gay, that was their business.  Now that they are making it everyone's business, let the stonings continue.  Screw 'em, and not in the way they want.

Posted by: Null at March 31, 2015 09:12 AM (xjpRj)

147 A gay couple can force a Christian bakery to violate their principles because of "equality" A straight couple can not force a Gay bakery to violate their principles and celebrate marriage as an institution between a man and a woman because of "justice" Some are more equal than others.

Posted by: The Unequal Hat at March 31, 2015 09:12 AM (0Ew3K)

148 Now I saw a storey that the "Racist Fat Slob" Limbaugh is saying that Senator Henry Reed from Nevada was beaten up by gangsters. Presdent Obama should arrest him now for lying about a US Senator. Too Much !!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Mary Clogginstein from Brattleboro, VT at March 31, 2015 09:12 AM (Sd++4)

149 I submit that they're not all that concerned about ruling their Prison Planet. All they're concerned about is that all the Christians (and Jews) are dead when the rubble stops bouncing. Talk about folding like a cheap suit when the muzzies come calling......

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i] at March 31, 2015 09:13 AM (DXB+X)

150 the new timeline suggests they may have simply taken a wrong turn while fleeing the motel, about 12 minutes away. Posted by: zombie at March 31, 2015 02:00 PM (K4YiS) Comedy is not pretty. Neither is reality.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 09:13 AM (XUKZU)

151 131...zombie. Beyond depressing. It's fcking pathetic that those who speak out for what they believe are they're values cave in a whimper at the least push back. Some spine y'all got there. Makes me wanna vomit!

Posted by: Russkilitlover at March 31, 2015 09:13 AM (K1mhl)

152 I have a Mormon friend who shoots video for a living and has been approached to shoot pornography, which he always refuses. If he lives in a state where it's legal, can he be sued if he turns them down? -- Nope. Cause America has enshrined into the law that certain people are "protected classes". Mostly blacks, women, gays, and handicapped. Pornographers are not a protected class. A better example might be pornstars who refuse to do gay or inter-racial porn. Or porn directors who refuse to film it. Clearly their only objection is on race and sexuality - both of which are protected classes.

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 09:13 AM (ZPrif)

153 The remaining 90, 95, 99% of bakers will make your cake.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:13 AM (MMC8r)

154 Not only Saudi Arabia... But they also make most of their product in China... where dissidents disappear... and forced abortions were very prevalent until just a couple of years ago...

Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 09:13 AM (qh617)

155 Wonder if police in the Middle East are still using the gay dating iPhone app to round up gays.

Posted by: RWC - Team BOHICA at March 31, 2015 09:13 AM (fWAjv)

156 I suspect the big mouths are not a majority.

Posted by: Bruce J. at March 31, 2015 09:14 AM (iQIUe)

157 I really have no confidence the idiots who write these types of bills (lawyers/legislators) are capable of doing so in a way that cannot eventually be overturned in court. IIRC, the exact wording (or close enough) of this bill has been tried at SCOTUS at least once- and very specifically stood up to judicial review. Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 02:07 PM (kff5f) Well then, if it gets that far I guess we shall see if the Dread Justice Roberts' well-known love of precedent still holds.

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2015 09:14 AM (Dj0WE)

158
As per leftist policy: No enemies to the Left, including Islamic Fascists.

Until the USA dies anyway.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at March 31, 2015 09:14 AM (ODxAs)

159 Re: Closing Apple stores. How would you ever get the battery changed in your device if they closed the stores?

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 09:14 AM (39g3+)

160 Sounds interesting - any details? Sure. He insisted to a national crowd that in his youth, the KKK was burning cross in black people's yards here in Baldwin county. It never happened, of course, but he wanted the rising-above-his-redneck-roots credit with the sophisticates.

Posted by: toby928(C) at March 31, 2015 09:14 AM (evdj2)

161 Forced abortions still happen in China.

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 09:14 AM (MYCIw)

162 What if I went to a Jewish bakery and asked for a cake to celebrate Adolph's birthday? This IN law protects them, too. But you'll ever hear the R's making this case because they're stupid and they're pussies because then they'd cower at the backlash of comparing homosexuals to Hitler!

Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 09:14 AM (FRLeJ)

163 The left would not allow the bill of rights, particularly the first two amendments to be passed today.

All the basic rights guaranteed by the Constitution are now "problematic" and anti-[lefty approved oppressed group here]

Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 09:14 AM (nyxv/)

164

We would make a cake for a straight couple, if we ever saw one.

Posted by: Castro Street Bakery at March 31, 2015 09:14 AM (wAQA5)

165 And now NASCAR is bowing to Big Anus?!? Freakin' NASCAR! I hate this world anymore.

Posted by: Citizen X at March 31, 2015 09:14 AM (7ObY1)

166 ...if you had only listen to me about the precedent we were setting with titles II and VII of the CRA of 1964, none of this would be happening...

Posted by: zombie Barry Goldwater at March 31, 2015 09:15 AM (AkOaV)

167

Did ve mention dat herr kam A kaze was fond of the "wurst" kind of pornz?

 

Posted by: Lufthansa legal dept. at March 31, 2015 09:15 AM (Spluw)

168 I buy their products because they "just work" and are easy to use and make my life simpler. Good luck, zombie. The fish rots from the head down - if Apple's CEO thinks social justice is a higher priority than delivering product and serving their customers, it's only going to go downhill from here.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 09:16 AM (0NdlF)

169 I can't believe Pence is folding. Doesn't everyone know by now that the leftist Bully Mob has a short attention span and can't keep up the over-publicized outrage forever? - Vote for us! We don't stand for anything! - The GOPe

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 09:16 AM (XUKZU)

170 And to the point of this post, I hate my iphone. I'm going back to Samsung as soon as I can.

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 09:16 AM (MYCIw)

171 Its like these leftists really want to force a literal war, and oddly they think somehow they'll win.

Posted by: Iblis at March 31, 2015 09:16 AM (9221z)

172 Geez, talk about lack of tolerance. First, I'm a libertarian who hasn't voted for a Democrat in my entire life. Second, in a country of 300 million+, I'm sure you could find some racist who would create a religion that would feature anti-black beliefs as part of it. The number of people who would do that is probably equal to the number of bakery owners who don't want to cater to homosexuals, but so what? And what I really don't understand is why baking a cake for a homosexual wedding implies support for those two people's choice? A lawyer representing a client doesn't necessarily support the client's agenda, a doctor treating a racist patient doesn't necessarily want the patient to live and continue his/her racism, a police officer protects all citizens without regard for their political beliefs and would rightly be fired for refusing to patrol near a church that performs gay marriage ceremonies, but a bakery owner who is asked to bake a cake can righteously object because his putting eggs and flour in a pan is the equal of supporting the political act of gay marriage? Hint: one of these is not like the other. Seems like these bakeries and photographers are just using their religion as a crutch upon which to base their prejudices. This doesn't mean RFRAs are useless, but continuing to support bakers using RFRAs makes a mockery of the GOP and prevents it from gaining more voters.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:16 AM (XsOa7)

173 All the usual suspects are on their high horses on this, and I suspect it won't abate until Obama enables the Iranians on their nuke ambitions. What makes better cover for selling the world out to a crew that hangs homosexuals from cranes in downtown Teheran, than a flap about the rights of millionaire gay couples wishing for their perfect gay wedding cake?

Posted by: Sort-of-Mad Max at March 31, 2015 09:16 AM (DLu2s)

174 What if I went to a Jewish bakery and asked for a cake to celebrate Adolph's birthday?

This IN law protects them, too. But you'll ever hear the R's making this case because they're stupid and they're pussies because then they'd cower at the backlash of comparing homosexuals to Hitler!

Posted by: Soothsayer,

 

Bigger problem; the left would be thrilled to do this to Jews. Remember the KKK march in Skokie Illinois.

Posted by: Lufthansa legal dept. at March 31, 2015 09:16 AM (Spluw)

175

   Very interesting occurrence today--got invited to a gay wedding.

   Declined without comment.

   No idea at all if that's where it ends, I AM surprised that the invitation was extended, our area is not exactly a hotbed of gaydom.

Posted by: irongrampa at March 31, 2015 09:17 AM (jeCnD)

176 I see this need to get in on the two minutes of hate by Cook, NASCAR, and Angie List as being similar to the "mourners" at Kim Jong Il's funeral - they all want to prove their are the most progressive voice in the room.

Posted by: NFL at March 31, 2015 09:17 AM (TLTHv)

177 Good luck, zombie. The fish rots from the head down - if Apple's CEO thinks social justice is a higher priority than delivering product and serving their customers, it's only going to go downhill from here. ----- I agree completely. Steve Jobs did not care about this other stuff. He was singularly focused. I'd short Apple.

Posted by: SH at March 31, 2015 09:17 AM (gmeXX)

178 The sophistry (I refuse to call it "logic" or "reasoning") which argues that a cake decorator refusing to bake me a cake must be forced, at the point of a gun, to bake me a cake can necessarily be used against a videographer refusing to make a video of my homosexual sex acts. Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 02:11 PM (kff5f) Isn't forcing someone to say something on a cake, the very definition of Forced Speech? Don't refuse to bake the cake... refuse the speech.... give them the cake, and the stuff to put whatever they want on it.... Just refuse to do it yourself... Because even corporations have certain speech rights according to the Supreme Court. IMO, they have argued this wrong...

Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 09:17 AM (qh617)

179 Apple has now been added to my list (along with Starbucks) of companies that won't be seeing me in their stores.

Posted by: Hank at March 31, 2015 09:17 AM (/ujVT)

180 162 Sounds interesting - any details?

Sure. He insisted to a national crowd that in his youth, the KKK was burning cross in black people's yards here in Baldwin county. It never happened, of course, but he wanted the rising-above-his-redneck-roots credit with the sophisticates.

Posted by: toby928(C) at March 31, 2015 02:14 PM (evdj2)


-----------------------------------------------------


Great, good to know.

Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 09:17 AM (nyxv/)

181

One must realize that    by far the largest group of people in this country are white, middle class, heterosexuals - the one group    for   which   it    is apparently  A-ok to offend.

 

I'm tired of the double standard.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2015 09:18 AM (BbwTO)

182 Seems like these bakeries and photographers are just using their religion as a crutch upon which to base their prejudices. This doesn't mean RFRAs are useless, but continuing to support bakers using RFRAs makes a mockery of the GOP and prevents it from gaining more voters.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99

 

Nation of Islam, Come on back when you're ready to force them to see the Light of Leftist Truthiness.

Posted by: Lufthansa legal dept. at March 31, 2015 09:18 AM (Spluw)

183 "What if I went to a Jewish bakery and asked for a cake to celebrate Adolph's birthday? This IN law protects them, too. But you'll ever hear the R's making this case because they're stupid and they're pussies because then they'd cower at the backlash of comparing homosexuals to Hitler! " That was exactly my point. Funny how you'll never hear THAT argument being made.

Posted by: VBJonny at March 31, 2015 09:18 AM (oOsa/)

184 "I wonder why homosexuality is such a compelling cause to them. On the face of it, it seems an unlikely issue to get people worked up so easily."

It's because every one of them consider themselves to be Atticus Finch (from To Kill A Mockingbird)  They want to be hailed as brave for standing up against the system but without really expending any effort or exposing themselves to danger.  The gay rights movement is just  one of the  many causes that can help satisfy their "Atticus Finch" delusion.

Posted by: George Orwell de Leon at March 31, 2015 09:18 AM (1BQGO)

185 >>And what I really don't understand is why baking a cake for a homosexual wedding implies support for those two people's choice?

They have to participate in the event. That's the difference.

Posted by: NFL at March 31, 2015 09:18 AM (TLTHv)

186 Why do Actors, Athletes, and CEOs think I give a fly fuck what they think about politics. Stick to what you do and know and shut the fuck up. Pardon me while I scratch my balls

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 09:18 AM (rDqRv)

187 Posted by: irongrampa at March 31, 2015 02:17 PM (jeCnD) It was a test... you will soon be called a bigot... and attacks will commence...

Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 09:18 AM (qh617)

188 That's okay - I'm boycotting Apple for being such a gay douchebag of a company.

Posted by: Super Creepy Eric Hoteham at March 31, 2015 09:19 AM (oDCMR)

189 Apple isn't gonna do shit in Indiana. Call their bluff. You really think Apple wants people in IN to lose their jobs/livelihood over this? Then you'd see a real backlash. Moreover, Apple isn't gonna leave a market [an entire state] and forgo the revenue. That'd be insane in the business world. Apple has a fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders, partners, and employees first. Their social bullshit is secondary.

Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 09:19 AM (FRLeJ)

190 Seems like these bakeries and photographers are just using their religion as a crutch upon which to base their prejudices. This doesn't mean RFRAs are useless, but continuing to support bakers using RFRAs makes a mockery of the GOP and prevents it from gaining more voters. -- thx for the concern, fascist.

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 09:19 AM (ZPrif)

191 Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 02:16 PM (0NdlF) I don't even blame Apple, really. They're the biggest company in the US right now. They have to know they have millions of targets on their backs. They saw how DC went after big oil, big pharma, big whatever... and they don't want to be next. So they hire a gay CEO and tell him to be all SJWy and do whatever it takes to keep the govt out of their business while theyre trying to grow market share. Otherwise, the govt might FUCK them. Like they tried to fuck Microsoft in the '90s and Google in the '10s. So Microsoft went from 1 part time lobbyist to a few hundred in short order, and Googles doing the same, and now so is Apple. Talk to the talk, donate to the right people, hire the right former staffers and lobbyists and what not... and for a few million a year you can have the government leave you alone. A lot easier and cheaper then trying to fight them in court and in the court of LIV public opinion.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 09:19 AM (AkOaV)

192 Apple has a fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders, partners, and employees first. Their social bullshit is secondary. Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 02:19 PM (FRLeJ) Exactly

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 09:19 AM (rDqRv)

193

Its like these leftists really want to force a literal war, and oddly they think somehow they'll win.

 

Posted by: Iblis at March 31, 2015 02:16 PM (9221z)

 

Considering we will have no allies outside of, perhaps, Israel (if they're not already coated in cobalt-60), and it will be literally the world against us,....

 

Oh well, who wants to live forever on this shithole rock?

Posted by: steveegg at March 31, 2015 09:20 AM (cL79m)

194 Don't refuse to bake the cake... refuse the speech.... give them the cake, and the stuff to put whatever they want on it.... This. The demand is for the editorial statement. To force you to say something you disagree with. Or pay the price. ESPECIALLY pay the price.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:20 AM (MMC8r)

195 All the basic rights guaranteed by the Constitution are now "problematic" and anti-[lefty approved oppressed group here] Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 02:14 PM (nyxv/) Oh, yes, yes they are. Free speech, free press, free association, free exercise of religion? - Rejected. Right to bear "arms" (as in: military grade weaponry, if you can afford it)? - Rejected. There was even a 3rd Amendment case not too long ago- people being forced to house cops on a stakeout. Secure in person and papers? Don't make me laugh. Right not to self-incriminate? They'd reject that one in a heartbeat if they could. Public trial? Confronting of witnesses? Hah. About the only two that would pass today are 7 & 8.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 09:20 AM (kff5f)

196 So no iPhones or Starbucks in Indiana? Good grief how will they survive?

Posted by: wth at March 31, 2015 09:20 AM (wAQA5)

197 But, Joe, You said this earlier: I want to support the RFRAs, So, tell me without-googling it-what about the RFRA do you support and please tell me what specific religion endorses not serving black people? Did anyone mention that you were a Democrat? I don't recall that

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 31, 2015 09:20 AM (DXzRD)

198 I'm still baffled by why this particular fetish is deserving of respect and accommodation when so many others are not.

Posted by: toby928(C) at March 31, 2015 09:20 AM (evdj2)

199 I have nothing against anal on religious grounds but I will impose a surcharge.

Posted by: Sandra Fluke at March 31, 2015 09:20 AM (8ZskC)

200

Seems like these bakeries and photographers are just using their religion as a crutch upon which to base their prejudices.

 

Yes.  I don't see how this is particularly different from serving blacks at lunch counters.  You're a public accommodation.

Posted by: Bandersnatch, now half gay at March 31, 2015 09:20 AM (JtwS4)

201 To be honest I'm suprised the goat fuckers would openly buy an IPhone. If using a western toilet is wrong and toilet a sin per Sharia wtf is a phone?

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 31, 2015 09:20 AM (vPh3W)

202 Is it gay people or trial lawyers who are most offended by this law?

Posted by: Hank at March 31, 2015 09:21 AM (/ujVT)

203 I have no doubt that many people sincerely feel that they have always been and always will be attracted to the same sex. However, to say that same-sex attraction is an "immutable characteristic" is simply a shallow (and politically motivated) assertion -- without good evidence. If we shoehorn our lives and identities into the political footwear that people are kicking around in today, merely for the sake of winning political battles, we rob ourselves of lasting meaning.

Posted by: Captain Oblivious[/i][/b] at March 31, 2015 09:21 AM (hiT/m)

204 Why do Actors, Athletes, and CEOs think I give a fly fuck what they think about politics. Stick to what you do and know and shut the fuck up. --- Actually, humans are natural followers. The Left is smart to focus on the top 1% of most influentials - celebrities, athletes, CEOs. You might be immune to the effect, but most ppl aren't. Most people will naturally ape the attitudes and beliefs of high status, ruling class individuals.

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 09:21 AM (ZPrif)

205 "You'll probably see a bunch of those other 19 states move to strike the law from their books." Not Texas.

Posted by: Head Football Coach Howard Schnellenberger at March 31, 2015 09:21 AM (fMSaY)

206 188 Why do Actors, Athletes, and CEOs think I give a fly fuck what they think about politics. Stick to what you do and know and shut the fuck up. Pardon me while I scratch my balls Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 02:18 PM (rDqRv) -------- heh, You are pardoned.

Posted by: Seems Legit at March 31, 2015 09:21 AM (A98Xu)

207 It's good when the anti-Christian bigots self-identify.

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 09:21 AM (ZPrif)

208 So no iPhones or Starbucks in Indiana? Good grief how will they survive?

Chick-Fil-A doesn't offer a 24-oz coffee, but it's pretty good.

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at March 31, 2015 09:21 AM (/kI1Q)

209 Apple has a fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders, partners, and employees first. Their social bullshit is secondary. ----- I agree with that. But what Apple has indicated is that this will take the focus of the CEO. This did not occur under Jobs' watch. He was focused on building the best products. Nothing else. This may be a small blip - but Apple became the largest company under the leadership of a man who's vision was solely to build the best products. The current leadership clearly has other priorities. No telling how that will affect the business.

Posted by: SH at March 31, 2015 09:21 AM (gmeXX)

210 they all want to prove their are the most progressive voice in the room. Exactly. They don't know what its about, they don't care. Its about the tone, its about holding the right positions and being on the bandwagon. Buy my products, see I'm politically correct (in the most literal, historical meaning of the term). This is why the governor of Connecticut - a state with exactly the same law - is calling for a state wide boycott on Indiana trade. They haven't any idea about the law or its meaning. They don't care. But seriously, why does anyone buy Apple products? They cost so much more for what you get than other products out there. I mean, all these companies are run by jackwagons, but why pay so much?

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 09:21 AM (39g3+)

211 "So is NASCAR." way to know your constituency fucking idiots Posted by: Head Football Coach Howard Schnellenberger at March 31, 2015 02:04 PM (fMSaY) Is there a specific name for the rule, listed here before, that if an organization is not specifically listed as conservative, it will eventually turn leftist? And even some conservative listed groups are getting the side eye from me nowadays (I'm looking at you, NRO, for the Steyn brouhaha.)

Posted by: LizLem at March 31, 2015 09:21 AM (yRwC8)

212 Bloody Wars Rage Islamic World, U.N. Chief Slams Israel For Causing Enormous Suffering Weasel Zippers And they hang gays also. Has Apple said anything yet? Or Fredo? Or Horseface?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 09:22 AM (rDqRv)

213 Seems like these bakeries and photographers are just using their religion as a crutch upon which to base their prejudices. This doesn't mean RFRAs are useless, but continuing to support bakers using RFRAs makes a mockery of the GOP and prevents it from gaining more voters. - We've evolved beyond freedom and liberty.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 09:22 AM (XUKZU)

214 Hey, if you don't want to violate your conscience you should change your belief system.

Posted by: Progressive Trash Ruling Class at March 31, 2015 09:22 AM (ZPrif)

215 ONN reports the Iranians have begun to assemble a nuclear bomb in the negotiating room. Kerry says "inshallah". http://onion.com/19FKxhc

Posted by: MTF, Vote for someone the GOP insiders hate! at March 31, 2015 09:22 AM (LISuA)

216 Trust me: In the coming days they'll trot out the bullshit polls that amazingly show a majority do not support the IN law. Trust me, again: they are conducting this polling as I write this and just waiting for the right results until they publish.

Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 09:22 AM (FRLeJ)

217 Seems like these bakeries and photographers are just using their religion as a crutch upon which to base their prejudices. Interesting. So there is no moral objection, it's just HATEY HATE HATE and religion is an excuse. Basically, secularism trumps all.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:22 AM (MMC8r)

218 Did ve mention dat herr kam A kaze was fond of the "wurst" kind of pornz? Just checked... other pilots teased Lubitz by calling him “Tomato Andy” “Tomato” is an anti-gay slur in Germany, “based on the fact that while a tomato is thought to be a vegetable, it is really a fruit.” Don't ask, don't tell AtC

Posted by: SE Pa Moron [/i] at March 31, 2015 09:22 AM (xQX/f)

219 You might be immune to the effect, but most ppl aren't. Most people will naturally ape the attitudes and beliefs of high status, ruling class individuals. Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 02:21 PM (ZPrif) ------- This is sadly true. When a celebrity wears something the knockoff is instantly sold out. The Murphy Brown single mother having a baby deal, did actually trickle down.

Posted by: Seems Legit at March 31, 2015 09:22 AM (A98Xu)

220

Very interesting occurrence today--got invited to a gay wedding.

Declined without comment.

...........................

Couldn't decide what to bring as a date.

Posted by: wth at March 31, 2015 09:22 AM (wAQA5)

221

Is there a specific name for the rule, listed here before, that if an organization is not specifically listed as conservative, it will eventually turn leftist? And even some conservative listed groups are getting the side eye from me nowadays (I'm looking at you, NRO, for the Steyn brouhaha.)

 

Posted by: LizLem at March 31, 2015 02:21 PM (yRwC

 

Degeneration.

Posted by: steveegg at March 31, 2015 09:23 AM (cL79m)

222 My suggestion: make the cake but spit in it Call it the Jessie Jackson speciial

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 09:23 AM (rDqRv)

223 NASCAR may really love teh gheys so much that they release frowny face statements on how disappointed they are with Indiana, but they're not going to cancel the Brickyard 500. IndyCar isn't about to throw out multimillions by cancelling the Indy 500 either. They love teh gheys, but not that much. Same for Apple, who won't pull out of the Middle East over a few differences of opinion. CEO's, commissioners, association presidents. Where do they all go for the surgery to have their spines removed? At any rate, NASCAR like any other institution that isn't explicitly conservative will be taken over by the Left. As for Apple in Saudi Arabia, Tim Cook like any good leftist hates other people with lots of money but he's deeply and passionately in love with his own money.

Posted by: kbdabear at March 31, 2015 09:23 AM (GrXXa)

224 Is there a specific name for the rule, listed here before, that if an organization is not specifically listed as conservative, it will eventually turn leftist? And even some conservative listed groups are getting the side eye from me nowadays (I'm looking at you, NRO, for the Steyn brouhaha.) -- It's O'Sullivan's Law. Which he coined in the pages of National review.

Posted by: Progressive Trash Ruling Class at March 31, 2015 09:23 AM (ZPrif)

225 And what I really don't understand is why baking a cake for a homosexual wedding implies support for those two people's choice? A lawyer representing a client doesn't necessarily support the client's agenda, a doctor treating a racist patient doesn't necessarily want the patient to live and continue his/her racism, a police officer protects all citizens without regard for their political beliefs and would rightly be fired for refusing to patrol near a church that performs gay marriage ceremonies, but a bakery owner who is asked to bake a cake can righteously object because his putting eggs and flour in a pan is the equal of supporting the political act of gay marriage? Hint: one of these is not like the other.

Seems like these bakeries and photographers are just using their religion as a crutch upon which to base their prejudices. This doesn't mean RFRAs are useless, but continuing to support bakers using RFRAs makes a mockery of the GOP and prevents it from gaining more voters.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:16 PM (XsOa7)

----------------------------------------------------------------------


Lawyers can refuse clients.  You think the ACLU is going to take the Westboro batpists as clients?

And the point of the Bill of Rights is that it protects speech and freedom of conscience that you disagree with.  That's why it exists.  The core argument is who gets to decide.  The founders thought that the people were sovereign.  The left thinks they are - via the state - are sovereign.

So what if someone who wants to deny service to a gay customer is a bigot?  (Note: none of the cases so far are examples of this - they served gay customers but didn't want to service a gay wedding specifically).  That gay couple can easily go somewhere else.  So in essence the state is going to bankrupt a proprietor for hurting someone's feelings.  The state is deciding that the proprietor doesn't get to have the freedom of association, freedom of speech or conscience rights.  The point of these things being protected by the bill of rights is to leave that decision to individuals and not to the state.  YOU get to decide what violates your conscience.  Not me.

Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 09:23 AM (nyxv/)

226 Clearly what is needed here is for Gay Bars to open themselves to religious services on Sunday cuz tolerance and righteous fisting.

Posted by: Super Creepy Eric Hoteham at March 31, 2015 09:23 AM (oDCMR)

227 "This doesn't mean RFRAs are useless, but continuing to support bakers using RFRAs makes a mockery of the GOP and prevents it from gaining more voters." Thank you for your concern. Also, as for why baking a cake for a gay wedding matters: "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them." "Do no share in the sins of others. Keep yourself pure." "Anyone who welcomes them shares in their wicked work." Ect.

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 09:23 AM (MYCIw)

228 For a Christian to buy from Apple, or any corporation that depends on Chinese labor (and that's just one example) represents a problem of conscience anyway. It's very, very difficult to avoid buying products from countries with REAL human-rights violations as status quo. I pay a lot more for clothes and shoes made in the USA. And I'll never buy an Apple product again. I avoid Starbucks and Target too, because their CEOs have openly stated they don't want business from "my kind." But it's a drop in the bucket, and I know it.

Posted by: LadyS at March 31, 2015 09:23 AM (xYNhJ)

229 i love my apple stuff......love

ot.....i just opened a new loofa......& the packaging said it would get rid of cellulite!!!!! i know this is to be a lie......loofas are liars

Posted by: phoenixgirl at March 31, 2015 09:23 AM (u8GsB)

230 I don't even blame Apple, really. Didn't mean it in terms of blame/whatever. Just predicting that their technical product will be going downhill. Like FireFox. Hopefully they'll either bounce off the bottom and re-focus, or someone else will come along to fill your "Just Works" tech needs.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 09:24 AM (0NdlF)

231 Very interesting occurrence today--got invited to a gay wedding. Declined without comment. ........................... Couldn't decide what to bring as a date. Posted by: wth at March 31, 2015 02:22 PM (wAQA5) Nah I think he was afraid to have to pee in the Men's room

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 09:24 AM (rDqRv)

232 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:16 PM (XsOa7) As a fellow libertarian, I'm a little confused as to where you are coming from. Surely it's not libertarian to have the government force someone to engage in commerce against their will, right? And yes, I'm sure there are people who have objections to gay marriage outside of religion. I don't understand why they can't run their businesses how they see fit and serve who they want to serve. Which, by the way, was the law of the land before the CRA of 1964 and subsequent heart of atlanta motel supreme court case. Surprisingly, other than where government mandated otherwise, 99% of businesses served whoever walked through the door because, you know, they were in business and didn't care the color of the customer as long as his money was green.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 09:24 AM (AkOaV)

233 Otherwise, the govt might FUCK them. Like they tried to fuck Microsoft in the '90s and Google in the '10s. So Microsoft went from 1 part time lobbyist to a few hundred in short order, and Googles doing the same, and now so is Apple. ----- That reminds me - Apple used to spend next to nothing on lobbying. They didn't need the government to support them. If only all public companies took the same position. This is clearly a shift in a company that is now no longer in growth mode but it holding onto market share mode. Short Apple.

Posted by: SH at March 31, 2015 09:24 AM (gmeXX)

234 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_O%27Sullivan_%28columnist%29 He is known for O'Sullivan's First Law (O'Sullivan's Law): "All organizations that are not actually right-wing will over time become left-wing."

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 09:24 AM (ZPrif)

235 Before freeing someone from their chains, first find out why they were chained in the first place.

Posted by: despair at March 31, 2015 09:24 AM (J6suc)

236 The IRS has repeatedly said corporations may not engage in open politicking with shareholder money. Except, of course, to promote progressive causes.

Posted by: Lois Lerner at March 31, 2015 09:24 AM (LISuA)

237 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:16 PM (XsOa7) Would you make a sign supporting a KKK Rally? If not, you are prejudiced... Would you bake a cake, and make it nice... use your artistic talents... to make a cake celebrating SLAVERY??? if not... you are prejudiced, and should be forced by law to do so. EVERYONE is biased... to say you are not is a flat out lie... we are just biased about different subjects... and you seem OK to FORCE others act against their beliefs... because you do not share them. Which tells me you are NOT a Libertarian...

Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 09:24 AM (qh617)

238 invitation was extended, our area is not exactly a hotbed of gaydom. Posted by: irongrampa at March 31, 2015 02:17 PM (jeCnD The reception will be a hoot, what gets thrown, bouquet, garter or a dildo?

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 31, 2015 09:24 AM (vPh3W)

239 Isn't forcing someone to say something on a cake, the very definition of Forced Speech? Don't refuse to bake the cake... refuse the speech.... give them the cake, and the stuff to put whatever they want on it.... Just refuse to do it yourself... Because even corporations have certain speech rights according to the Supreme Court. IMO, they have argued this wrong... Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 02:17 PM (qh617) Good point. Try going into a bakery and ask them to use a design that is Disney logo/name, and they don't have a license to use it. They'll bake you a cake, and tell you to find your own way to put Mickey Mouse on your cake. If that were employed here, the gay activists would have a significantly weaker case. And the idiot knee-jerk liberals would not all be talking about it right now.

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2015 09:24 AM (Dj0WE)

240 174: Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:16 PM (XsOa7)

Another fine product from  "Concern Trolls 'R' Us".
Ask for us by name.
Accept no substitutes!

Posted by: LeBron Horowitz at March 31, 2015 09:24 AM (2DVgX)

241 I cannot wait until the day when soros and the Democrats decide it's time to break up Apple. I will laugh and laugh..

Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 09:24 AM (FRLeJ)

242 How are they participating in the event? By delivering a cake to a wedding hall? Ridiculous. It's one thing if they were asked to be at the ceremony and cut it up for the guests, but my understanding is that the extent of their participation is putting two male figurines as toppers. Sorry, but that's not participation in anything. That's selling a product. And as for Jews baking cakes for Nazis, are you comparing gays to Nazis? I don't think that's the argument you should be making, folks.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:25 AM (XsOa7)

243 Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 02:23 PM (nyxv/) Well said.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 31, 2015 09:25 AM (DXzRD)

244

And what I really don't understand is why baking a cake for a homosexual wedding implies support for those two people's choice?

 

 

--

 

Well, when given the choice of :

 

A. prison,

B. having your business shut down, or

C. producing at the point of a gun, a product that endorses a practice that you don't agree with

 

 I suppose you could say that C. doesn't necessarily imply support.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2015 09:25 AM (BbwTO)

245 And what I really don't understand is why baking a cake for a homosexual wedding implies support for those two people's choice? Lets play a little game. Let's pretend you have a bakery. Now, into this bakery comes a guy in full klan gear, with the hood on. He wants you to bake a cake depicting a black man being lynched next to a burning cross for their next Robert Byrd Memorial Klan Meeting. Why not make the cake, you're just baking something right? You aren't supporting their choice. Right? Right?

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 09:25 AM (39g3+)

246 s there a specific name for the rule, listed here before, that if an organization is not specifically listed as conservative, it will eventually turn leftist? O'Sullivan's Law.

Posted by: toby928(C) at March 31, 2015 09:25 AM (evdj2)

247 I guess I could have brought a tomato.

Posted by: wth at March 31, 2015 09:25 AM (wAQA5)

248 Trust me: In the coming days they'll trot out the bullshit polls that amazingly show a majority do not support the IN law. - After days of wall-to-wall coverage we have been able to cherry pick a sample who when asked a misleading question will give us the results we want.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 09:26 AM (XUKZU)

249 >>>EVERYONE is biased... to say you are not is a flat out lie. True, if not, look at Kate Upton she is biased against pudgy, white middle age men with gray hair.

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 31, 2015 09:26 AM (vPh3W)

250 Posted by: LadyS at March 31, 2015 02:23 PM (xYNhJ) 100% of technology you buy is manufactured overseas because environmental laws make it almost impossible to manufacturer components in the US. Apple actually looked in to making the iPad here in the US and said it would raise the cost per ipad by $400 to do that. Labor and shipping costs kind of cancel each other out, it was regulation and environmental crap that made them decide to build them outside of the country.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 09:26 AM (AkOaV)

251 >>> What if I went to a Jewish bakery and asked for a cake to celebrate Adolph's birthday? Or asking a kosher or halal deli to cater your event, but you insist on serving pork. What do you mean it violates your religion? Discrimination!

Posted by: LizLem at March 31, 2015 09:26 AM (yRwC8)

252 Exactly right. It's one thing if the bakery owner were forced to make a cake portraying two men kissing, but that's not what's happening here. These bakers are outright refusing to bake cakes for gay people. Period. Full stop.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:26 AM (XsOa7)

253 202 ...I don't see how this is particularly different from serving blacks at lunch counters. Yes, you don't see a difference. But it's not you're religious views that are being protected. The whole point of religious freedom, which is guaranteed in our Constitution, is that we protect other people's religions. The real question is, are you willing to tolerate people whose religions require different behavior than yours?

Posted by: Captain Oblivious[/i][/b] at March 31, 2015 09:26 AM (hiT/m)

254 How are they participating in the event? By delivering a cake to a wedding hall? Ridiculous. It's one thing if they were asked to be at the ceremony and cut it up for the guests, but my understanding is that the extent of their participation is putting two male figurines as toppers. Sorry, but that's not participation in anything. That's selling a product. How about the couple in Upstate NY who used to rent out their farm for weddings but then got sued when they refused to host a Gay Wedding for religious reasons? Now they are out of business?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 09:26 AM (rDqRv)

255 244 And as for Jews baking cakes for Nazis, are you comparing gays to Nazis? I don't think that's the argument you should be making, folks. ------------------------- Well the SA was so Gay Hitler had them liquidated.

Posted by: Super Creepy Eric Hoteham at March 31, 2015 09:26 AM (oDCMR)

256 I cannot wait until the day when soros and the Democrats decide it's time to break up Apple. I will laugh and laugh.. Nah, too much hipster cred. But the hipster tears if the gov't did anything against Apple would be quite delicious. Double bonus if it's due to policies they supported.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 09:26 AM (0NdlF)

257 Ok, now I'm thinking of boycotting starbucks. The whole race together crap and now this.....

Posted by: Draki at March 31, 2015 09:27 AM (0eidE)

258 If using a western toilet is wrong and toilet a sin per Sharia wtf is a phone? Goat dating service.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i] at March 31, 2015 09:27 AM (DXB+X)

259 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:16 PM (XsOa7) I know a few lawyers who refuse to do criminal law precisely because they view defending the guilty as being a party to the crime. The doctor, in your scenario, is not being called upon to *join in* with whatever the objectionable thing is. A wedding cake designer, a photographer, a florist: they are being specifically asked to join in- to support with their labor- to an enterprise they find immoral. Even accepting your bogus claim that "someone would make up a religion" (go find out what the US thinks about that practice- you might start with people who claimed to be exempt from the draft because "my denomination [of Christianity] is pacifist"): so what? What right do you have to a wedding cake that should allow you to have the government force someone to make one against their will? What *Right* do you even have to engage in any business with anyone for any reason? You have NO RIGHT to what someone else must produce or provide.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 09:27 AM (kff5f)

260 Exactly right. It's one thing if the bakery owner were forced to make a cake portraying two men kissing, but that's not what's happening here. These bakers are outright refusing to bake cakes for gay people. Period. Full stop. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:26 PM (XsOa7) NO THEY ARE NOT. All these cases have to do with wedding ceremonies But nice try

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 09:27 AM (rDqRv)

261 254 Exactly right. It's one thing if the bakery owner were forced to make a cake portraying two men kissing, but that's not what's happening here. These bakers are outright refusing to bake cakes for gay people. Period. Full stop.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:26 PM (XsOa7)


not for gay people.....for gay weddings....gays could order a birthday cake for a gay.......no problem....no one is against gays having birthdays......

Posted by: phoenixgirl at March 31, 2015 09:27 AM (u8GsB)

262 254 ...These bakers are outright refusing to bake cakes for gay people. That's not true, you troll, and you know it. You are a liar.

Posted by: Captain Oblivious[/i][/b] at March 31, 2015 09:28 AM (hiT/m)

263 "Or asking a kosher or halal deli to cater your event, but you insist on serving pork. What do you mean it violates your religion? Discrimination!" No one is insisting on the bakers participating in the ceremony. To have a situation analogous to yours, the kosher or halal deli would have to refuse to cater an event solely because its food would be sitting side-by-side with pork.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:28 AM (XsOa7)

264 Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 02:25 PM (39g3+) Me, personally? I'd probably bake the cake and take his money, cuz what the fuck do i care. But I also respect the fact that others would feel differently. Just like I respect the fact that my local pizza place serves fake fucking pepperoni (gross, for anyone wondering) because the owner is a devout Muslim. That's fine, I respect that. I just don't order pork products from him... I'm not out suing to force him to violate his beliefs so that I can eat a pepperoni pizza.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 09:28 AM (AkOaV)

265 Bigots gotta bigot.

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 09:28 AM (ZPrif)

266 #244 Just wait, I'm sure some folks will dress as Nazis and start demanding ham sandwiches and cakes at jewish delis and bakeries.

Posted by: Draki at March 31, 2015 09:28 AM (0eidE)

267 And as for Jews baking cakes for Nazis, are you comparing gays to Nazis? I don't think that's the argument you should be making, folks. Your concern is noted. But clearly you admit that forcing something to do something they don't want to do is wrong and unconstitutional. Right? Unless you think the Jewish baker should be forced to make a Hitler b-day cake. Do you?

Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 09:28 AM (FRLeJ)

268 Barry Goldwater voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because he said it was unconstitutional.  Guess what; he was right and the Supreme Court just held that it was finally.


And making the Gaystapo part of it makes it even worse.

Posted by: Vic[/i] We Have No Party at March 31, 2015 09:29 AM (wlDny)

269 That's not true, you troll, and you know it. You are a liar. Posted by: Captain Oblivious at March 31, 2015 02:28 PM No? So then tell me what's really going on. Post a newspaper article or something. Calling me a troll isn't a good argument.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:29 AM (XsOa7)

270 " These bakers are outright refusing to bake cakes for gay people. Period. Full stop." WRONG. They are refusing to bake cakes for gay WEDDINGS, which are illegitimate due to their religious beliefs.

Posted by: Head Football Coach Howard Schnellenberger at March 31, 2015 09:29 AM (fMSaY)

271 200 I'm still baffled by why this particular fetish is deserving of respect and accommodation when so many others are not. Posted by: toby928(C) at March 31, 2015 02:20 PM (evdj2) Give it time buddy

Posted by: NAMBLA at March 31, 2015 09:29 AM (fWAjv)

272 Lying bigots lie.

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 09:29 AM (ZPrif)

273 Exactly right. It's one thing if the bakery owner were forced to make a cake portraying two men kissing, but that's not what's happening here. These bakers are outright refusing to bake cakes for gay people. Period. Full stop. I see you're not really up to the intellectual challenge here.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:29 AM (MMC8r)

274 Ace, do you mean to suggest for one minute that this is not about homos, but about a political agenda that requires the nuclear arming of Twelver mullahs? Are you insane? Or so lucid as to ensure the survival of you and your offspring in the face of a total nihilistic attack on life itself?

Posted by: Outarange Guy at March 31, 2015 09:29 AM (XBF+S)

275 Gay bakers should be asked to make the following cake: Happy Birthday Matthew Shepard's Killer!!! It's OK to Wear White Shoes After Labor Day!!!

Posted by: MJ at March 31, 2015 09:29 AM (Y2VBD)

276 Will Apple stop selling its products in Indiana?

Posted by: Joe Biden at March 31, 2015 09:29 AM (5fSr7)

277 Unless you think the Jewish baker should be forced to make a Hitler b-day cake. Do you? Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 02:28 PM (FRLeJ) I'd love to do that. They might wonder what that white spread is all over the top but what the fuck

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 09:29 AM (rDqRv)

278 I salute the Gaystapo in taking on the tea party scum. Both are evil, but the Gays are just giving the tea party a taste of the hate they dished out. This is what happens when you make enemies. No one will defend you. The Gaystapo has proven tea party/socons are a paper tiger.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 09:29 AM (2SnmG)

279 Beside putting two guys or gals on top of the cake, they do deliver it to the reception, set it up, and usually stick around to cut and serve it. So, yeah, it's more than just baking a cake.

Posted by: Bruce J. at March 31, 2015 09:30 AM (iQIUe)

280 #263 Give it up pheonixgirl, they'll never believe us that Chick-Fila-A will serve sandwiches to gay people even.

Posted by: Draki at March 31, 2015 09:30 AM (0eidE)

281 Calling me a troll isn't a good argument. I disagree.

Posted by: toby928(C) at March 31, 2015 09:30 AM (evdj2)

282 Calling me a troll isn't a good argument. ----- Depends on the audience. He won me over.

Posted by: SH at March 31, 2015 09:30 AM (gmeXX)

283 These bakers are outright refusing to bake cakes for gay people.

That's not actually true (and I suspect you know it, but you have to lie to keep your fauxrage up).  They're happy to sell them cake, they just decline to participate in gay weddings.

http://is.gd/j3DdRx

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at March 31, 2015 09:30 AM (/kI1Q)

284 None of us is truly free unless we can use the power of government to force others to pretend to respect us.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 09:30 AM (XUKZU)

285 Outrageous.

Posted by: goon at March 31, 2015 09:30 AM (A53Jp)

286 matthew shepard wasn't killed because he was gay....he was killed because of a drug deal gone bad.......

Posted by: phoenixgirl at March 31, 2015 09:30 AM (u8GsB)

287 Interesting how this topic always brings out the closet fascists.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 09:30 AM (2Ojst)

288 252. The regulatory barriers to US manufacture are a part of this, yes, absolutely. Paging BackwardsBoy.

Posted by: LadyS at March 31, 2015 09:30 AM (xYNhJ)

289 shmoe, this isn't about serving gay people, which no one except Muslims have a problem with, it's about being forced by the state to serve gay weddings on pain of bankruptcy homework is hard, I know

Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 09:31 AM (EaH5U)

290 Socons are getting a tatse of their own medicine from the gaystapo. I am enjoying every minute of this.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 09:31 AM (2SnmG)

291 Brave Catholic Warrior Hector gotta troll.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:31 AM (MMC8r)

292 I cannot wait until the day when soros and the Democrats decide it's time to break up Apple. Never happen, as long as their CEO plays the game and Apple pays their tribute (lobby and campaign finance).

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 09:31 AM (39g3+)

293 289 Interesting how this topic always brings out the closet fascists.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 02:30 PM (2Ojst)


sigh.....too true

Posted by: phoenixgirl at March 31, 2015 09:31 AM (u8GsB)

294 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:28 PM (XsOa7) Well, if you ask bakers or photographers, what they do is "art." So you're asking them to create art -- and be a part of the wedding process -- based on something they disagree with and find offensive. but either way, who gives a shit? I wouldn't have a problem baking a gay cake, or a death to america cake, or whatever, because I'm a greedy bastard who wants to get paid and doesn't give a shit. BUT others feel differently. Surely in a tolerant country of 300 million, we can accept that not everyone agrees with our views on life, right? And that government shouldnt force a person to violate their conscious arbitrarily. Hell, we even allowed quakers to get out of the draft. Why? Because people realized how dicked up it is to say to someone, "hey, we know you have deeply felt beliefs that are immutable to you as a person, but fuck you you're doing what we say anyways"

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 09:31 AM (AkOaV)

295 "Calling me a troll isn't a good argument." I gave you a detailed explanation of the law after your first post. If you'd like a more detailed explanation, click the link in my sig.

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 09:31 AM (MYCIw)

296 #280 What hate from the tea party are you talking about?

Posted by: Draki at March 31, 2015 09:31 AM (0eidE)

297 Maybe all that Bridezilla shit just got out of hand

Posted by: Bigby's Ring Finger at March 31, 2015 09:31 AM (3ZtZW)

298 Remember: the fewer children, the fewer fags. In a tiny sense, Roseanne was right. (What? About 5% or so in the worst environments?)

Posted by: Outarange Guy at March 31, 2015 09:31 AM (XBF+S)

299 What is this ' Troll Tuesday"?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 09:31 AM (rDqRv)

300 no one is against gays having birthdays...... Just not too many.

Posted by: ISIS at March 31, 2015 09:32 AM (8ZskC)

301 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works Or the unworkful fruits.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at March 31, 2015 09:32 AM (W5DcG)

302 Yes. I don't see how this is particularly different from serving blacks at lunch counters. You're a public accommodation. Actually, I agree with this. And now we see where it ends. Turns out making government an overseer of all "public" business transactions results in a more totalitarian society. It is far better for liberty to let businesses VOLUNTARILY LOSE MONEY. It's their own business! What's next? Criminalizing unprofitable business decisions? "The Federal Agency of Profits has decided that your decision to cut staff will not result in more profits, so it denies your Application for Reduction in Employee Headcount. Do your duty and make jobs, comrade."

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 09:32 AM (0NdlF)

303 Considering we will have no allies outside of, perhaps, Israel (if they're not already coated in cobalt-60), and it will be literally the world against us,.... Oh well, who wants to live forever on this shithole rock? Posted by: steveegg at March 31, 2015 02:20 PM (cL79m) Actually I was thinking in more civil terms, rather than international. The amount of mindless, unashamed, clueless anti-christian bigotry on display, especially at the tech sites was incredible. See these "intellectuals" think that believing in a religion is a mark of stupidity, and can't fathom any reasonable person partaking in it. Thus they have no problem bashing Christians. Especially Catholics. They have no clue about the Constitution. All they know is that the ignorant bigots are at it again, and that the forces of "reason" must rise up and snark them to death.

Posted by: Iblis at March 31, 2015 09:32 AM (9221z)

304 I'm a libertarian, but let me tell you why the government should force you to do something ...

Posted by: Great Examples of Persusion at March 31, 2015 09:32 AM (gmeXX)

305

No one is insisting on the bakers participating in the ceremony. To have a situation analogous to yours, the kosher or halal deli would have to refuse to cater an event solely because its food would be sitting side-by-side with pork.

 

--

 

No, to make it analogous, the halal deli would be forced to serve pork.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2015 09:32 AM (BbwTO)

306 How's the BPD, Hector?

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:32 AM (MMC8r)

307 what is this dutchie thing

Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 09:32 AM (EaH5U)

308 "Your concern is noted. But clearly you admit that forcing something to do something they don't want to do is wrong and unconstitutional. Right? Unless you think the Jewish baker should be forced to make a Hitler b-day cake. Do you?" No, that's not the standard. Forcing a taxi driver to serve black people as part of his business is not unconstitutional. He doesn't have to be a taxi driver, but if he chooses to do so then he can't discriminate. No one forces bakers to be bakers, but if they choose to do so, and serve the general public, then they shouldn't be allowed to discriminate. A Jewish baker should not be forced to make a Hitler cake. But if a Nazi walks into the shop and asks for a cake that has nothing to do with Nazism, the Jewish baker shouldn't be permitted to discriminate by looking into the Nazi's background. Just bake the fucking cake and get paid.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:32 AM (XsOa7)

309 #292 enjoy it while it lasts. The bay bakeries are going to get some orders soon they won't like.

Posted by: Draki at March 31, 2015 09:32 AM (0eidE)

310 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:26 PM (XsOa7)
+++++

Lie like the Left, much?

Posted by: Jim Dolt@AssQuake at March 31, 2015 09:32 AM (g1MTt)

311

gays could order a birthday cake for a gay.......no problem....no one is against gays having birthdays

 

So that just stopped being a religious objection and became political.  Your baker is upset that same sex marriage is legal.

 

Which it is.

Posted by: Bandersnatch, now half gay at March 31, 2015 09:33 AM (JtwS4)

312

Surely in a tolerant country of 300 million, we can accept that not everyone agrees with our views on life, right?

 

YOU FUCKING RINO!!!!!

Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at March 31, 2015 09:33 AM (zF6Iw)

313 288 matthew shepard wasn't killed because he was gay....he was killed because of a drug deal gone bad....... Posted by: phoenixgirl at March 31, 2015 02:30 PM (u8GsB) Thank you thank you thank you. This is just one of many tropes the progs like to trot out no matter how thoroughly the "Oh my God, they killed Matthew Shephard because he was gay! You bastards!" line has been shown to be utter bullshit.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 09:33 AM (2Ojst)

314 what is this dutchie thing Hector.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:33 AM (MMC8r)

315 "And what I really don't understand is why baking a cake for a homosexual wedding implies support for those two people's choice?" you are a carpenter. Someone enters your shop and asks you a sign post with the following words: 'JoeShmoe99's mother is a dirty wh0re'. Now, your mother's moral conduct might have been spotless, however this is difficult to prove. Do you do it? and if not, why? And do you think they should be able to sue you for not delivering the goods? Why the wedding cake for a religious person should be any different? ghey marriage OFFENDS them. Beside, they have already tried to ask a pro-Christian cake to a ghey baker (or a supporter of the cause) and he turned down the service. Nobody took him to court but what if they did? Are the gheys receiving 'special treatment'?

Posted by: fromabroad at March 31, 2015 09:33 AM (rnV3B)

316 #310 Lol, Shmoe agrees with us and doesn't even know it.

Posted by: Draki at March 31, 2015 09:33 AM (0eidE)

317 15 I want to support the RFRAs, I really do. But what stops them from being used by someone who claims that interracial marriages are contrary to their religion? Or that their religion frowns on black people, so that they won't sell wedding cakes to black couples? --- Forcing someone to participate in an action they disapprove of is a) morally wrong, and b) likely to result in them not doing a very good job, and c) increases their feelings of disapproval. It's a lose/lose/lose proposition.

Posted by: despair at March 31, 2015 09:33 AM (J6suc)

318 309 what is this dutchie thing

Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 02:32 PM (EaH5U)


.....it was a song.....

Posted by: phoenixgirl at March 31, 2015 09:33 AM (u8GsB)

319 O'Sullivan's Law, thanks everyone! I knew there was a name for it, my brain just refused to cooperate. First NFL, now NASCAR...red blooded sports institutions turning blue is the new black!

Posted by: LizLem at March 31, 2015 09:34 AM (yRwC8)

320 Barry Goldwater was right on the Civil Rights Act. Good on intention bad on principle. And its had the affect of conditioning the left that they may use the government to coerce their desired behavior from others.

Posted by: Iblis at March 31, 2015 09:34 AM (9221z)

321 If you'd like a more detailed explanation, click the link in my sig. Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 02:31 PM I clarified that I don't have a problem with RFRAs in general, I have a problem with RFRA supporters using bakers that refuse to make cakes for gay weddings as their raeson d'etre for RFRAs.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:34 AM (XsOa7)

322 #310 Shmoe just agreed to allow Jews to not bake Nazi cakes.

Posted by: Draki at March 31, 2015 09:34 AM (0eidE)

323 @292 May I be the first to say it? Eat shit and die.

Posted by: Outarange Guy at March 31, 2015 09:34 AM (XBF+S)

324

I hate it when people disagree with me. The evvvvvviiiillll people in Indiana adopted a law similar to one signed by Bubba and the dear leader.

so, I'll ignore that and scream tea party several times. tea party.

 

I did it again!

Posted by: dutch treat at March 31, 2015 09:34 AM (Spluw)

325 personally sometimes i don't want to wear shoes. sometimes i don't want to wear a shirt. i would like to know why corporations such as 7-11 quick stops etc can make me . it's a personal choice in what makes me uncomfortable. (i really couldn't think of amnything to add to thw disussion) yeah religion is being attacked because it is Safe for the Left to attack religion is the west.

Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 09:34 AM (nqBYe)

326 This troll doesn't get it does it. What a dope.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 09:35 AM (rDqRv)

327 If I were gay (I am not) If I were getting a wedding cake (I am not) Why would I want someone to make the cake if they do not support my decision? Am I that vain and pompous to force my lifestyle onto the baker (I'm not) I'm sure there are lots of other bakers looking to make a nice cake and get their name out there (Great advertising) Live and let live, get off my fucking lawn,

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 31, 2015 09:35 AM (2Aj5D)

328 @311 As long as socons/tea party lose I am hppay. The Gaystapo while themselves are assholes are doing us a favor by showing how weak conservatives are.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 09:35 AM (2SnmG)

329 >>>EVERYONE is biased... to say you are not is a flat out lie.

Yes. On a national news show lastnight (maybe CNN?) they did a story on combating racism and interviewed the founder of OK Cupid. He had analyzed the various partner preferences for users of his site and found some interesting statistics, such as people prefer a partner of the same race, but that regardless of race, women would be interested in a white partner if looking outside of their race, etc. They also mentioned a study that found that people were more fearful of armed black men than armed white men. Of course, their conclusion was that we need to work extra hard to overcome these unconscious biases.

While preferring a partner in your own tribe seems natural (but you should date whomever you want/are attracted to), when it came to other examples such as the gun stuff, I thinks I'd rather follow Gavin de Becker's advice than the journalist's PC crap.

Posted by: Lizzy[/i] at March 31, 2015 09:35 AM (TLTHv)

330 photographers for homosexual weddings, then

Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 09:35 AM (FRLeJ)

331 I'm all for letting people run their businesses as they see fit. If you want to open Bubbas Bait & BBQ and only serve white christian men... Fine, whatever. I'll go to Johnsons BBQ & Tackle across the street and spend my money there. The reason we were against Jim Crow laws is because the state MANDATED that both Bubba and Johnson install separate facilities for different races and threatened them under penalty of fines or jail time if they refused to comply with their segregation. But if Bubba wants to do that on his own, while I think its ignorant and offensive, I don't see why it should be illegal. And I think Bubba would go out of business in no time flat, because most of us would never shop in a store that was so exclusionary to others. ...But I don't see how he loses his rights to freedom of association and to run his business as he sees fit just because he moved his bait shop from his backyard to a store front.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 09:35 AM (AkOaV)

332 "Forcing someone to participate in an action they disapprove of is a) morally wrong, and b) likely to result in them not doing a very good job, and c) increases their feelings of disapproval. It's a lose/lose/lose proposition." So should restaurants in the South owned by KKK members be permitted to refuse service to blacks? Are you really going to go there?

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:35 AM (XsOa7)

333 Calling me a troll isn't a good argument. It wouldn't be if you weren't acting like a troll. However, based on current evidence, I don't see a problem with it. Oh, and now Hector is back. My day is complete.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 09:35 AM (kff5f)

334 Caterers for homo weddings, then.

Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 09:35 AM (FRLeJ)

335 Thank you thank you thank you. This is just one of many tropes the progs like to trot out no matter how thoroughly the "Oh my God, they killed Matthew Shephard because he was gay! You bastards!" line has been shown to be utter bullshit. I thought he had his hands up saying "don't shoot".

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at March 31, 2015 09:35 AM (W5DcG)

336 #323 If only we could convince Shmoe that baking gay wedding cakes is offensive...... like Jews to nazi cakes.

Posted by: Draki at March 31, 2015 09:35 AM (0eidE)

337 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFtLONl4cNc

feh

Posted by: phoenixgirl at March 31, 2015 09:35 AM (u8GsB)

338 As Ace says, this isn't about refusing to sell someone a donut. It's only about gay marriage. These services are all what could be considered creative - photography, baking, fashion, cooking. Why would anyone want someone who's heart isn't in it to be the creative service provider at their wedding? Answer - they don't, they want to punish them for their beliefs, then hire someone they actually like.

Posted by: Greg61 at March 31, 2015 09:36 AM (H0lcY)

339 320 309 what is this dutchie thing Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 02:32 PM (EaH5U) .....it was a song..... Posted by: phoenixgirl at March 31, 2015 02:33 PM (u8GsB) You're supposed to pass it on the left-hand side, I believe.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 09:36 AM (2Ojst)

340 But if a Nazi walks into the shop and asks for a cake that has nothing to do with Nazism, the Jewish baker shouldn't be permitted to discriminate by looking into the Nazi's background. ----- Well we finally know where you stand. Didn't take long.

Posted by: SH at March 31, 2015 09:36 AM (gmeXX)

341 This troll doesn't get it does it. What a dope. Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 02:35 PM Maybe you're just too stupid to understand common sense?

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:36 AM (XsOa7)

342 First NFL, now NASCAR...red blooded sports institutions turning blue is the new black! Posted by: LizLem at March 31, 2015 02:34 PM (yRwC Pink, see NFL October when it's titty awareness month.

Posted by: f at March 31, 2015 09:36 AM (2Aj5D)

343 I do not oppose ghey marriage but I think this is a big to do over thing. If I were ghey and wanted to get married, I would also want to patronize ghey businesses or ghey friendly businesses. Seems like a wasted opportunity for gheys.

Posted by: Bruce J. at March 31, 2015 09:36 AM (iQIUe)

344 "Just bake the fucking cake and get paid." You'd force a Jewish baker to bake a swastika cake? Really? O...kay. Would you also force a kosher deli to make you a ham sandwich?

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 09:36 AM (MYCIw)

345 328 This troll doesn't get it does it. What a dope. Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 02:35 PM (rDqRv) The troll is trolling. If he were an actual libertarian he would understand that coercing a transaction that one party doesn't want to participate in is anti-freedom.

Posted by: joncelli, sensitive guy at March 31, 2015 09:36 AM (RD7QR)

346 A local baker refused to make me a cake commemorating my exceptional work at the glory hole. Thousands served dammit! Those dicks don't suck themselves you know!

Posted by: Piss The Dutchie at March 31, 2015 09:36 AM (fWAjv)

347 Why would I want someone to make the cake if they do not support my decision?

They don't really want a cake.  They want to destroy people they don't like.

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at March 31, 2015 09:36 AM (/kI1Q)

348 priests and reverends for homo weddings shirley you think they have a right to refuse?

Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 09:36 AM (FRLeJ)

349 Can't gays just be satisfied with cocksucking? Why do we even have to listen to their endless whining? We didn't dig their existential hole - they did it themselves. So why would we have an interest in harnessing our children to the wishes of a bunch of cocksuckers?

Posted by: Super Creepy Eric Hoteham at March 31, 2015 09:36 AM (oDCMR)

350 Answer - they don't, they want to punish them for their beliefs, then hire someone they actually like. Ah, drama queens.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 09:36 AM (0NdlF)

351 Yes. I don't see how this is particularly different from serving blacks at lunch counters. You're a public accommodation. I already addressed how compelling businesses to serve people is unconstitutional and wrong, but there's another answer to this. These bakers have no problem baking a cake for homosexuals. They don't care what you do in your privacy or what perversions you get up to. If you like sheep or whips and chains or watersports or whatever, that's your problem, not theirs. They can get any cake baked they want. They just don't want to tacitly support and endorse, let alone participate in, something they consider morally wrong and which violates their conscience: homosexual "marriage." The guy who won't serve blacks is just saying he wants nothing to do with blacks, no matter what. The baker who won't make a homosexual wedding cake is saying "I don't care about your personal life, but I won't help you violate my conscience." In other words: there's absolutely no comparison whatsoever, and trotting that out is not only infantile but deliberately provocative and has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 09:36 AM (39g3+)

352 the only solution to all this is for no one to bake any more cakes, ever let them eat gluten-free chia seed taro biscuits

Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 09:37 AM (EaH5U)

353 I hate the tea party, they disagree with me dear leader. No one should question the dear leader

Posted by: dutch treat at March 31, 2015 09:37 AM (Spluw)

354 271 Calling me a troll isn't a good argument. But calling you a liar is a perfect description.

Posted by: Captain Oblivious[/i][/b] at March 31, 2015 09:37 AM (hiT/m)

355 @325 Enjoy continued marginalization in the societal and political realm.after decades of bullying different groups, you are now dealing with a monster you created. God bless the Gaystapo!

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 09:37 AM (2SnmG)

356 photographers for homosexual weddings, then Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 02:35 PM That's different. Photographers are intricately involved in a wedding ceremony in a way that bakers are not.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:37 AM (XsOa7)

357 They don't really want a cake. They want to destroy people they don't like. The cake is a lie.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 09:37 AM (0NdlF)

358 #346 Shmoe actually agreed with us on the ham sammich and swastika cake. He just thinks gay marriage ain't a good reason to refuse.

Posted by: Draki at March 31, 2015 09:37 AM (0eidE)

359 Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 31, 2015 02:35 PM (2Aj5D) Right. The correct response to a baker who refuses to sell you your gay wedding cake is to find a baker who will, then tell all of your friends and family to go to that other baker because he's a cool guy. Post some negative Yelp! reviews, then move on. The free market will take care of the rest. If a lot of people support the Christian baker, fine. If they don't, they'll go elsewhere. Either way, everyone wins. No?

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 09:37 AM (AkOaV)

360 A Jewish baker should not be forced to make a Hitler cake. But if a Nazi walks into the shop and asks for a cake that has nothing to do with Nazism, the Jewish baker shouldn't be permitted to discriminate by looking into the Nazi's background. Are you saying that cakes for Gay Weddings have nothing to do with Gay Marriage?

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:38 AM (MMC8r)

361 They don't really want a cake. I can't believe some are still stuck on this point. THEY DON'T WANT THE FUCKING CAKE.

Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 09:38 AM (FRLeJ)

362 Wait -- has anybody seen AtC recently?

Posted by: joncelli, sensitive guy at March 31, 2015 09:38 AM (RD7QR)

363 problem with RFRA supporters using bakers that refuse to make cakes for gay weddings as their raeson d'etre for RFRAs. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:34 PM (XsOa7) joe, look we aren't allowed the fights, the fight is brought to who-ever and we fight. it's like arguing Social Cons! it's not like most social cons are just waiting for the fight they don't want, It is demanded by the left that social cons lose every argument THEY initiate. THEY INITIATE. and why is that? They have a goal .

Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 09:38 AM (nqBYe)

364 Maybe you're just too stupid to understand common sense? Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:36 PM (XsOa7) No I can read and know this is has only been about providing services for a wedding that these people feel violates their religious beliefs. They would be happy to bake cakes for them for other occasions and have said so. But why let facts get in the way of an ignorant argument

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 09:38 AM (rDqRv)

365 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:37 PM (XsOa7) You are beyond splitting hairs here.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 09:38 AM (AkOaV)

366 I feel less slanted now.

Posted by: joncelli, sensitive guy at March 31, 2015 09:38 AM (RD7QR)

367 Tim Cook needs to get back to what he knows: ruining the designs of Apple products he inherited from the Steve Jobs era. 

Posted by: Bud Norton at March 31, 2015 09:38 AM (6cOMd)

368 Aww. willow, please report to the Barrel.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 09:38 AM (0NdlF)

369 #358 Shmoe you haven't heard about the photographer that got found guilty in NM for refusing to participate then?

Posted by: Draki at March 31, 2015 09:38 AM (0eidE)

370 Very interesting occurrence today--got invited to a gay wedding.

Declined without comment.
...........................
Couldn't decide what to bring as a date.
Posted by: wth at March 31, 2015 02:22 PM (wAQA5)



A liberal acquaintance allowed as how his daughter is ... uh ... of the Subaru demographic, but she and her ... uh ... "friend" aren't married. If I were to be invited, I know what I'd get the happy couple: a turkey baster.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 09:38 AM (oKE6c)

371 Shmoe actually agreed with us on the ham sammich and swastika cake. He just thinks gay marriage ain't a good reason to refuse. Like so many people, "I don't have a problem with it, so you can't either." Funny notion some people have of freedom.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:38 AM (MMC8r)

372 They already tried to have gay bakers make pro-family cakes and they rightly refused. Nothing happened to those bakers.

Posted by: Iblis at March 31, 2015 09:39 AM (9221z)

373 i have to admit to liking italics. it's not as boring

Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 09:39 AM (nqBYe)

374

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 02:35 PM

 

--

 

Exactly

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2015 09:39 AM (BbwTO)

375 i have to admit to liking italics. it's not as boring

Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 09:39 AM (nqBYe)

376 Apple will forgive them if the state changes its name to iNdiana.

Posted by: despair at March 31, 2015 09:39 AM (J6suc)

377 balls!

Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 09:39 AM (FRLeJ)

378 That's different. Photographers are intricately involved in a wedding ceremony in a way that bakers are not.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99

 

bullshit. food at weddings has been around a lot longer than photographs.

 

The nation of Islam isn't about to cater any event that's gay and/or interracial. You aren't interested in forcing those doors open, and niether is your dear leader.

Posted by: dutch treat at March 31, 2015 09:39 AM (Spluw)

379 @  240

That was funny.

But I'll never know.

Posted by: irongrampa at March 31, 2015 09:39 AM (jeCnD)

380 Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 02:06 PM (0LHZx) The law isn't messed up. Twenty years ago it was sensible legislation to prevent that is upon us now. It is still sensible legislation.

Posted by: Not Loved Time to be Feared at March 31, 2015 09:39 AM (nRvEn)

381 So that just stopped being a religious objection and became political. Your baker is upset that same sex marriage is legal. Seriously? You want to go back and look at that again? The baker may or may not care that same sex marriage is legal. The baker does believe that supporting same sex marriage with his labor is joining/supporting a sinful enterprise. But let's turn this around. Let's say that the baker just doesn't want to do it. "I don't like them gays," he says. What right should anyone have to force him to spend his labor? Not what right does he have to refuse: what right does the gay couple have to force him to serve them?

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 09:39 AM (kff5f)

382 "The guy who won't serve blacks is just saying he wants nothing to do with blacks, no matter what. The baker who won't make a homosexual wedding cake is saying "I don't care about your personal life, but I won't help you violate my conscience." In other words: there's absolutely no comparison whatsoever, and trotting that out is not only infantile but deliberately provocative and has nothing to do with the topic at hand." Try replacing blacks with homosexuals and you get this: "The guy who won't serve homosexuals is just saying he wants nothing to do with homosexuals, no matter what. The baker who won't make a black wedding cake is saying "I don't care about your personal life, but I won't help you violate my conscience." What is the difference? We're talking about discrimination based on immutable characteristics, whether it's race, ethnicity, sex, sexual persuasion, natural hair color, whatever.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:40 AM (XsOa7)

383 378 Apple will forgive them if the state changes its name to iNdiana. Posted by: despair at March 31, 2015 02:39 PM (J6suc) And we have a winner.

Posted by: joncelli, sensitive guy at March 31, 2015 09:40 AM (RD7QR)

384 That's fine, I respect that. I just don't order pork products from him... I'm not out suing to force him to violate his beliefs so that I can eat a pepperoni pizza. Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 02:28 PM (AkOaV) A sane view in an increasingly insane world...verboten!

Posted by: LizLem at March 31, 2015 09:40 AM (yRwC8)

385 Post some negative Yelp! reviews, then move on.

The free market will take care of the rest. If a lot of people support the Christian baker, fine. If they don't, they'll go elsewhere.

Either way, everyone wins. No?

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 02:37 PM (AkOaV)



Uh oh. An outbreak of common sense.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 09:40 AM (oKE6c)

386 My cake has special icing. Mmmmm. Salty and tangy at the same time.

Posted by: Piss The Dutchie at March 31, 2015 09:40 AM (fWAjv)

387 conservative monster, i did not do "it" i just admire it. i don't actually remember how to do italics.

Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 09:40 AM (nqBYe)

388 Yes. I don't see how this is particularly different from serving blacks at lunch counters. You're a public accommodation. Posted by: Bandersnatch, now half gay at March 31, 2015 02:20 PM (JtwS4) No. No no no no no. This is pernicious bullshit popularized by the language of the Americans with Disabilities Act. A business is private f*cking property to be used by the owner as he or she sees fit, to provide services or do business with, or to decline to do so, with anyone he or she sees fit. Your position means that it can be commandeered by the state to do what they want the owner to do, regardless of that owner's First, Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights. It's totalitarian, fascist, and antithetical to property rights.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 09:40 AM (2Ojst)

389 Bakers are very involved with the wedding. The cake is the centerpiece of the reception, and they have to set it up, take it down, and manage it during the festivities. But aside from all of that IT ISN'T ABOUT THE DAMN CAKE. It's about the government preventing the free exercise of religion.

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 09:41 AM (MYCIw)

390 When MA legalized same sex marriage the Catholic Charities adoption agency, one of the oldest adoption agencies in the country, decided to shut down because they had a policy of only placing children with heterosexual couples.

To those who think the bakers are being silly, would you have a problem with an institution like this adoption agency continuing its policy of heterosexual married couple placements only?

Posted by: Lizzy[/i] at March 31, 2015 09:41 AM (TLTHv)

391 Would you also force a kosher deli to make you a ham sandwich? Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 02:36 PM (MYCIw) ________ Apples and Oranges The Deli owner doesn't say I'll make a pork sandwich for you, but not the guy next to you. He says I don't make pork sandwiches, period. The SoCon baker on the other hand says, I'll make a cake for these 2 people getting married, but not for these other 2 people. Why is this so hard to understand the difference?

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 09:41 AM (0LHZx)

392 What is the difference? We're talking about discrimination based on immutable characteristics, whether it's race, ethnicity, sex, sexual persuasion, natural hair color, whatever.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99

 

Blow me. And good luck making me do it.

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 09:41 AM (Spluw)

393 Pink, see NFL October when it's titty awareness month. Posted by: f at March 31, 2015 02:36 PM (2Aj5D) Hey now.... Breast.... Cancer... awareness.... LOL... We actually had a great idea once... almost had the local Hooters in Denver go for it.... but they said corporate would never go for it... A 'Beer for Breasts' event, sponsored by Hooters... where X amount of the proceeds goes to breast cancer research...

Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 09:41 AM (qh617)

394 #384 You know the mormons used to not have kind views of blacks and probably wouldn't have baked cakes for their weddings.

Posted by: Draki at March 31, 2015 09:41 AM (0eidE)

395 By the way these aren't uninterested innocent bystanders who can't get their cakes baked or pics taken. They are fuckin activists looking for a fight and law suit. I mean let's call a spade a spade

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 09:41 AM (rDqRv)

396 natural hair color Right, we can't wait for the lawfare on that one. *rolls eyes*

Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 09:41 AM (EaH5U)

397 On another blog I read, it's pointed out that "moderates" who are consistently against "our team" in favor of moderating for the "other team" are effectively enemies. Everything they do helps the "other team" gain ground. Whenever they have the option of helping "our team", they do not. So they're useless. Don't let them get into a position to backstab you, and ignore their spineless ideas on how to make peace with those who are waging war.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 09:41 AM (0NdlF)

398 I don't believe that anyone should be forced to provide services if it goes against their faith. That said, the tea party/ socons are such assholes I am willing to go against my belief to see them suffer a defeat. The Gaystapo is the first force in politics to ever make the tea party/socons look impotent. I am enjoying seeing 2 evil forces go at it. I view the tea party/socons as the bigger threat, so I am with the Gaystapo on this one.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 09:41 AM (2SnmG)

399 I wonder if CNBC will grill their lord and savior Tim Cook about this? Sorry, I'm laughing too hard to continue the post

Posted by: Dan at March 31, 2015 09:41 AM (COpZ4)

400 "bullshit. food at weddings has been around a lot longer than photographs." OK, again: Are we talking about bakers who refused to attend a gay wedding, or bakers who refused to bake a cake because they knew it would be a part of a gay wedding ceremony at which their attendance was neither requested nor desired? If it's the former, I'm in full support of the RFRA. If it's the latter, I am not.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:41 AM (XsOa7)

401 They already tried to have gay bakers make pro-family cakes and they rightly refused. Nothing happened to those bakers. [/i 'Protected Class' is fundamentally unAmerican.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:41 AM (MMC8r)

402 If this law is so so so horrible why did TFG endorse and vote for it when he was a Senator?

Posted by: RWC - Team BOHICA at March 31, 2015 09:42 AM (fWAjv)

403 i don't actually remember how to do italics. Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 02:40 PM (nqBYe) Its the only web fu I know use brackets [ ] with an i to open and brackets [ ] with a /i to close

Posted by: Iblis at March 31, 2015 09:42 AM (9221z)

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:42 AM (MMC8r)

405 bandersnatch

as a catholic, it's a religious matter to me.....just as abortion is.....both issues have wandered into the political realm but to me they are religious before political

Posted by: phoenixgirl at March 31, 2015 09:42 AM (u8GsB)

406 The SoCon baker on the other hand says, I'll make a cake for these 2 people getting married, but not for these other 2 people.

Why is this so hard to understand the difference?

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo

 

I'm not a so-con mini moo.

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 09:42 AM (Spluw)

407 So the next time I fly into Dulles with either one of my dogs or a duty free bag (usually a marker of alcohol purchases), I can demand the next cab? Yeah, not gonna happen. Let me know when that lawsuit gets national notice.

Posted by: anon a mouse at March 31, 2015 09:42 AM (KnbYp)

408 So that just stopped being a religious objection and became political. Your baker is upset that same sex marriage is legal. I try to be patient but few things annoy me more than people lecturing others on how they believe and what their religion teaches. Allow me to enlighten you into Christian theology: Homosexuals having birthdays is simply a birthday. All of us are sinners, all of us do bad things. Baking a cake for someone is always baking a cake for a sinner - particularly if I bake myself a cake. That's no different no matter who it is. Bakig a cake celebrating homosexual "marriage" is endorsing and participating in something that is a direct violation of God's law. Its like how a Jewish guy would have no problem baking a cake for a German, but would have issues with doing so celebrating Auschwitz. I'm sorry if this is too subtle for you, but its really quite simple.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 09:42 AM (39g3+)

409 310 Hector LIV Get informed. In this case the lady had served this same customer forsome time. He asked her to amke him a cake for the wedding. She said no. Now your uninformed ass is here saying that the baker wont serve gays.. At least be accurate troll.

Posted by: Golfman at March 31, 2015 09:42 AM (48QDY)

410 Whatever happened to FUBU - For Us By Us? Novel idea. Too bad it can only happen in a free country.

Posted by: Super Creepy Eric Hoteham at March 31, 2015 09:42 AM (oDCMR)

411 If I knew you were coming, I'd have baked a kike

Posted by: Hitler 1944. at March 31, 2015 09:42 AM (UhRGU)

412 Pass the poochie from the left hand side...cause I'm HUNGRY!

Posted by: Barack Hussein Obama at March 31, 2015 09:42 AM (7ObY1)

413 They want to destroy unpeople they don't like. FIFY.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 09:42 AM (kff5f)

414 If this law is so so so horrible why did TFG endorse and vote for it when he was a Senator? Because he's a lying piece of shit, they know it, and give him a pass.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:42 AM (MMC8r)

415 swastika cake. ---------------- Stop the Hindoo bashing. Hindoos have rights too.

Posted by: RioBravo at March 31, 2015 09:42 AM (NUqwG)

416 Blow me. And good luck making me do it. Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 02:41 PM For someone who's so anti-homosexual, it's amusing that you'd want me to blow you.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:42 AM (XsOa7)

417 The SoCon baker on the other hand says, I'll make a cake for these 2 people getting married, but not for these other 2 people. Why is this so hard to understand the difference? Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 02:41 PM (0LHZx) No, the So Con baker will bake you a cake... But does say I will not speak those words... THAT is the difference... its not the cake... its the speech.

Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 09:43 AM (qh617)

418 Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 02:40 PM (nqBYe) Ooops! I only saw your big comment. Sorry! It's [ I ] [ / I ] with no spaces. But with great power comes great responsibility.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 09:43 AM (0NdlF)

419
OK, again: Are we talking about bakers who refused to attend a gay wedding, or bakers who refused to bake a cake because they knew it would be a part of a gay wedding ceremony at which their attendance was neither requested nor desired?

If it's the former, I'm in full support of the RFRA. If it's the latter, I am not.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99

 

The former. .....and blow me again.

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 09:43 AM (Spluw)

420 'Protected Class' is fundamentally unAmerican. Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 02:41 PM (MMC8r) I'd love to see some candidate stand up to repeal "hate crime" laws. Who cares what someone thinks? (yes i know) Its what you do that counts!

Posted by: Iblis at March 31, 2015 09:43 AM (9221z)

421 400 I don't believe that anyone should be forced to provide services if it goes against their faith. That said, the tea party/ socons are such assholes I am willing to go against my belief to see them suffer a defeat. Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 02:41 PM (2SnmG) 'I like the cock' is so much shorter and easier to say.

Posted by: RWC - Team BOHICA at March 31, 2015 09:43 AM (fWAjv)

422 BTW, "teaparty/socons" WTF???

Posted by: anon a mouse at March 31, 2015 09:43 AM (KnbYp)

423 The Deli owner doesn't say I'll make a pork sandwich for you, but not the guy next to you. He says I don't make pork sandwiches, period. The SoCon baker on the other hand says, I'll make a cake for these 2 people getting married, but not for these other 2 people. Why is this so hard to understand the difference? Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 02:41 PM (0LHZx) I'll make a kosher cake or i cannot Make a kosher cake? poleease!

Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 09:43 AM (nqBYe)

424 The Gaystapo is the first force in politics to ever make the tea party/socons look impotent. I am enjoying seeing 2 evil forces go at it. I view the tea party/socons as the bigger threat, so I am with the Gaystapo on this one. Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 02:41 PM (2SnmG) _________ You think the TP and SoCons are the same people? Congrats. You're the dump person of the day on the internet.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 09:43 AM (0LHZx)

425 iPad fu sux. im better on the phone.

Posted by: Golfman at March 31, 2015 09:43 AM (48QDY)

426 @399 Conservatives will ultimately lose. You are all aging and not getting new recruits from younger people. Time is on the side of the Marxist-Leninists, Moderates and Libertarians.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 09:43 AM (2SnmG)

427
I'm sorry if this is too subtle for you, but its really quite simple.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 02:42 PM (39g3+)


you said it better than i could....

Posted by: phoenixgirl at March 31, 2015 09:43 AM (u8GsB)

428

Posted by: JoeShmoe99

 

I make speeches, not sense. That's why the dear leader is one of my friends.

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 09:44 AM (Spluw)

429 "What is the difference?" A marriage is a holy sacrament. Participating in someone's wedding has a spiritual weight. Try to get married in a Catholic Church as a protestant and you'll quickly learn the distinction. Should we all be suing the Pope for discrimination?

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 09:44 AM (MYCIw)

430 i may make a beef CAKE. (PAUSES) i'm not making pork chops.

Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 09:44 AM (nqBYe)

431

and mini moo and hector are battling for the basement.

 

wow.

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 09:45 AM (Spluw)

432 Joe, do you like gladiator movies?

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:45 AM (MMC8r)

433 Should we all be suing the Pope for discrimination? Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 02:44 PM (MYCIw) no but maybe for a poor fashion choice. Have you seen those shoes he wears? Try playing basketball in them also

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 09:45 AM (rDqRv)

434 392 When MA legalized same sex marriage the Catholic Charities adoption agency, one of the oldest adoption agencies in the country, decided to shut down because they had a policy of only placing children with heterosexual couples.


Posted by: Lizzy at March 31, 2015 02:41 PM (TLTHv)



So the policy worked, as leftists see it.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 09:45 AM (oKE6c)

435 It's [ I ] [ / I ] with no spaces. But with great power comes great responsibility. Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 02:43 PM (0NdlF) willow. coming to the barrel soon.

Posted by: Golfman at March 31, 2015 09:45 AM (48QDY)

436 432 i may make a beef CAKE. (PAUSES) *puts sunglasses on* i'm not making pork chops. YEEAAAHHHH!!!!! Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 02:44 PM (nqBYe) There, that's better.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 09:45 AM (2Ojst)

437 no but maybe for a poor fashion choice. Have you seen those shoes he wears? Try playing basketball in them also

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 02:45 PM (rDqRv)



What, no love for his yarmulke?

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 09:45 AM (oKE6c)

438 Should we all be suing the Pope for discrimination? Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 02:44 PM (MYCIw) Oh, they're trying. They're trying.

Posted by: Iblis at March 31, 2015 09:46 AM (9221z)

439 i may make a beef CAKE.

What time's dinner, and what wine should I bring?

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at March 31, 2015 09:46 AM (/kI1Q)

440 A lot of the barreling over italics happens because... Pixy capitalizes the lower-case i that you type I just had to retype the i in this very post, for example, because Pixy capitalized it. Pixy thinks if you type an i you must mean the pronoun "I."

Posted by: Barack Hussein Obama at March 31, 2015 09:46 AM (7ObY1)

441 Enjoy continued marginalization in the societal and political realm.after decades of bullying different groups, you are now dealing with a monster you created. God bless the Gaystapo! What's funny about this gloating is that this is actually Peak Gay. Stand firm and the enemy will flee. And there's nothing for God to bless about the Gaystapo; only deliverance of the people in it from their self-destruction.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 09:46 AM (0NdlF)

442 Wow ... It's as if allowing Government to compel some people to provide goods or services against their will is a bad idea. Who knew ? Look ... If I don't want to sell something to someone, or work for them, government is just not going to make me. I'll burn the place down first. You may not like my reasons ... and i really just do not give a damn.

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 31, 2015 09:46 AM (wQ9BN)

443 their attendance was neither requested nor desired? If it's the former, I'm in full support of the RFRA. If it's the latter, I am not. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:41 PM (XsOa7) When you buy a wedding cake... the baker comes and sets it up... Its not like a sheet cake you buy at the grocery store. Its also still coerced speech... because the expectation is that they will use their artistic talent to make the cake nice... WITH the sentiments of those buying the cake, not those who actually create the cake.

Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 09:46 AM (qh617)

444 CEO of world's largest tax cheat lectures Indiana governor on morality.

Posted by: Wilkey at March 31, 2015 09:46 AM (Vr7So)

445 @426 At one time they were not back in 2009/2010. I used to be a tea partier, then socons starting taking over and turned what was a libertarian leaning movement into one that is based on reactionary social views, xenophobia and racism. I have no beef with you as you are one of the sane people around here.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 09:46 AM (2SnmG)

446 I don't know anything about any Kakes of Teh Gheys but have I had the opportunity to tell you all how much money I've made today?

Posted by: Mr. Poo Poo at March 31, 2015 09:47 AM (fLKzW)

447 428 @399
Conservatives will ultimately lose. You are all aging and not getting new recruits from younger people. Time is on the side of the Marxist-Leninists, Moderates and Libertarians.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 02:43 PM (2SnmG)




Yeah, and the homosexuals are outbreeding us, too.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 09:47 AM (oKE6c)

448 Should we all be suing the Pope for discrimination? He IS a filthy so-con. (Even the commie Pope.)

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:47 AM (MMC8r)

449 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:40 PM (XsOa7) I happen to agree with you. I don't think it should matter whether a business owner wants to refuse service to a gay wedding, or a black man, or a Muslim woman or whatever. If you own your labor and are not someone elses slave, no one should be able to force you to perform labor against your will. THAT was why barry goldwater was against the CRA of 1964. Because THIS is where it leads. We keep adding more and more "victim" classes to the list of people who 'cannot be discriminated against' which does NOTHING to stop discrimination. If anything, it furthers it. Because when you force someone to do something at the point of a gun, they form resentment. You've also created a situation where it's easier and cheaper for businesses to only hire white straight males, because if they hire anyone else and fire them for any reason, those people in "victim" classes have special laws on the books that allow them to sue the business for discrimination. So what that does is create a FINANCIAL incentive for racism which is just as bad as a POLITICAL incentive for racism. Let people live how they want to live, tolerate those who have different beliefs than you do, and it will all work out in the end. Use the threat of force from the government to bend arms and force people to work against their will, and it does nothing but generate resentment.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 09:47 AM (AkOaV)

450 The SoCon baker on the other hand says, I'll make a cake for these 2 people getting married, but not for these other 2 people. Why is this so hard to understand the difference? Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 02:41 PM (0LHZx) Exactly. Why is the baker's baking a cake a celebration of the eater's choices? Should a SoCon baker refuse to bake a cake for a heterosexual couple who had sex before their wedding night? Because that's contrary to his religion too. Should SoCon bakers be doing background checks on their customers? Just bake the fucking cake and keep your religion to yourself.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:47 AM (XsOa7)

451 Most people don't realize that Gays only make up 1.5% of the the population. If that. This is all about bullying Christians out of the public square.

Posted by: Iblis at March 31, 2015 09:47 AM (9221z)

452 HR, a red wine would be appropriate with the 'beef cake' I DID NOT do the ITALICS.

Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 09:47 AM (nqBYe)

453

I used to be a tea partier.

 

Who knew that snorting the tea was a bad idea?

Posted by: dutch treat at March 31, 2015 09:47 AM (Spluw)

454 Who knew Ghey Marriage wouldn't make Gheys happy? We tried to tell them but they went all Ghey ragey and stomped out with their stompy boots on. Fags are complete Drama Queens.

Posted by: Super Creepy Eric Hoteham at March 31, 2015 09:48 AM (oDCMR)

455 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:40 PM (XsOa7) But you can't make that switch because no one is saying they just want nothing to do with gays. There is a specific ceremony to which they attach religious significance- the wedding ceremony- in which they refuse to participate with homosexuals because they believe it to be morally wrong. You are trying to make equal two things which are not equal. There is no equivalency between someone who simply refuses service based on [characteristic] and someone who refuses service for a particular thing or activity based on [characteristic]. No. Equivalency. So the onus is on *you* to prove that you have some right to my labor. Go on. Try that one. I dare you.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 09:48 AM (kff5f)

456 #428 Man, Hector is just reduced to meaningless babble at this point. More so than usual, I mean.

Posted by: Citizen X at March 31, 2015 09:48 AM (7ObY1)

457 Apple has a fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders, partners, and employees first. Their social bullshit is secondary. Apple shareholders need to threaten a lawsuit to this effect, that Cook et all are breaching their fiduciary responsibility to the owners of the company in their quest for The One True Holy Social Justice. That is pretty much the only thing that will get the attention of the twit-fascists. And, once upon a time, there was a thing called "freedom of association." The SJW's love freedom of association, but ONLY when they are the ones determining who may (and must) associate with whom. This is, of course, the exact opposite of what "freedom of association" actually is. But they've successfully inverted every other political and philosophical concept in the Western canon, so why not this one, too?

Posted by: filbert at March 31, 2015 09:48 AM (h6Mpm)

458 At one time they were not back in 2009/2010. I used to be a tea partier, then socons starting taking over and turned what was a libertarian leaning movement into one that is based on reactionary social views, xenophobia and racism. **** wtf? trolls are so one minded. control the border=xenophobe. let's not make everything ghey pride forever=reactionary social views. Anything I say=racism.

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 09:48 AM (th6S/)

459 Yes. I don't see how this is particularly different from serving blacks at lunch counters. You're a public accommodation. Posted by: Bandersnatch, now half gay at March 31, 2015 02:20 PM (JtwS4) Weddings require invitations. They aren't "public".

Posted by: AmishDude at March 31, 2015 09:48 AM (L2xDv)

460 You know you're idiotic trash when Moo Moo is attacking your inconsistency and stupidity. Anyone who describes themselves as "libertarian" then goes on and on about how the government should restrict liberty more is either a colossal fool or a liar.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 09:48 AM (39g3+)

461 Just bake the fucking cake and keep your religion to yourself.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99

 

Make me asshole.

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 09:48 AM (Spluw)

462 I can see the wedding cake and other wedding related service business becoming tied to the church, ordered thru the pastor or as part of a club.  No longer offered to the general public.  The gays can get their cakes from the unconcerned or WalMart.

Posted by: Jean at March 31, 2015 09:48 AM (ztOda)

463 @443 If you have not noticed, God is not with your movement. You have been losing every cultural battle and 4 out of the last 6 Presidential elections. I enjoyed the meltdown by conservatives in 2012.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 09:49 AM (2SnmG)

464 A lot of the barreling over italics happens because... Pixy capitalizes the lower-case i that you type I just had to retype the i in this very post, for example, because Pixy capitalized it. Pixy thinks if you type an i you must mean the pronoun "I." That's actually Internet Explorer, and the case of the italic tag doesn't matter. It's the lost closing tag that causes issues. I find it helpful to type the open/close tag before pasting anything.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 09:49 AM (0NdlF)

465 204 Is it gay people or trial lawyers who are most offended by this law? Posted by: Hank at March 31, 2015 02:21 PM (/ujVT) Now you're gettin' it.

Posted by: AmishDude at March 31, 2015 09:49 AM (L2xDv)

466 Tim Cook needs to get back to what he knows: ruining the designs of Apple products he inherited from the Steve Jobs era. Posted by: Bud Norton at March 31, 2015 02:38 PM (6cOMd) Someone pointed out the other day that Jobs was a jerk but his #1 concern was the product, making the best product possible. Thus why Apple became the brand it was. If agenda becomes #1 and product slips to #2...well nature abhors a vacuum, some other product will take over the market. Will be interesting to see how this all shapes out for Apple.

Posted by: LizLem at March 31, 2015 09:49 AM (yRwC8)

467 He's been looking at the back of people's heads for too long.

Posted by: Butt Bandit at March 31, 2015 09:50 AM (GGCsk)

468 Most people don't realize that Gays only make up 1.5% of the the population. If that. It may be as high as 3% but the number who want to get married is a small percentage of even that number. You're right; this has nothing to do with homosexuality as many have pointed out before. Its all about destroying enemies and controlling the majority.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 09:50 AM (39g3+)

469 465 @443
If you have not noticed, God is not with your movement. You have been losing every cultural battle and 4 out of the last 6 Presidential elections.


Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 02:49 PM (2SnmG)



He's right. Gaia has turned against us.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 09:50 AM (oKE6c)

470 When you buy a wedding cake... the baker comes and sets it up... Its not like a sheet cake you buy at the grocery store. Its also still coerced speech... because the expectation is that they will use their artistic talent to make the cake nice... WITH the sentiments of those buying the cake, not those who actually create the cake. Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 02:46 PM (qh617) Not at my wedding. We ordered it, paid for it, it was delivered to the hall, and that was it. The baker wasn't there for the ceremony, the reception, etc. We also could've just picked up the cake from the baker, but we chose delivery for an extra $50. Baking a cake is now speech? C'mon. Should taxi drivers refuse to pick up gay men because they disapprove of their lifestyles? Ridiculous.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:50 AM (XsOa7)

471 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:47 PM (XsOa7) A baker should be free to make or not make a cake as they see fit, the reason be damned, without the fascist interference from the state that you seem to advocate and support.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 09:50 AM (2Ojst)

472 trolls are so one minded. control the border=xenophobe. Hector's entire motivating factor is that he married an illegal. Therefore everything is about him, him, him and what he wants. Anyone else is evil. Pure Borderline Personality Disorder.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:50 AM (MMC8r)

473 Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 02:46 PM (0NdlF) I have some very sad personal experience because of an immediate family member, with the Gay lifestyle. It is destructive.... it is a false path. Whether you believe in God, or Evolution, it makes no sense to celebrate the 'Gay' lifestyle. Note, I did not say GAY is bad... but the Gay culture which they have, by choice, embraced. That lifestyle will eventually self destruct... but its going to cause a lot of pain before it goes IMO.

Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 09:50 AM (qh617)

474 i i i i i

Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 09:50 AM (nqBYe)

475 But he's gay! Standing up to him would mean we're homophobic...

Posted by: Lufthansa at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (ufFCO)

476 Better yet.  Now that Apple is officially taking stands on various laws they should be pressed to put forth an opinion on Sharia law.

Posted by: Thatch at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (xwAcF)

477 All concern trolls are Average Joe.

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (ZPrif)

478 Make me asshole. Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 02:48 PM (Spluw) No problemo.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (XsOa7)

479 If you have not noticed, God is not with your movement. You have been losing every cultural battle and 4 out of the last 6 Presidential elections. Matthew 10:22 and pretty much all of Rev.

Posted by: GMan at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (sxq57)

480 Therefore everything is about him, him, him and what he wants.

Very Pink Mafia.

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (/kI1Q)

481 You're right; this has nothing to do with homosexuality as many have pointed out before. Its all about destroying enemies the family and controlling the majority.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 02:50 PM (39g3+)


FIFY.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (oKE6c)

482 ok didn't work

Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (nqBYe)

483 Apple pays almost no taxes in the US. It manufactures its iPhones with what is little better than slave labor. Its workforce has almost no blacks or Hispanics. And yet its CEO dares to tell Indiana about right and wrong. Tim Cook likes anti-discrimination laws? Let's try them out on Apple.

Posted by: Wilkey at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (Vr7So)

484 Good news you guys "Pres Obama okays release of 12 F-16 jet fighters, 20 Harpoon missiles and up to 125 M1A1 Abrams tank kits that had been withheld from Egypt." Egypt's cool now, right?

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (th6S/)

485 Just bake the fucking cake and keep your religion to yourself. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:47 PM (XsOa7) Yeah, that about sums up liberalism, bud. I think you meant to say liberalism when you said you were a libertarian. Put a gun to a guys head and say, "do what I fucking tell you or you lose your business, get fined, and end up in jail. Now get to work, asshole!"

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (AkOaV)

486 You gotta love how these people are all for equality, except when it comes to someone else expressing a different point of view. Then it's "discrimination".

Posted by: Ass Pirate at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (GGCsk)

487 'Just bake the fucking cake and keep your religion to yourself." Oh, for fuck's sake. Are these bakers out evangelizing with buttercream? They didn't ask for this. They were just minding their own business when someone came to them and said "so, I'm going to need you to violate your religion or else I'm going to sue you and try to get you arrested."

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (MYCIw)

488 Baking a cake is now speech? C'mon. Should taxi drivers refuse to pick up gay men because they disapprove of their lifestyles? Ridiculous.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99

 

Notice how witless tries to evade. Taxi drivers ARE getting away with it.

 

No one is making me do shit that i don't want to do. You certainly won't.

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (Spluw)

489

Wait -- has anybody seen AtC recently?

 

I believe she avoids these threads to preserve her sanity.

 

Speaking for myself, I find them hard to take.  There are legitimate arguments on both sides of the wedding cake but some people are way to quick to go to cocksuckers gotta suck cock because they get a context in which to flaunt their anti-gay animus.

 

 

Posted by: Bandersnatch, now half gay at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (JtwS4)

490 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:47 PM (XsOa7) Hector has changed his argument.

Posted by: Golfman at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (48QDY)

491 Posted by: fromabroad at March 31, 2015 02:00 PM (rnV3B) SECONDED.

Posted by: despair at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (J6suc)

492 453 Most people don't realize that Gays only make up 1.5% of the the population. If that. Posted by: Iblis at March 31, 2015 02:47 PM (9221z) ________ So it's OK to discriminate against a group as long as that group isn't too big. Got it.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (0LHZx)

493 OT: More SJW outrage! Now they're asking if Trevor Noah would be getting all this pushback if he were white. See Twitchy.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 09:51 AM (XUKZU)

494 I've been boycotting Starbucks for years. I don't care about their politics, their coffee sucks and is way over priced.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2015 09:52 AM (g1DWB)

495 Woah, MSDNC is turning on Trevor Noah already. Can't be the anti-Semitism. Must've been the misogynism and fat jokes. Live by the PC, die by the PC, Trevor.

Posted by: Citizen X at March 31, 2015 09:52 AM (7ObY1)

496 If you have not noticed, God is not with your movement. You have been losing every cultural battle and 4 out of the last 6 Presidential elections. You think winning presidential elections is a sign of God's favor? Heh. Obama winning elections is God's judgement. And it may take a lot more societal destruction before America realizes that technology and wealth are an inadequate replacement for having God.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 09:52 AM (0NdlF)

497 I would bake the cake alright. With special filling.

Posted by: Ass Pirate at March 31, 2015 09:52 AM (GGCsk)

498 These services are all what could be considered creative - photography, baking, fashion, cooking. Why would anyone want someone who's heart isn't in it to be the creative service provider at their wedding? Answer - they don't, they want to punish them for their beliefs, then hire someone they actually like. It has been my experience that 'the arts' are heavily populated by people not so heteronormative. Baking a cake, not so much art, more science. Decorating the cake, the 'adorning' of the cake, mounting the little Adam and Steve bride/groom or bride/bride or groom/groom on the cake, that's much more artistic... They want to have a monopoly on the arts and punish those of the normative persuasion.

Posted by: SE Pa Moron [/i] at March 31, 2015 09:52 AM (xQX/f)

499 All concern trolls are Average Joe. Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 02:51 PM (ZPrif) This would concern me if I gave a fcuk about their concern.

Posted by: filbert at March 31, 2015 09:52 AM (h6Mpm)

500 A baker should be free to make or not make a cake as they see fit, the reason be damned, without the fascist interference from the state that you seem to advocate and support. Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 02:50 PM (2Ojst) I didn't say I supported it. I'm just talking about the law as it stands today. We can talk about a world without the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act, but it's not reality.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:52 AM (XsOa7)

501 Baking a cake is now speech? C'mon. Should taxi drivers refuse to pick up gay men because they disapprove of their lifestyles? Ridiculous. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:50 PM (XsOa7) Should a Taxi Driver be forced to say 'I agree with the Gay lifestyle' when he picks you up? Baking a cake is not speech.... DECORATING said cake, with SPEECH.... it SPEECH.... If you can't see that... I can't help you.

Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 09:52 AM (qh617)

502 It is destructive.... it is a false path. Whether you believe in God, or Evolution, it makes no sense to celebrate the 'Gay' lifestyle.


Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 02:50 PM (qh617)




You left out "public health."

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 09:52 AM (oKE6c)

503 and 4 out of the last 6 Presidential elections... 5 over 4 since 1980. Suck on that.

Posted by: anon a mouse at March 31, 2015 09:52 AM (KnbYp)

504

 M1A1 Abrams tank kits

 

I always loved the sound of that. Funny, yet intruiging.

Posted by: Hello, Revell? at March 31, 2015 09:52 AM (Spluw)

505 The .1% of the population can use this as a legal cudgel to destroy the ability of anyone else to resist. Once your religious objections are voided, then your religion can be, too.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:52 AM (MMC8r)

506 LiFB

Posted by: toby928(C) at March 31, 2015 09:52 AM (evdj2)

507 If you have not noticed, God is not with your movement. You have been losing every cultural battle and 4 out of the last 6 Presidential elections. God helps those who control their border, population...50 million new Americans will change the country.

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 09:53 AM (th6S/)

508 mounting the little Adam and Steve



Unfortunate choice of words.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 09:53 AM (oKE6c)

509 Hector must have had a bad day at the glory hole.

Posted by: joncelli, sensitive guy at March 31, 2015 09:53 AM (RD7QR)

510 @462 I admit my position is hypocritical. But I HATE the tea party/socons and want them defeated. I would support Marxists- Leninists over the tea party/ socons if that is what it takes to crush that movement.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 09:53 AM (2SnmG)

511 Should taxi drivers refuse to pick up gay men because they disapprove of their lifestyles? Explain to me why they should be forced to pick up gay men. What right does that gay man have to that taxi ride?

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 09:53 AM (kff5f)

512 I'd bake a cake for Alex ... ... but it would have to be a shortcake.

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 31, 2015 09:53 AM (wQ9BN)

513 Posted by: Bandersnatch, now half gay at March 31, 2015 02:51 PM (JtwS4) I'm not anti-gay as much as being made to do something by the point of a gun.

Posted by: Golfman at March 31, 2015 09:53 AM (48QDY)

514 Someone pointed out the other day that Jobs was a jerk but his #1 concern was the product, making the best product possible. Well his first concern was making money, but there's nothing wrong with that. It was his job as a businessman.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 09:54 AM (39g3+)

515 Should taxi drivers refuse to pick up gay men because they disapprove of their lifestyles? Ridiculous. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:50 PM (XsOa7) No, in fact, I think we should put guns to cab drivers heads to make sure they pick up whoever we tell them to pick up, because fuck them, right? "Ooh, you don't want to ride around in Harlem at 3 AM with 2 crackheads in the car looking for their dealer? Well fuck you, bigot, you're going to do it." That's what America is all about baby! Forcing people to do what whoever has the guns tells them to do. Asshole.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 09:54 AM (AkOaV)

516 Just remember, "4 out of the last 6 Presidential elections" nerds that Bubba got pluralities. Obama is a sign of something scary or nothing at all.

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 09:54 AM (th6S/)

517 Baking a cake is not speech.... DECORATING said cake, with SPEECH.... it SPEECH.... If you can't see that... I can't help you. Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 02:52 PM (qh617) Putting flowers or a design on a cake is speech? Interesting.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:54 AM (XsOa7)

518 Hector has changed his argument. Posted by: Golfman You know how i know hecturd lies? He's typing.

Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at March 31, 2015 09:54 AM (JBzwC)

519 Good news you guys "Pres Obama okays release of 12 F-16 jet fighters, 20 Harpoon missiles and up to 125 M1A1 Abrams tank kits that had been withheld from Egypt." Egypt's cool now, right? Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 02:51 PM (th6S/) I believe you but where did you see that?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 09:54 AM (rDqRv)

520

If the state has the    ability    to violate the speech and religion rights of bakers, they certainly have the    ability to violate the speech and religious rights of    ministers.

 

 

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2015 09:54 AM (BbwTO)

521 #384 You know the mormons used to not have kind views of blacks and probably wouldn't have baked cakes for their weddings. Posted by: Draki at March 31, 2015 02:41 PM (0eidE) Wrong, try again. Blacks have been members of the LDS church from pretty much almost the beginning. The church under Joseph Smith had abolitionist underpinnings. Why that later changed, and the complexities involved...this is probably not the place but there is a lot more there than what you are inferring.

Posted by: LizLem at March 31, 2015 09:54 AM (yRwC8)

522 >>If you have not noticed, God is not with your movement. You have been losing every cultural battle and 4 out of the last 6 Presidential elections. <<

You are going to rue the day when all this chaos you created gets turned back on you when someone else takes over. It's only a matter of when not if.

Posted by: Ass Pirate at March 31, 2015 09:54 AM (GGCsk)

523 Should a Taxi Driver be forced to say 'I agree with the Gay lifestyle' when he picks you up? " You see, courts have ruled that Muslim cab drivers can wave me off if I have my dog or am likely to be carrying alcohol. Interesting, no?

Posted by: anon a mouse at March 31, 2015 09:54 AM (KnbYp)

524 @509 What ya going to do about it? Just post xenophobic rants online. Time is not on your side.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 09:54 AM (2SnmG)

525 more good news from knoller "Further, US to seek $1.3 billion in annual military assistance to Egypt, making it 2nd largest recipient of US foreign military financing."

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 09:54 AM (th6S/)

526 Wow. Hector's pretty biblically illiterate for a Brave Catholic Warrior.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:54 AM (MMC8r)

527 No, in fact, I think we should put guns to cab drivers heads to make sure they pick up whoever we tell them to pick up, because fuck them, right? "Ooh, you don't want to ride around in Harlem at 3 AM with 2 crackheads in the car looking for their dealer? Well fuck you, bigot, you're going to do it." That's what America is all about baby! Forcing people to do what whoever has the guns tells them to do. Asshole. Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 02:54 PM (AkOaV) Comparing gay people to armed crackheads. Right. Got it. Good. Next time the GOP loses, I know who'll to blame. Morons like you.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:55 AM (XsOa7)

528 74 I wonder why homosexuality is such a compelling cause to them. Because it goes to the heart of issues about what it means to be human and to be a family. Destroy those meanings, and you can manipulate damn near everything. Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 02:01 PM (EaH5U) --- Astute.

Posted by: despair at March 31, 2015 09:55 AM (J6suc)

529 Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 02:53 PM (kff5f) A gay man has the right to do whatever the fuck he wants to do, since he's now a member of the protected class, and the protected classes run government and government has the guns. Got it? So just do what we tell you to do if you know what's good for you

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 09:55 AM (AkOaV)

530 Aaaand...Slate has turned against Trevor Noah. I think this dude is toast by the end of the week. Who were the runner-ups, Amy Poehler, Louis CK and Amy Schumer?

Posted by: Citizen X at March 31, 2015 09:55 AM (7ObY1)

531 But in Riyadh they can sell gold iPhones and there is enough conspicuous consumption and petrodollars to BUY them.

Posted by: SGT Dan's Cat at March 31, 2015 09:55 AM (kBuGL)

532 I would make them special wedding Napoleon's. Filled lovingly one at a time.

Posted by: Ass Pirate at March 31, 2015 09:55 AM (GGCsk)

533 So if you are not down with Ghey Marriage and State Enforcement of Ghey agenda, then Apple doesn't want your business? Sounds like Smart Power.

Posted by: Super Creepy Eric Hoteham at March 31, 2015 09:55 AM (oDCMR)

534 Why are stupid people stupid?

Posted by: filbert at March 31, 2015 09:55 AM (h6Mpm)

535 I didn't say I supported it. I'm just talking about the law as it stands today. We can talk about a world without the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act, but it's not reality. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:52 PM (XsOa7) Your previous comments say otherwise.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 09:55 AM (2Ojst)

536 You see, courts have ruled that Muslim cab drivers can wave me off if I have my dog or am likely to be carrying alcohol. Interesting, no? Posted by: anon a mouse at March 31, 2015 02:54 PM (KnbYp) Well, courts fuck shit up from time to time. I disagree with those rulings.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:55 AM (XsOa7)

537 Should taxi drivers refuse to pick up gay men because they disapprove of their lifestyles? Ridiculous. Is there a difference between a gay ride and a straight ride? (Don't answer that.)

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 09:55 AM (MMC8r)

538 Not at my wedding. We ordered it, paid for it, it was delivered to the hall, and that was it. The baker wasn't there for the ceremony, the reception, etc. We also could've just picked up the cake from the baker, but we chose delivery for an extra $50. Baking a cake is now speech? C'mon. Should taxi drivers refuse to pick up gay men because they disapprove of their lifestyles? Ridiculous. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:50 PM (XsOa7) ___________ My wedding as well. But I've also attended weddings where the cake is all elaborate and shit and it actually takes a lot of prep work to get it set up. But it still boils down to the fact that refusing to bake/setup the cake or make flower arrangements or whatever else for Group X while doing it for Group Y is discrimination. It doesn't matter what it is. The person is stating I will do something for these people, but I will not do that same something for these other people, simply because these other people are gay. That's all there is to it. Everything else is just noise.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 09:55 AM (0LHZx)

539 Just bake the fucking cake and keep your religion to yourself.

 

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:47 PM (XsOa7)

 

"Just a pinch of incense to Caesar, and you can go!  That's all!"

 

Enjoy the boot on your neck, Plath.

Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at March 31, 2015 09:56 AM (zF6Iw)

540 528 Wow. Hector's pretty biblically illiterate for a Brave Catholic Warrior. And pretty unhappy for a Don't Worry Be Happy And pretty unloving for a Dr. Love

Posted by: Citizen X at March 31, 2015 09:56 AM (7ObY1)

541 i have to laugh . a few days ago i read an articly from a female gay women (dyke) complaining about women wearing clothes most resembling male clothes . and confusing her on male -female, women. hittable or not. i laughed because SHE-He didn't even pause to realize many women , truck drivers, laborers, gardeners might find wearing flannel or tool belts useful but not sexual. But She/he wanted to be pissed instead of knowledgeable about the MANY roles women play in today societies not Limited to housewife . talk about a victorian female

Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 09:56 AM (nqBYe)

542 Your previous comments say otherwise. Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 02:55 PM (2Ojst) Nope. As I said, I'm talking about the world we live in.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 09:56 AM (XsOa7)

543 526 @509 What ya going to do about it? Just post xenophobic rants online. Time is not on your side. *** The Laraza wing of the democrat nuevo mexciano los americon Vichy party loves that whole hippy dippy "all you white people are old and should die soon" thing. Which is true since we all get old and die and mestizo replacements seem to have about 8 kids per household.

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 09:56 AM (th6S/)

544 Hector's pretty biblically illiterate for a Brave Catholic Warrior. In fairness, I believe the claim was Serbian Orthodox.

Posted by: toby928(C) at March 31, 2015 09:56 AM (evdj2)

545 "Ooh, you don't want to ride around in Harlem at 3 AM with 2 crackheads in the car looking for their dealer? Well fuck you, bigot, you're going to do it." ________ Actually the law says pretty much that. A NYC cab driver can't refuse a fare based on geography. Many do of course, but legally speaking they cannot.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 09:56 AM (0LHZx)

546 Putting flowers or a design on a cake is speech? Interesting. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:54 PM (XsOa7) Read the damn cases... they were not putting flowers on a cake... they were putting sayings that the people buying the cake wanted. And that.... is speech....

Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 09:57 AM (qh617)

547 @524 Demographics and time is not on your side. You are dying out literally.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 09:57 AM (2SnmG)

548 Just bake the fucking cake and keep your religion to yourself. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:47 PM (XsOa7) just make me a sammich and quit fainting over individual rights to an opinion.

Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 09:57 AM (nqBYe)

549 Comparing gay people to armed crackheads. Right. Got it. Good. Next time the GOP loses, I know who'll to blame. Morons like you. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:55 PM (XsOa7) no, no, the crackheads aren't armed, the government is. As a libertarian, you understand the principle that every law the government passes is enforced at the point of a gun, right? Implied violence is the only reason any of us pay our taxes or follow any laws... without it, they would simply be suggestions. Right? Still following? So you think you have the right to tell a taxi driver who he has to pick up in his cab at the point of a gun. Just like you think you have a right to go in to a bakery, pull a gun, put it to a guys head, and force him to bake a cake for a gay wedding, even if he doesnt want to. Because youre a freedom loving libertarian, right?

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 09:57 AM (AkOaV)

550 Is there a difference between a gay ride and a straight ride? (Don't answer that.) Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 02:55 PM (MMC8r) There's something stuffed up the tailpipe.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 09:57 AM (2Ojst)

551 You are going to rue the day when all this chaos you created gets turned back on you when someone else takes over. It's only a matter of when not if. *** a good percentage of the world's human population is happy living in their own shit.

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 09:57 AM (th6S/)

552 Oh, noes!!! Bobby Durst's wife has moved in with his atty and taken her $20 million dollar cut from his $65 mil inheritance.

Posted by: Bruce J. at March 31, 2015 09:57 AM (iQIUe)

553 Yes, homosexuality is so existential and natural.

Give me a fucking break. You want to be a butt bandit that's your business. Just don't try to stick it in me.

Posted by: Ass Pirate at March 31, 2015 09:57 AM (GGCsk)

554 What is the difference? We're talking about discrimination based on immutable characteristics, whether it's race, ethnicity, sex, sexual persuasion, natural hair color, whatever.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:40 PM (XsOa7)

--------------------------------------------

You're a libertarian?  You're the only libertarian I've met who has needed this explained to them:

You are focusing on the wrong thing.  The core issue at hand is who get's to decide when the state can bankrupt you for discriminating.  A libertarian says that the state should never do this - with the once-in-a-lifetime exception of discrimination in the past where blacks could not participate in the economy or in society.  That's history now, so the state should not be bankrupting or hassling people who want to discriminate for any reason.

It's pointless to argue and split hairs about bakers vs photographers - the point is that for a libertarian you and the government don't get to decide what is a proper and approved use of my freedoms of association, speech, and conscience.  There is not "balance" to be sought between my basic freedoms and your desire to have a wedding cake (which you can easily get).

Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 09:58 AM (nyxv/)

555 Guys, you knew that dick was poison when you put it in your mouth. Why you bitchin' now?

Posted by: from the SJW paradise at March 31, 2015 09:58 AM (Q819Q)

556 You aren't supporting their choice. Right?

Right? Posted by: Christopher Taylor


I know a really nice lady who is a cake decorator for a grocery chain in these parts.  She is a devout Christian.  She has refused to make vulgar cakes and even to write offensive words on special order cakes (like "b*tch," for example).  Rightly or wrongly, she believes very intensely that such things are not appropriate and aren't aligned with the code of behavior prescribed by her religion. 

Some people believe things very, very strongly.  Just as strongly, I suspect, as gay folk believe they should be allowed to marry. 

Posted by: Moderate Salami at March 31, 2015 09:58 AM (/Ho8c)

557

Should taxi drivers refuse to pick up gay men because they disapprove of their lifestyles?

 

Muslim taxidrivers already refuse to carry passengers with dogs, or passengers carrying alcohol.  So why aren't you directing your hate at them?

Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at March 31, 2015 09:58 AM (zF6Iw)

558 "Apple pays almost no taxes in the US. It manufactures its iPhones with what is little better than slave labor. Its workforce has almost no blacks or Hispanics." And this is the general pattern for Silicon Valley CEOs today. They financially back Democrats who support "higher taxes for the 1%", who support aggressive labor movement tactics, and who support draconian "disparate impact" racial standards for hiring and promotion. While at the very same time, those very same Valley CEOs use every tax dodge on the books for both their companies and themselves, they build their products in countries where militant labor organizers get turned into piles of donor organs, and they have fewer blacks and Hispanics employed percentagewise than any other major industry in America, especially in the C-suite jobs. Consistency. How does it work? A cynic would say that what Democrats have going with tech is a classic protection racket. As long as Valley checkbooks open wide for Democrats, Democrats will turn a blind eye to business practices in the Valley that they would normally deplore and attack.

Posted by: torquewrench at March 31, 2015 09:58 AM (noWW6)

559 Taxi drivers can and do readily refuse to pick up fares on a regular basis for all kinds of reasons, usually "that guy looks dangerous or too drunk"

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 09:58 AM (39g3+)

560 >>If you have not noticed, God is not with your movement. He doesn't seem to favor you all that much given he wants you to stick your dick in another guy's ass.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2015 09:58 AM (g1DWB)

561 Next time the GOP loses, I know who'll to blame. Morons like you. Um, you do realize that's a compliment around these parts, right?

Posted by: Citizen X at March 31, 2015 09:58 AM (7ObY1)

562 Aaaand...Slate has turned against Trevor Noah. I think this dude is toast by the end of the week. - Always the same. The black man is the last hired and the first fired.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 09:58 AM (XUKZU)

563 hecturd thinks he's a brave internet warrior moby. Unforts, he's too stupid to pull it off.

Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at March 31, 2015 09:58 AM (JBzwC)

564 Demographics and time is not on your side. You are dying out literally. *** Dear Laraza fucker, see every war ever. You can outnumber us by 5000-1 and we'd still win. signed, xxoo the people you think are old and dying

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 09:59 AM (th6S/)

565 Speaking of weddings, HBO just shot a pilot about the Salem Witch Trials at the site of mine. Old Sturbridge Village in MA. They built a barn and burned it down for the shoot, not sure if the Meeting House where we were married is featured in the show, but hard to believe it wouldn't be.

Posted by: Lincolntf at March 31, 2015 09:59 AM (2cS/G)

566 In time Christians will have to play the same boycott warfare that the radical left does.  It worked out fine for Chik-Filet.

Imagine when the 3% gay population has a fit and boycotts, and the 70% fed up Christian population says "we counter-boycott" Apple, or California, or Angie's (dishonest) List.  You force a few bakeries to close, the 70% forces Apple to apologize, or closes down Angie's List. 

You choke point the gun industry, we buy ten million guns.  etc.  But we really have to boycott the intolerant left, and favor those companies that get targeted for boycott.  The Alinsky method is to target individuals, like Rush.  So the counter is to support them, or boycott those that are targeting.

But as long as corporate America caters to the intolerant left, without paying a price from the 70% PO'd Christians, they will keep bowing.  The 70% need to be activated.

Posted by: Illiniwek at March 31, 2015 09:59 AM (ZU84r)

567

Weddings require invitations. They aren't "public".

 

The catering service is a business which serves the public.

Posted by: Bandersnatch, now half gay at March 31, 2015 09:59 AM (JtwS4)

568 I'm not anti-gay as much as being made to do something by the point of a gun.

There's a lot of overlap on the Venn diagram of People Who Are Gay and People Who Believe The Government Should Control The Actions Of Everyone Else So They Don't Ever Feel Any Sadz, and in a sane world that would not be Proof That Everyone Who Isn't In Either Circle Is A Bad Person, but we don't get to live in a sane world.

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at March 31, 2015 09:59 AM (/kI1Q)

569 "But it still boils down to the fact that refusing to bake/setup the cake or make flower arrangements or whatever else for Group X while doing it for Group Y is discrimination. " So your stance is that the Catholic Church should be required to marry Protestant couples? Hell, why stop there? I always wanted to do that chair thing. I think I'll go down to the local rabbi and tell him I want to do a vow renewal and need him to perform the ceremony.

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 09:59 AM (MYCIw)

570 President Barack Obama on Monday said he would ask the US Congress for $1.3 billion per year in military aid for Egypt and said he would lift holds on aircraft, missiles and tanks for Cairo in place since October 2013, the White House said in a statement. Obama also said that the United States would discontinue starting in fiscal 2018 Egypt's use of cash flow financing, a financial mechanism that allows Egypt to buy equipment on credit, the White House said. Can the fuck explain the sudden turn about?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 09:59 AM (rDqRv)

571 550 Just bake the fucking cake and keep your religion to yourself. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:47 PM (XsOa7) ------- Just keep your dick out of other guys asses and expecting me to approve and support it and I will.

Posted by: Seems Legit at March 31, 2015 09:59 AM (A98Xu)

572 83 And then in the 1930s, FDR brought "the right to what someone else must produce/provide" back with his damnable Four Freedoms. Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at March 31, 2015 01:59 PM (/kI1Q And if I could go back in time and strangle him, I'd be mighty tempted to do so. "We know that time travel is impossible, because we know that a strangely garbed man did not mysteriously appear in 1983 and murder George Lucas."

Posted by: despair at March 31, 2015 10:00 AM (J6suc)

573 Let's briefly sum up: Indiana's law is bad because bad. Bad, bad. Bad. Badddie bad badda bing badda bad. (Insert self-serving sophistry at appropriate places)

Posted by: filbert at March 31, 2015 10:00 AM (h6Mpm)

574 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:55 PM (XsOa7) Right, because you believe that you should be able to put a gun to a muslim taxi drivers head and tell him to put an unclean dog in his car, even if it violates his beliefs. Because, freedom.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:00 AM (AkOaV)

575 a few days ago i read an articly from a female gay women (dyke) complaining about women wearing clothes most resembling male clothes .


Posted by: comrade willow at March 31, 2015 02:56 PM (nqBYe)



Some day I'm going to understand why dykes try to act and look like men, despite typically despising men.


Unfortunately, today is not that day.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 10:00 AM (oKE6c)

576 If you have not noticed, God is not with your movement. You have been losing every cultural battle and 4 out of the last 6 Presidential elections. My statistics show that six of the last eight Presidents had all daughters, no sons. I thereby offer Ted Cruz, with two daughters, no son(s) as the inevitable next President.

Posted by: SE Pa Moron [/i] at March 31, 2015 10:00 AM (xQX/f)

577 Good news you guys "Pres Obama okays release of 12 F-16 jet fighters, 20 Harpoon missiles and up to 125 M1A1 Abrams tank kits that had been withheld from Egypt." Egypt's cool now, right? Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 02:51 PM (th6S/) I believe you but where did you see that? *** Mark Knoller's twitter feed, son

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:00 AM (th6S/)

578 no, no, the crackheads aren't armed, the government is. As a libertarian, you understand the principle that every law the government passes is enforced at the point of a gun, right? Implied violence is the only reason any of us pay our taxes or follow any laws... without it, they would simply be suggestions. Right? Still following? So you think you have the right to tell a taxi driver who he has to pick up in his cab at the point of a gun. Just like you think you have a right to go in to a bakery, pull a gun, put it to a guys head, and force him to bake a cake for a gay wedding, even if he doesnt want to. Because youre a freedom loving libertarian, right? Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 02:57 PM (AkOaV) Oh, I see. OK. Well, yes, I think the law should be that neither taxi drivers nor bakers should be able to refuse customers on the basis of their immutable characteristics, so long as neither the driver nor the baker are forced to participate in whatever activity they are opposed to.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:00 AM (XsOa7)

579 >>If you have not noticed, God is not with your movement. <<

You have to leave this world to find the truth as to what God believes. But I'm pretty certain he's had this conversation with us before.

Posted by: Marcus T. at March 31, 2015 10:00 AM (GGCsk)

580 Dolf, baby, what's up? What's on the agenda for today, Mein Fuhrer? A little broken glass? A little putsch-comes-to-shove? A little...? Huh? W--?

Posted by: Ernst Rohm at March 31, 2015 10:00 AM (MMC8r)

581 Tim Cock is a good name for him too.

Posted by: Soothsayer, Inc. -- The King Unwilling at March 31, 2015 10:00 AM (FRLeJ)

582 why would anyone want to FORCE someone to make a food product? 'the secret's in the sauce' and all....

Posted by: the Butcher at March 31, 2015 10:01 AM (fUjxW)

583 Nope. As I said, I'm talking about the world we live in. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:56 PM (XsOa7) You are a terrible liar. See your #310 in particular. I quote: No, that's not the standard. Forcing a taxi driver to serve black people as part of his business is not unconstitutional. He doesn't have to be a taxi driver, but if he chooses to do so then he can't discriminate. No one forces bakers to be bakers, but if they choose to do so, and serve the general public, then they shouldn't be allowed to discriminate. Preventing someone from "discriminating" depends on the use of force by the state, which is what this entire discussion has been about.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 10:01 AM (2Ojst)

584

"Apple is an organization known for it's christian hatred, anti-semitism and sexualization of children."

 

Repeat that long and loud enough and see what the Board of Directors at Apple does.

Posted by: Buckeye Abroad at March 31, 2015 10:01 AM (i4hxh)

585 Muslim taxidrivers already refuse to carry passengers with dogs, or passengers carrying alcohol. So why aren't you directing your hate at them? Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at March 31, 2015 02:58 PM (zF6Iw) __________ For the 1000th time, it's not the same thing. The Muslims refuse to take passengers with dogs. ALL PASSENGERS WITH DOGS. They're not saying I will take straight passengers with dogs, but not gay passengers with dogs. They're discriminating against dogs, not against a group of humans. Now you could argue it shoudl be illegal to discriminate against dogs, but that's a totally different issue than the topic at hand.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:01 AM (0LHZx)

586 @545 You do know there is a high rate of intermarriage between Latinos and Whites? Did you know some Latinos are white? Of course not, you are low IQ inbred bigot.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 10:01 AM (2SnmG)

587 C'mon. Should taxi drivers refuse to pick up gay men because they disapprove of their lifestyles? Ridiculous. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:50 PM (XsOa7) I already do, kufir Do try to keep up.

Posted by: Mohammad al-Fuqtard, Cabdriver Only to the Righteous at Minneapolis Airport at March 31, 2015 10:01 AM (/kVvc)

588 Comparing gay people to armed crackheads. Right. Got it. Any time someone trots this kind of thing out, its them waving the white flag of surrender in a debate, but trying to win on crowd favor.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 10:01 AM (39g3+)

589 Can the fuck explain the sudden turn about? Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 02:59 PM (rDqRv) My guess? Separating the Saudis and the Egyptians. Obama is worried that he's completely losing control of the middle east, especially since we cut back aid big time after the "coup" and the Sauds filled in the gaps. Now Egypt works for the Saudis and is sending troops to yemen on their behalf.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:01 AM (AkOaV)

590 Just remember, "4 out of the last 6 Presidential elections" nerds that Bubba never got above 50% of vote.

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:01 AM (th6S/)

591 why would anyone want to FORCE someone to make a food product? 'the secret's in the sauce' and all.... Posted by: the Butcher at March 31, 2015 03:01 PM (fUjxW) For the same reason that some people go out of their way to piss me off before they get in my chair

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 10:01 AM (rDqRv)

592 Cabs, driven by black men, will routinely ignore black men as customers, esp. at night.  I've got young black engineers who work for me - who have switched to Uber because of it ... no whining - just picked another option.

How much of a Tempest in a Teapot is this?  Some silly small percentage of weddings are gay, and some silly small percentage of bakers and florists are Christians with strong beliefs -- how often are these little electrons colliding on their own?

Posted by: Jean at March 31, 2015 10:02 AM (ztOda)

593 Some day I'm going to understand why dykes try to act and look like men, despite typically despising men. See also: drag queens.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 10:02 AM (MMC8r)

594 I grew up in the South in the 50s and 60s.  There has never been any law that I am aware of that forced any businesses to segregate based on race.  The only law that forced segregation was the local school systems and that ended long before the 1964 civil rights act.  They has what was called "freedom of choice" before 1964.  But that wasn't good enough for the feds under LBJ. Because people must be "forced".   And when the civil rights act was originally passed it only applied to businesses who had a substantial part in interstate commerce and government agencies which was primarily schools. That was the first thing that went away.

Posted by: Vic[/i] We Have No Party at March 31, 2015 10:02 AM (wlDny)

595 549 @524
Demographics and time is not on your side. You are dying out literally.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 02:57 PM (2SnmG)




But not from AIDS.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 10:02 AM (oKE6c)

596 >>> If you have not noticed, God is not with your movement. You have been losing every cultural battle and 4 out of the last 6 Presidential elections. TakiMag had a good article on this very topic, "Happy to be on the wrong side of history." Link in nic. Worth a look if you've never read.

Posted by: LizLem at March 31, 2015 10:02 AM (yRwC8)

597 Let's briefly sum up: Indiana's law is bad because bad. Bad, bad. Bad. Badddie bad badda bing badda bad. - You give those Indianan an inch, they'll take a mile.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 10:02 AM (XUKZU)

598 My guess? Separating the Saudis and the Egyptians. Obama is worried that he's completely losing control of the middle east, especially since we cut back aid big time after the "coup" and the Sauds filled in the gaps. Now Egypt works for the Saudis and is sending troops to yemen on their behalf. Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 03:01 PM (AkOaV) No THAT I unnderstand. I mean why isn't he forced to say "I was wrong and stupid" to begin with

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 10:03 AM (rDqRv)

599 My statistics show that six of the last eight Presidents had all daughters, no sons. Well, Reagan had that ghey son who bashes his dead father for a living.

Posted by: Citizen X at March 31, 2015 10:03 AM (7ObY1)

600 You do know there is a high rate of intermarriage between Latinos and Whites? Did you know some Latinos are white? Of course not, you are low IQ inbred bigot. *** you saying mestizos aren't inbred? Are you the type of laraza retard that think that Mexicans of German descent are Latino?

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:03 AM (th6S/)

601 The catering service is a business which serves the public. Posted by: Bandersnatch, now half gay at March 31, 2015 02:59 PM (JtwS4) So fucking what? It's privately owned and operated. They can serve, or not serve, whoever they want. Unless of course you believe that their property is actually owned by the government.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 10:03 AM (2Ojst)

602 Comparing gay people to armed crackheads. Right. Got it. Good. Next time the GOP loses, I know who'll to blame. Morons like you.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:55 PM (XsOa7)

--------------------------------------

Ha ha ha.  Have you been pushing your question the whole thread just to get that answer?


You've pretty much ignored everyone elses response but you leap at this?


The point is that people should be free to discriminate and the point of the government protecting freedoms is that it protects them from people like you who want to bankrupt them for using it in ways you don't like.

Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 10:03 AM (nyxv/)

603 My flavor of libertarianism leads me to believe that the federal government should be as small as possible and have as few powers as possible. States can do whatever they want, and I'll move around based on their actions. But, in general, I do think that removal of discrimination is a valid government function. I appreciate the notion that discriminatory businesses won't survive, but in practice I doubt that will be the case. Instead, we'll just have a balkanized society where everyone will discriminate against everyone else.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:03 AM (XsOa7)

604 Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 03:01 PM (2SnmG) There's no such thing as Latino, racist. Virtually every person from south of our border (who come from various cultures, countries, and speak varied languages and dialects) is either white (the majority) or a descendant of indigenous native Americans. "Hispanics" and "Latinos" are not a real thing. Only culturally isolated gringos say "Eh, Guatemalans, Brazilians, Peruvians its all the same shit."

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:03 AM (AkOaV)

605 iShit is built in a country which is pro-choice with free abortions. Catch is, the party chooses for you and aborts your baby.

Posted by: Roy at March 31, 2015 10:04 AM (VndSC)

606 " I think the law should be that neither taxi drivers nor bakers should be able to refuse customers on the basis of their immutable characteristics, " The objection is to participation in the ceremony, not to the people involved in a ceremony. Would you force a baker to bake a cake for a satanist black mass?

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 10:04 AM (MYCIw)

607 The point is that people should be free to discriminate and the point of the government protecting freedoms is that it protects them from people like you who want to bankrupt them for using it in ways you don't like. Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 03:03 PM (nyxv/) I disagree with that. Am I now a fascist pig?

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:04 AM (XsOa7)

608 The Muslims refuse to take passengers with dogs. ALL PASSENGERS WITH DOGS. They're not saying I will take straight passengers with dogs, but not gay passengers with dogs. They're discriminating against dogs, not against a group of humans. Now you could argue it shoudl be illegal to discriminate against dogs, but that's a totally different issue than the topic at hand. Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 03:01 PM (0LHZx) Yeah, because it's not like the ADA actually requires you to accommodate service dogs regardless of your personal beliefs if you're providing a public accommodation. Nope, not like that at all. And, of course, you can automatically tell if someone has a service dog as you view them from 2 blocks away and decide not to pick them up. Amirite there, Mohammad??

Posted by: Sean Bannion at March 31, 2015 10:04 AM (/kVvc)

609 I'd take a dump in the cake.

Did you ever hear what they do a restaurants when you send back the food?

Think that and weeks to come up with inventive ideas.

Posted by: Winnowed Warrior at March 31, 2015 10:04 AM (GGCsk)

610 >>The Muslims refuse to take passengers with dogs. ALL PASSENGERS WITH DOGS. They're not saying I will take straight passengers with dogs, but not gay passengers with dogs. They're discriminating against dogs, not against a group of humans. Now you could argue it shoudl be illegal to discriminate against dogs, but that's a totally different issue than the topic at hand. You can't be this obtuse. Guess what, a blind person with a service dog is a condition recognized by the ADA. It is illegal to discriminate against them, they and their service dog are entitled to the same service as any white, black, gay, transgender or whatever other freakazoid combination you can come up with. Petard. Hoisted. You.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2015 10:04 AM (g1DWB)

611 that's the problem with laraza retards, they go racial early and often, there's no way to have a reasonable discussion. "maybe we have enough of the people from a country that borders ours" laraza asshole: "you white fuckers are going to die and we'll take over!!!!"

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:04 AM (th6S/)

612 I disagree with that. Am I now a fascist pig? Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:04 PM (XsOa7) Nope. You were one before you got here.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 10:04 AM (2Ojst)

613 The catering service is a business which serves the public. Posted by: Bandersnatch, now half gay at March 31, 2015 02:59 PM (JtwS4) So fucking what? It's privately owned and operated. They can serve, or not serve, whoever they want. Unless of course you believe that their property is actually owned by the government. Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 03:03 PM (2Ojst) No bandersnatch is 100% correct on this. At least that is how our Law define's a "Place of Public Accomodation". You don't have to like it, but that is the law

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 10:05 AM (rDqRv)

614 Can the fuck explain the sudden turn about? Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 02:59 PM (rDqRv) The House of Saud called... and said... you are not staying bought...

Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 10:05 AM (qh617)

615 Are you the type of laraza retard that think that Mexicans of German descent are Latino? Yes. Yes he is.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 10:05 AM (MMC8r)

616 So your stance is that the Catholic Church should be required to marry Protestant couples? Hell, why stop there? I always wanted to do that chair thing. I think I'll go down to the local rabbi and tell him I want to do a vow renewal and need him to perform the ceremony. Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 02:59 PM (MYCIw) _________ Valid point. And yes now that you bring it up, that is religious discrimination, isn't it? Person X (rabbi or priest) refuses to sell me a service due to my religion (I'm not Jewish or Catholic). It just shows how silly all religions are. And yes it should be illegal to discriminate.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:05 AM (0LHZx)

617 Just perform the F'ing abortion and keep your religion to yourself.

Posted by: Big Government's next move at March 31, 2015 10:05 AM (DXzRD)

618 93 The problem with modern people is that they do not comprehend that liberty necessarily has an ugly side. Back when the left was more about liberty, they would say they'd fight to the death to defend your right to say something even if they disagreed with it. Even just 10 years ago you'd hear them talk about tolerance, which is putting up with things you don't personally like and disagree with. --- It was a lie all along. The left was never in favor of free speech, or all speech, only THEIR speech. They used our laws to put THEIR ideas in power and then outlaw OUR ideas. There was no idealism involved, just the age old lust for power.

Posted by: despair at March 31, 2015 10:05 AM (J6suc)

619 There's no such thing as Latino, racist. Virtually every person from south of our border (who come from various cultures, countries, and speak varied languages and dialects) is either white (the majority) or a descendant of indigenous native Americans. *** Louis CK is totes mestizo

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:05 AM (th6S/)

620 Remember the cream filling.

Posted by: Winnowed Warrior at March 31, 2015 10:05 AM (GGCsk)

621 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:03 PM (XsOa7) So you believe in small government, except the whole coercion and micromanaging of every single persons life, interactions with others, trade, employment history and associations? Got ya.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:05 AM (AkOaV)

622 @566 I don't like LA Raza buddy as they are Marxist- Leninist, but you do for over 100 years the Spanish whipped white ass in European wars? Of course not, you are a inbred low IQ ignorant bigot.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 10:06 AM (2SnmG)

623 >>Yeah, because it's not like the ADA actually requires you to accommodate service dogs regardless of your personal beliefs if you're providing a public accommodation. Fist bump.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2015 10:06 AM (g1DWB)

624 Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 02:57 PM (AkOaV) Average JoeSchmoe is Libertarian in the same way that Mohammed was feminist.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 10:06 AM (kff5f)

625 Gotta' admit ... I like it when the gloves come off, and otherwise Good Little Republicans start waxing eloquent about how Political Authority trumps Individual Freedom of Association, all for the Greater Good. We'll be full bore National Socialist before I die, and as long as the guy in charge is Republican ... many of you will shit yourselves blind with happiness.

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 31, 2015 10:06 AM (wQ9BN)

626 Forcing me to participate in a gay marriage is forcing me to deny my faith publicly. It can be argued that by doing so, you forever lose your salvation in that is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. I do not agree, but I see why some hold to that argument. IN any case, I would rather die than deny my faith for any reason. This is an targeted attempt to force people of faith to either deny their faith or face deadly force in being arrested by the State and see their property stolen for their "crime" of being faithful. Those who do not see any problem with this are bigots who enjoy turning Christian citizens into sub-human slaves without rights. Period.

Posted by: Inspector Cussword at March 31, 2015 10:06 AM (S8V5R)

627 The objection is to participation in the ceremony, not to the people involved in a ceremony. Would you force a baker to bake a cake for a satanist black mass? Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 03:04 PM (MYCIw) Exactly right. Yes, I would, as long as the baker is not forced to support the black mass outside of his normal functions, i.e., baking a cake. I also believe a homosexual baker should be forced to bake a cake for the Westboro Baptist Church, so long as the baker need not do anything outside of his normal functions of cake-baking.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:06 AM (XsOa7)

628 "Hispanics" and "Latinos" are not a real thing. Only culturally isolated gringos say "Eh, Guatemalans, Brazilians, Peruvians its all the same shit." And the only unifying detail? They speak a European language. That's the Circus of Identity Politics.

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 10:06 AM (MMC8r)

629 "Of course not, you are low IQ inbred bigot."
Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 03:01 PM (2SnmG)

here in the reality based community,we call this sort of thing "projection"... have you considered seeking professional help?



Posted by: redc1c4 at March 31, 2015 10:07 AM (044Yr)

630 You can't be this obtuse. Guess what, a blind person with a service dog is a condition recognized by the ADA. It is illegal to discriminate against them, they and their service dog are entitled to the same service as any white, black, gay, transgender or whatever other freakazoid combination you can come up with. Petard. Hoisted. You. Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2015 03:04 PM (g1DWB) ______________ You're beyond moronic. Let me try again. The cab driver is not dicriminating against a group of people. He's not saying I won't take blind people with dogs. He is saying I won't take people with dogs, blind or otherwise. I swear to god you people can't be this fucking retarded not to see the difference between that and saying no cakes for gays.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:07 AM (0LHZx)

631 "In time Christians will have to play the same boycott warfare that the radical left does." It occasionally ought to be pointed out that there are enough self-identified conservatives in the country of all stripes that any truly large scale boycott by enough of them would be impossible to ignore and would garner instant attention. If a large enough bloc of organized conservatives knocked it off with giving their money to the lunatic leftists of Hollyweird for a year -- a simple pledge of no movies or TV -- a bunch of smaller studios and networks would collapse financially well before that year was out. It would be a Hollyweird version of the Crash of '29. Bankrupt studio moguls and stars leaping out of windows. And the survivors would become considerably more circumspect about how much leftist messaging they were prepared to insert into their entertainment product.

Posted by: torquewrench at March 31, 2015 10:07 AM (noWW6)

632 No bandersnatch is 100% correct on this. At least that is how our Law define's a "Place of Public Accomodation". You don't have to like it, but that is the law Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 03:05 PM (rDqRv) I understand that, especially in the context of the ADA, but it's patently unconstitutional.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 10:07 AM (2Ojst)

633 Posted by: despair at March 31, 2015 03:05 PM (J6suc) Exactly. Whatever suits their narrative or their needs, they're 100% in favor of, and whatever doesn't they're 100% against. Which is how pornography and burning flags is protected by the first amendment as speech, but baking a wedding cake is not.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:07 AM (AkOaV)

634 Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 03:06 PM (2SnmG) You know the Spanish are white Europeans, right? No, you don't, because you have a substandard IQ for a paramecium.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 10:07 AM (kff5f)

635 @621 You are really ignorant and making me laugh.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 10:07 AM (2SnmG)

636 So you believe in small government, except the whole coercion and micromanaging of every single persons life, interactions with others, trade, employment history and associations? Got ya. Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 03:05 PM (AkOaV) Yes, clearly, believing in anti-discrimination laws means I'm a believer in Orwellian-style government. Please.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:07 AM (XsOa7)

637 315 288 matthew shepard wasn't killed because he was gay....he was killed because of a drug deal gone bad....... Posted by: phoenixgirl at March 31, 2015 02:30 PM (u8GsB) --------------- This is why AoS commenters suck as of late. We all know this, yet it has to be pointed out while also ignoring the argument. The left believes he was killed for being gay. They believe bakers are refusing to serve gays. This construct can be turned around. FFS, this site's comments used to be funny and intelligent.

Posted by: MJ at March 31, 2015 10:07 AM (Tegl7)

638 They built a barn and burned it down for the shoot So, its a complete fiction, not based on actual events of the brief time period of the Salem Witch Trials, then? Got it. The Muslims refuse to take passengers with dogs. ALL PASSENGERS WITH DOGS. They're not saying I will take straight passengers with dogs, but not gay passengers with dogs. You really aren't very good with this logic thing, are you?

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 10:07 AM (39g3+)

639 The objection is to participation in the ceremony, not to the people involved in a ceremony. Would you force a baker to bake a cake for a satanist black mass? Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 03:04 PM (MYCIw) _______________ If he bakes cakes for Catholic events, yes.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:07 AM (0LHZx)

640 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:03 PM (XsOa7) But if that is how a Free people CHOSE to live... why should the government interfere? Because it makes YOU uncomfortable? Because YOU want it to be different? Why should YOUR opinion, trump those who chose to live otherwise?

Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 10:08 AM (qh617)

641 I don't like LA Raza buddy as they are Marxist- Leninist, but you do for over 100 years the Spanish whipped white ass in European wars? Of course not, you are a inbred low IQ ignorant bigot.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 03:06 PM (2SnmG)



Spaniards are white, numbnuts.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 10:08 AM (oKE6c)

642 Are you the type of laraza retard that think that Mexicans of German descent are Latino? Yes. Yes he is *** I mean, I am not a member of a group that calls itself the race, so I don't know, but I know that Germans living in Mexico are Mexicans, not necessarily Latino. But maybe I am wrong. What it seems like to me is that German Mexican are driving out their indigenous population to their bordering country. So, what's up with that?

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:08 AM (th6S/)

643 I think the law should be that neither taxi drivers nor bakers should be able to refuse customers on the basis of their immutable characteristics, so long as neither the driver nor the baker are forced to participate in whatever activity they are opposed to.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99

 

Ha! No, you don't. You have no intention of forcing me to do anything. You and mini moo are liars.

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 10:08 AM (Spluw)

644 Ghey is just a social construct.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 10:08 AM (XUKZU)

645 "It just shows how silly all religions are. And yes it should be illegal to discriminate." So you basically disagree with the concept of the free exercise of religion then?

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 10:08 AM (MYCIw)

646 >>Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 03:05 PM (0LHZx) <<

So compel people to act against their religious beliefs?

Got it.

Religion has a special place in this countries traditions and laws. Good luck with that.

What you are suggesting is that anarchy should reign. That's all very funny now until we get around to something you really care about.

At that point it's too late.

Posted by: Winnowed Warrior at March 31, 2015 10:08 AM (GGCsk)

647 Valid point. And yes now that you bring it up, that is religious discrimination, isn't it? Person X (rabbi or priest) refuses to sell me a service due to my religion (I'm not Jewish or Catholic). It just shows how silly all religions are. And yes it should be illegal to discriminate. Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 03:05 PM (0LHZx) I mean, you seriously cannot even conceive of a logical argument, can you? The very principles of reason are totally beyond your ken. Churches do not "sell" services. You can pick up all the wheels that just fell off your argument over there in the corner. Dunce.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at March 31, 2015 10:08 AM (/kVvc)

648 636 I though conservatives claim Hispanics can't be white?

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 10:08 AM (2SnmG)

649 You know the Spanish are white Europeans, right?

No, you don't, because you have a substandard IQ for a paramecium.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 03:07 PM (kff5f)




Sorry, just saw your comment.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 10:09 AM (oKE6c)

650 Spaniards are white, numbnuts. - Well, yeah, technically but . . . .

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 10:09 AM (XUKZU)

651 Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 03:07 PM (0LHZx) And there you have it, folks. First Amendment be damned.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 10:09 AM (2Ojst)

652 I swear to god you people can't be this fucking retarded Just stop it, moo moo.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 31, 2015 10:09 AM (DXzRD)

653 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:06 PM (XsOa7) So, you're a Libertarian (or even "libertarian") but you would force people to engage in commerce in which they do not wish to engage. Right.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 10:09 AM (kff5f)

654 do for over 100 years the Spanish whipped white ass in European wars? I think that the Spanish would be astonished to learn they aren't white. I think that a lot of the other Europeans would like to point out that the Spanish eventually lost, which is why England and Holland remained Protestant...

Posted by: Grey Fox at March 31, 2015 10:09 AM (4hIUY)

655 I don't like LA Raza buddy as they are Marxist- Leninist, but you do for over 100 years the Spanish whipped white ass in European wars? Of course not, you are a inbred low IQ ignorant bigot. *** that's all you got? It's really eeiry to have an online rant with go racial first invaders. Like, um, thanks for invading the USA, dude.

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:09 AM (th6S/)

656

Wow....650ish comments.

Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Plush Porcupine at March 31, 2015 10:09 AM (k8xvx)

657 So, you're a Libertarian (or even "libertarian") but you would force people to engage in commerce in which they do not wish to engage. Right. Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 03:09 PM (kff5f) He keeps using that word. I do not think it means what he thinks it means.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 10:10 AM (2Ojst)

658 ...a society where everyone will discriminate against everyone else. **** So, a free market. Nice!

Posted by: Jeff Gordon's brother-in-law at March 31, 2015 10:10 AM (NeFrd)

659

Forcing me to participate in a gay marriage is forcing me to deny my faith publicly. It can be argued that by doing so, you forever lose your salvation in that is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. I do not agree, but I see why some hold to that argument.

IN any case, I would rather die than deny my faith for any reason. This is an targeted attempt to force people of faith to either deny their faith or face deadly force in being arrested by the State and see their property stolen for their "crime" of being faithful.

 

--

 

Of course it is.  I predict that in less than twelve months, the locus will have shifed from bakers and photographers to churches and ministers.

 

You will be prevented by law from   practicing your faith  as you believe it,   and will be required to publicly endorse an abomination.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2015 10:10 AM (BbwTO)

660 Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 03:07 PM (2Ojst) Civil Rights Act of 1964. Pretty short bill actually. read it. The dems were brilliant. They sold it to their caucus as a way to be "progressive" and exert more power of businesses. It has very little to do with Civil Rights, and the parts that do mirror the Republican CRA of 1875 with almost the exact same language. The guts of the bill is actually about nationalizing business. Titles II and VII particularly. That was how LBJ was able to get his racist progressive D colleagues on board, while also selling it to black voters as a way to redemption for them. But that (and subsequent SCOTUS cases, like heart of atlanta motel) are why we are we are now. ... And why don't Republicans ever pull this shit? Pass a huge tax cut, gut the federal government, etc, and call it "the Civil Rights Act and Homosexuality Enabling Act of 2015" then call anyone who votes against it a racist who hates gays. Worked for the Dems.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:10 AM (AkOaV)

661 So you basically disagree with the concept of the free exercise of religion then? Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 03:08 PM (MYCIw) __________ Practice religion all you want. Believe in whatever Sky God you want. Have a blast. But when that belief leads to discrimination against others, that's where you go from religious freedom to discrimination against others.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:10 AM (0LHZx)

662 652 Spaniards are white, numbnuts.

-
Well, yeah, technically but . . . .

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 03:09 PM (XUKZU)




So ... they're Hispanic whites? As opposed to white Hispanics?


I'm so confused. The liberals need to publish a crib sheet.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 10:10 AM (oKE6c)

663 >>The cab driver is not dicriminating against a group of people. He's not saying I won't take blind people with dogs. He is saying I won't take people with dogs, blind or otherwise. And yet, you're wrong. You do realize this is against the law, don't you? Or are you going to continue to beclown yourself on this issue?

Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2015 10:11 AM (g1DWB)

664 Or are you going to continue to beclown yourself on this issue? Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2015 03:11 PM (g1DWB) I think we all know the answer here now, don't we?

Posted by: Sean Bannion at March 31, 2015 10:11 AM (/kVvc)

665 Yes, clearly, believing in anti-discrimination laws means I'm a believer in Orwellian-style government. Please. Errr... yes? If the Government has moral authority to force me to engage in commerce in which I do not wish to engage, what moral authority does it *not* have? This is a serious question. If you believe there is not and should not be a limit on government which prevents them from forcing me to provide a good or service to someone, what limits *do* you believe should be on government, and from what authority do these limits derive?

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 10:11 AM (kff5f)

666 Beep beep. Not in my cab. or restaurants.

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 10:11 AM (Spluw)

667 "I appreciate the notion that discriminatory businesses won't survive, but in practice I doubt that will be the case. Instead, we'll just have a balkanized society where everyone will discriminate against everyone else." What's really funny is that this guy who talks about "balkanization" doesn't realize that there were nation-states IN THE DAMN BALKANS where people who didn't like one another's beliefs were nevertheless forced to live cheek by jowl by paternalistic, all-controlling hard-left governments. And when those governments finally fell, what resulted was utterly horrific. People who would of their own accord have sorted themselves out into more homogenous communities instead were mixed together in ways that no one liked or wanted. Terrifying bloodshed followed.

Posted by: torquewrench at March 31, 2015 10:12 AM (noWW6)

668 OT, but hopefully to lighten things up...can we use the caricature of Jebby Bush in the sidebar every time there is a Jeb article? I kind of love it, it is perfect, hah!

Posted by: LizLem at March 31, 2015 10:12 AM (yRwC8)

669 Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2015 03:10 PM (BbwTO) Oh, that's already started. Happened to a chapel in Idaho. http://tinyurl.com/kwz42c2

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:12 AM (AkOaV)

670 Practice religion all you want. Believe in whatever Sky God you want. Have a blast. But when that belief leads to discrimination against others, that's where you go from religious freedom to discrimination against others. Should we discriminate against people who mug rich accountants and steal their wallets?

Posted by: Grey Fox at March 31, 2015 10:12 AM (4hIUY)

671 Short version of Cook. You can murder people for their sexual orientation provided we make a buck.

Got it.

Posted by: Marcus T. at March 31, 2015 10:12 AM (GGCsk)

672 I don't like LA Raza buddy as they are Marxist- Leninist, but you do for over 100 years the Spanish whipped white ass in European wars? Of course not, you are a inbred low IQ ignorant bigot. **** I recall Spain was once a world power. And then it wasn't. But since they colonized their part of the new world (i.e., you) I don't see you have a point.

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:12 AM (th6S/)

673 When the Manhattan Declaration team wanted to put a MD app in the App Store, Apple denied them the ability to do so, because they disagreed with the MD mission. Hypocrites.

Posted by: Crude at March 31, 2015 10:12 AM (/IrCS)

674 So, you're a Libertarian (or even "libertarian") but you would force people to engage in commerce in which they do not wish to engage. Right. Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 03:09 PM (kff5f) Libertarian.... he keepa using that word... I done think it means what he thinks it means...

Posted by: Inigo Montoya, who has studies his Agrippa, and his Political Science at March 31, 2015 10:12 AM (qh617)

675

@601 Citizen X a

 

"Well, Reagan had that ghey son who bashes his dead father for a living."

 

Don't forget about me!  I'll take my clothes off  (yet again) to keep relevant.

Posted by: Patti Reagan at March 31, 2015 10:12 AM (i4hxh)

676 Spaniards are white Us too, honest.

Posted by: Sicilians at March 31, 2015 10:12 AM (evdj2)

677 Churches do not "sell" services. You can pick up all the wheels that just fell off your argument over there in the corner. Dunce. Posted by: Sean Bannion at March 31, 2015 03:08 PM (/kVvc) _________ LOL. Oh really? Then what do they sell? Widgets? Churches are businesses. They sell fantasy.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:13 AM (0LHZx)

678 "But when that belief leads to discrimination against others, that's where you go from religious freedom to discrimination against others. " "Discrimination" defined as anything less than complete capitulation to any liberal whim.

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 10:13 AM (MYCIw)

679 Us too, honest. Posted by: Sicilians at March 31, 2015 03:12 PM (evdj2) Not exactly.

Posted by: Dennis Hopper at March 31, 2015 10:13 AM (2Ojst)

680

@661

So. in other words, the mark of the beast to come will not be a literal mark, but a figurative one. The mark on the head (your mind, thoughts, beliefs),or hands (what you do, how you do your business.) You will not be allowed to buy or sell unless you are in the right business and/or think the right thoughts and beliefs.

 

Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Plush Porcupine at March 31, 2015 10:13 AM (k8xvx)

681

Churches do not "sell" services.

 

Gorram right.  Wife was nominal Catholic, I was squishy Protestant.  We did a boatload of cromulent sucking up to get married in the Episcopal Church.

 

Choice is totally theirs. 

Posted by: Bandersnatch, now half gay at March 31, 2015 10:13 AM (JtwS4)

682 But if that is how a Free people CHOSE to live... why should the government interfere? Because it makes YOU uncomfortable? Because YOU want it to be different? Why should YOUR opinion, trump those who chose to live otherwise? Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 03:08 PM (qh617) Because we don't live in an anarchic society. All laws passed by the majority generally force someone to do something or refrain from doing something he or she would like to do. Why should the majority's opinions trump the minority's? Because that's how our society functions, except that our higher laws, i.e., the Constitution, prevent the majority's will in certain circumstances, e.g., banning free speech via the 1st Amendment, and discriminating on the basis of race, ethnicity, creed, etc. via the 14th Amendment. I think the 14th Amendment should encompass homosexuality because, in my opinion, it is as just as an immutable characteristic as race, ethnicity, sex, etc. You may disagree with that, and I respect your opinion. But, as the proverb goes, it is what it is.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:13 AM (XsOa7)

683 And so it all comes down to: What Is A Public Accommodation? Because if everything is then everybody can be coerced into doing anything. There might be a SCOTUS case in here somewhere.

Posted by: joncelli, sensitive guy at March 31, 2015 10:13 AM (RD7QR)

684 678 Spaniards are white

Us too, honest.

Posted by: Sicilians at March 31, 2015 03:12 PM (evdj2)




Now let's not get carried away. /kidding

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 10:13 AM (oKE6c)

685 JoeSchmoe, our Troll for the Day, is Lying Again:

" These bakers are outright refusing to bake cakes for gay people. Period. Full stop."

NO. They already baked cakes for homosexuals. Just not WEDDING cakes.

But thank you for playing, fool.

Posted by: Beverly at March 31, 2015 10:13 AM (3SiAu)

686 So, a free market. Nice! Posted by: Jeff Gordon's brother-in-law at March 31, 2015 03:10 PM (NeFrd) ------- A fricken men. Let the market decide and keep the lawyers out of it. And the judges. Don't trust them to do the right thing.

Posted by: Seems Legit at March 31, 2015 10:14 AM (A98Xu)

687 663 You rock and are one of the few logical thinkers here. I know you are not religious, but God bless you and your family!

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 10:14 AM (2SnmG)

688 It occasionally ought to be pointed out that there are enough self-identified conservatives in the country of all stripes that any truly large scale boycott by enough of them would be impossible to ignore and would garner instant attention. Conservatives aren't good at boycotts, because we think in terms of the businessmen, not the larger corporation. We see things in terms of individuals, not collectives. Maybe the owner of Apple is a jackwagon, but hey, I like this product and I buy it from a nice kid. What we are good at, and this is something I pointed out back when the whole idiotic Chik-Fil-A kerfluffle happened (oh, and the left won that by the way, the CEO stopped donating to the causes he was), is "buycotts." Conservatives are great at patronizing places we like and support, we bring them money and business. We're good at positive support of businesses, not negative attack.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 10:14 AM (39g3+)

689

Leftist activists don't want any rules about what occurs outside of mainstream lifestyles.  No judgements.  No debate.

 

  Go to SanFran and take a gander at the Folsum St. Fair and you'll see these same people who believe that having sex with a dude in public should be okay - the more debauched the better.

Posted by: Cheri at March 31, 2015 10:14 AM (G+Wff)

690 Happened to a chapel in Idaho. http://tinyurl.com/kwz42c2 Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 03:12 PM (AkOaV) And our resident "libertarians" seem to be just fine with this.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 10:14 AM (2Ojst)

691

Churches are businesses. They sell fantasy.

 

methinks that the mighty moo wouldn't repeat this in front of Farrakan

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 10:14 AM (Spluw)

692 665 >>The cab driver is not dicriminating against a group of people. He's not saying I won't take blind people with dogs. He is saying I won't take people with dogs, blind or otherwise. And yet, you're wrong. You do realize this is against the law, don't you? Or are you going to continue to beclown yourself on this issue? Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2015 03:11 PM (g1DWB) ___________ You're really this dumb? Really? Try and stick to the subject at hand. The Muslim saying no dogs has absolutely nothing to do with a SoCon fanatic refusing to bake a cake for gays. If you can't see the difference you're dumber than I ever imagined.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:14 AM (0LHZx)

693

Welcome to tha new age, to tha new age.

Welcome to tha new age, to tha new age.

 

Posted by: Imagine fascist homo CEOs at March 31, 2015 10:14 AM (xkSSa)

694

"I think I would short Apple."

Apple is going to make an electric car.  You should short Apple just for the corporate suicide surrounding that decision alone.  Apple's Iwatch battery is only good for 18 hours...

Posted by: Speller at March 31, 2015 10:15 AM (PsEVn)

695 >>The cab driver is not dicriminating against a group of people. He's not saying I won't take blind people with dogs. He is saying I won't take people with dogs, blind or otherwise. And yet, you're wrong. You do realize this is against the law, don't you? Or are you going to continue to beclown yourself on this issue? Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2015 03:11 PM (g1DWB) Two protected special interest groups enter, only one leaves... Let's get ready to rumble!

Posted by: LizLem at March 31, 2015 10:15 AM (yRwC8)

696 He keeps using that word. I do not think it means what he thinks it means. Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 03:10 PM (2Ojst) LOL

Posted by: Inigo Montoya, who has studies his Agrippa, and his Political Science at March 31, 2015 10:15 AM (qh617)

697 What's really funny is that this guy who talks about "balkanization" doesn't realize that there were nation-states IN THE DAMN BALKANS where people who didn't like one another's beliefs were nevertheless forced to live cheek by jowl by paternalistic, all-controlling hard-left governments. And when those governments finally fell, what resulted was utterly horrific. People who would of their own accord have sorted themselves out into more homogenous communities instead were mixed together in ways that no one liked or wanted. Terrifying bloodshed followed. Posted by: torquewrench at March 31, 2015 03:12 PM (noWW6) Gross oversimplification much?

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:15 AM (XsOa7)

698 Go to SanFran and take a gander at the Folsum St. Fair and you'll see these same people who believe that having sex with a dude in public should be okay - the more debauched the better.

Posted by: Cheri at March 31, 2015 03:14 PM (G+Wff)



It's an environmentally protected habitat for the virus.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 10:16 AM (oKE6c)

699 belief leads to discrimination against others, that's where you go from religious freedom to discrimination against others. Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 03:10 PM (0LHZx) They don't want to participate. But you're happy enough to force the ignorant savages to do what you want. Got it.

Posted by: Iblis at March 31, 2015 10:16 AM (9221z)

700 oh yeah, that's what it is having a discussion with the "die already, white men who are old" racists is that the same, ah, machismo that lets them boldly acts that way turns into pathetic begging and pleading the minute you argue back. "wow, maybe we should control the border" "you are inbred, old white men who should die soon" "but mexico has tight border security" "how dare you sire!!! we are but a poor country with no means to provide for the vile scum from Guatemala who invade our welfare net and drive us from work. And we need to work in America because our own country is overrun by monkeys and drug gangs and our relatives need the $12 a week we're able to send over via wire transfer. also, I am sure I can concoct some version of what you said is racist and when we're not wishing you an early death, we're being oppressed by you...and on and on"

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:16 AM (th6S/)

701 LOL. Oh really? Then what do they sell? Widgets? Churches are businesses. They sell fantasy. Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 03:13 PM (0LHZx) I can appreciate that you're an ignorant fuckwit when it comes to religion, and, like most immature 14 year olds, you don't even understand what you're criticizing. Maybe you could read up a bit and reduce your ignorance? No? It certainly would strengthen whatever argument you think you're making. On that other hand, it's much more fun for us to bash you around like a piñata because you think you actually know what you're talking about - when the evidence abounds that you do not.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at March 31, 2015 10:16 AM (/kVvc)

702 He keeps using that word. I do not think it means what he thinks it means. Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 03:10 PM (2Ojst) Or maybe you're just thinking that libertarianism is synonym for anarchism? Because that's not what it means.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:16 AM (XsOa7)

703 >>Because we don't live in an anarchic society. All laws passed by the majority generally force someone to do something or refrain from doing something he or she would like to do. Why should the majority's opinions trump the minority's? And yet, most gay marriage laws have not been passed by a majority, they have been decided by courts. A few judges have created most of this mess even in places where the majority did not want gay marriage. So back to that whole libertarian thing ....

Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2015 10:16 AM (g1DWB)

704 And not to be left out, Andrew "Gun-Grabbin'" Cuomo has just banned all NY state-funded travel to Indiana. Andy wants his own hissy-fit, dammit!

Posted by: Citizen X at March 31, 2015 10:16 AM (7ObY1)

705

i run my mouth about marxism, and then invoke God.

 

Snorting tea. just say no.

Posted by: dutch treat at March 31, 2015 10:16 AM (Spluw)

706

i run my mouth about marxism, and then invoke God.

 

Snorting tea. just say no.

Posted by: dutch treat at March 31, 2015 10:16 AM (Spluw)

707 Yes, clearly, believing in anti-discrimination laws means I'm a believer in Orwellian-style government. Please. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:07 PM (XsOa7) That's exactly what it means. A government so big that it can micro-manage thoughts for political correctness and 300 million people and their daily interactions with others is an all encompassing government

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:16 AM (AkOaV)

708

@680

By this "logic", Moo would take the govt's side in the Hosanna Tabor case (which position was unanimously rejected by the SCOTUS). After all, not hiring non-Christians is discrimination. Some libertarian Moo is. I hate to even use the term hypocrite because people are naturally inconsistent but this is such a break that it is applicable.

Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Plush Porcupine at March 31, 2015 10:17 AM (k8xvx)

709 It just shows how silly all religions are. And yes it should be illegal to discriminate. This is one of the most ignorant things I've ever seen anyone type. You know when you ate your breakfast this morning, you were discriminating, right? The last boi you dated was a choice between someone else and that confused young man. That's discriminating. Discrimination merely means choice, it means choosing between different options. Having "discriminating taste" is considered a virtue. The only time discrimination becomes wrong is when it is unjust and unethical. Merely discriminating is not wrong or improper. It is the only way we can actually go through life. Unless you think a higher power, say, a state panel of... lets call them commissars... makes every choice for you.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 10:17 AM (39g3+)

710 >>Practice religion all you want. Believe in whatever Sky God you want. Have a blast. But when that belief leads to discrimination against others, that's where you go from religious freedom to discrimination against others. <<

Except that religious people are allowed to practice freely. Part of that practice intersects with the public.

The public is not compelled to use their services. It's still a free market, for now.

The litigants have choices. They refuse to use those alternatives because: gay lawsuit.

Actually they are gay Nazi's.

What has been done here is to corrupt individual freedom in the name of populism.

You've elevated the interests of one group over another and made them a special class. Which is not permitted under our laws and Constitution.

That's not freedom.

So you don't believe in a constitutional republic. What you believe in is an oligarchy or anarchy where people are compelled to act according to a narrow belief.

That's simple enough even for you.

Posted by: Marcus T. at March 31, 2015 10:17 AM (GGCsk)

711 @674 My point is thatAngl Saxons are not invincible. They can bleed like any other human. You think that you will be able to exterminate Latinos, but you will be in for a shock. I am Slavic and marries to a Latina. People like you who want to exterminate her and her people are my enemy.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 10:18 AM (2SnmG)

712 NO. They already baked cakes for homosexuals. Just not WEDDING cakes. But thank you for playing, fool. Posted by: Beverly at March 31, 2015 03:13 PM (3SiAu) So they're not discriminating against homosexuals in all facets of their life, just ones that are important. OK. Cool.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:18 AM (XsOa7)

713

"But when that belief leads to discrimination against others, that's where you go from religious freedom to discrimination against others. "

 

--

 

But forcing someone to violate their religious beliefs somehow is not discrimination........................  Funny how the coin has only    one side.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2015 10:18 AM (BbwTO)

714 706 And not to be left out, Andrew "Gun-Grabbin'" Cuomo has just banned all NY state-funded travel to Indiana.



Um ... how much state-funded travel is there from NY to IN, anyway?


Indiana should reciprocate, and ban state-funded travel to NY and CT, and ban Apple products.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 10:18 AM (oKE6c)

715 "If you believe there is not and should not be a limit on government which prevents them from forcing me to provide a good or service to someone, what limits *do* you believe should be on government, and from what authority do these limits derive?" As I said on one of the morning threads, the line of reasoning (such as it is) out here among Commiefornia liberals boils down to this: "The government should be able to force people who disagree with me to do things they don't want to do, because the fact that they disagree with me proves that they're bad people, and bad people shouldn't have rights." QED and all that. Can't argue with this level of laser-fine logic.

Posted by: torquewrench at March 31, 2015 10:18 AM (noWW6)

716 The description of the plane video in the sidebar of the crash is pretty horrendous.

Posted by: Bruce J. at March 31, 2015 10:18 AM (iQIUe)

717 We've already lost by making the argument in terms of religious freedom. Don't get me wrong, religious freedom is important. However, we've completely abandoned the notion of individual liberty and propery rights. The argument we should be making is that the government cannot force us to transact against our wills. Capitalism is the most moral economic system, because trade is voluntary and thus mutually-beneficial. Capitalism is the only economic system that allows for win-win conflict resolution. If the government can force you to transact for any reason, then you have no property rights, no freedom of conscience, no intellectual freedom, and no individual liberty. By carving out an exemption to this type of government force strictly on religious grounds, we're conceding to their dubious argument that one gives up the right to a conscience merely by seeking a profit. Thus we forfeit all property rights.

Posted by: Mikey at March 31, 2015 10:18 AM (Uff7i)

718 Posted by: Sean Bannion at March 31, 2015 03:16 PM (/kVvc) _________ Churches sell fantasy. 1000 years ago, everyone bought since nobody really knew any better. Starting a few hundred years ago, people started figuring out it was all bullshit. In a few hundred more years, people will look back on religion and think, man what the fuck were those people thinking?

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:19 AM (0LHZx)

719 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:16 PM (XsOa7) Some of the basic tenets of libertarianism are individual choice, individual autonomy and freedom of association, all of which you have been vociferously opposing in this particular context. I don't think you have the slightest clue about what you claim to believe.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 10:19 AM (2Ojst)

720 I am sure you all have heard of the bartender in SF that got sued by a ghey for what was he thought was a insult.



So he gets some slap on the wrist.  He friend decide for a little pay back and go to a ghey bar with girls and start kissing, etc.




The bartender says we don't server "breeders".  They taped and sued the bar.


Won

Posted by: Nip Sip at March 31, 2015 10:19 AM (0FSuD)

721 And not to be left out, Andrew "Gun-Grabbin'" Cuomo has just banned all NY state-funded travel to Indiana.

I'm wondering how often that actually happens...and how often there's a valid business case for the travel, not just the rubber-room teachers deciding to take in a Knicks playoff game.

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at March 31, 2015 10:19 AM (/kI1Q)

722 A libertarian should be doing backflips over this law because it gives framework for the debate between the people and the government, while giving tools to the people to mount a defense of their values. But, you know, whatever. The feds should totes have the power to break into a pow wow and steal a bunch of eagle feathers from a tribe because they aren't on their special federally recognized tribes list.

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 10:19 AM (MYCIw)

723 That's exactly what it means. A government so big that it can micro-manage thoughts for political correctness and 300 million people and their daily interactions with others is an all encompassing government Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 03:16 PM (AkOaV) No, it's a government states that if you want to run a business that caters to the public, you won't discriminate against paying customers on the basis of their beliefs or personal lives. The horror!

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:19 AM (XsOa7)

724 Insulting people is such a charming way to win over people? What an asshole

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 10:19 AM (rDqRv)

725 Or maybe you're just thinking that libertarianism is synonym for anarchism? Because that's not what it means. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:16 PM (XsOa7) No, I think a large number of us here would consider ourselves libertarians, and we know what it means. It means that we believe in liberty and individualism trump "the common good" or "society". That we do not believe in using coercion to force people to act against their will and conscious, and that we believe that the vast majority of human affairs are best served in a society where people are free to do what they want as long as they don't encroach on anyone elses rights. Like Thomas Jefferson said about his (hypothetical polytheist neighbor) "if he neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg, why do I care what he does?"

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:19 AM (AkOaV)

726 So they're not discriminating against homosexuals in all facets of their life, just ones that are important. OK. Cool. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:18 PM (XsOa7) __________ Bbbbut don't you see, the sinners can sin and we love sinners but we just can't love the sinners when they commit the sin. Or something.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:19 AM (0LHZx)

727 That's ridiculous, Can anyone seriously argue and present FACTS suggesting that businesses which are opposed to providing artistic services (floral, bakery, etc) are not willing to give you A German Chocolate cake or an arrangement for a Funeral? If you're suggesting-that they don't provide any services to gays you're an idiot. Is there a magic detector that goes off in the bakery when a lesbian wants a cookie or some gay gay wants a donut. Flashing lights and sirens saying I DETECT A GAY PERSON APPROACHING THE CASE, DO NOT SELL THEM A CRULLER!!" PLeeeeeze.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 31, 2015 10:19 AM (DXzRD)

728 That's simple enough even for you. Posted by: Marcus T. at March 31, 2015 03:17 PM (GGCsk) Don't bet on anything being simple enough for him to grasp. FFS, two lbs. of cum at least have the possibility of achieving sentience. Moo Moo on the other hand....

Posted by: Sean Bannion at March 31, 2015 10:19 AM (/kVvc)

729 the issue isn't "homosexuality" it's whether the state can constitutionally *force* you in your private business to act contrary to your religious beliefs the answer should be no

Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 10:19 AM (YoW4p)

730 My point is thatAngl Saxons are not invincible. They can bleed like any other human. You think that you will be able to exterminate Latinos, but you will be in for a shock.

I am Slavic and marries to a Latina. People like you who want to exterminate her and her people are my enemy.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 03:18 PM (2SnmG)



Boy, you sure gave THAT straw man a good whomping.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 10:20 AM (oKE6c)

731 Meant "provide artistic services for gay weddings..."

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 31, 2015 10:20 AM (DXzRD)

732

 

Maybe the owner of Apple is a jackwagon, but hey, I like this product and I buy it from a nice kid.

 the ceo of apple and most likely the nice kid you by the device from think you are a jim crow lovin racist scumb bag.so no thanks

Posted by: kj at March 31, 2015 10:20 AM (lKyWE)

733 Apple is big enough to keep going on momentum alone for quite a while, but Tim Cook is the bullet in the charging rino's brain. Before long, Android is going to come out in dreamy fab phone colors too, and at half the price. Apple only goes on because of their fanbois who still have the expendable cash not to grow up

Posted by: kbdabear at March 31, 2015 10:20 AM (GrXXa)

734 Some of the basic tenets of libertarianism are individual choice, individual autonomy and freedom of association, all of which you have been vociferously opposing in this particular context. I don't think you have the slightest clue about what you claim to believe. Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 03:19 PM (2Ojst) Yes, and those tenets don't come with the word "unfettered" in front of them. So, I suggest you bone up on your logic skills, because you're missing many.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:20 AM (XsOa7)

735 Insulting people is such a charming way to win over people? Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 03:19 PM (rDqRv) That assumes that is a desirable goal of the party of the first part....

Posted by: Sean Bannion at March 31, 2015 10:20 AM (/kVvc)

736 So we can pretty much write off 2016 now. Thanks So Cons. Enjoy President Hillary for 8 years. In 2024 maybe you'll finally wake the fuck up and shut the fuck up about the gays and magic sperm killing vaginas.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:21 AM (0LHZx)

737 So they're not discriminating against homosexuals in all facets of their life, just ones that are important. OK. Cool.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99

 

Glad that you're happy, because I'm not about to change, and you certainly aren't going to try and change me.

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 10:21 AM (Spluw)

738 Not my comment but I saw it on another blog. This means a black musician or entertainer would have to preform at a KKK rally.

Posted by: redenzo at March 31, 2015 10:21 AM (WCnJW)

739 "The government should be able to force people who disagree with me to do things they don't want to do, because the fact that they disagree with me proves that they're bad people, and bad people shouldn't have rights."

And the corollary:  "The government shouldn't force me to do anything I don't feel like doing, because I'm not one of those bad people."

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at March 31, 2015 10:21 AM (/kI1Q)

740 I really don't get what the gays and their prog buddies have against the concept of balancing conflicting rights -- which is all these RFRA laws do. These are the same people always screaming about "fairness." What could be more "fair" than requiring that, when peoples' rights conflict, courts try to balance them? We all know that some rights are more important than others. For example, the right to life should always trump the right to speak whatever is on one's mind -- which is why people can't legally scream "fire" in a crowded theater that is not, in fact, on fire. People could die in the resulting stampede for the exits, and those peoples' right to live clearly trumps the speaker's right to free speech in that situation. Similarly, if there are 89 bakeries in your area, and you choose the one who doesn't bake cakes for gay weddings, get turned away and sue, then the court has to balance your right to buy a cake from this baker against the baker's right to live in accordance with his religious beliefs. Since you could obviously have your choice of many other nearby pro-gay bakeries from which to purchase your cake, the baker's religious rights should trump your right to buy a cake in that particular bakery. The inconvenience to you of using another baker would be minimal, but the infringement on the baker's rights if he were forced to bake the gay wedding cake in violation of his religious beliefs would be substantial. When you do the balancing, the baker clearly wins in that situation. In the "diverse" and "inclusive" society that lefties like Tim Cook claim they want, there are always going to be situations where some peoples' rights conflict with somebody else's rights. What better way to resolve those conflicts than to balance the respective rights? But the gays (and Muslims, some blacks, many women, etc.) don't seem to want equal civil rights -- they want superior civil rights. They want their rights to always trump the other guy's rights, no matter how substantial the infringement on the other guy's rights. So why is it that Tim Cook, Angie's List, NASCAR, etc., don't believe in the basic concept of fairness? Because that's what they're really opposing when they oppose these RFRA laws; they're opposing fairness.

Posted by: TrivialPursuer at March 31, 2015 10:21 AM (lmdHn)

741

"The litigants have choices. They refuse to use those alternatives because: gay lawsuit.

Actually they are gay Nazi's."

The SA, the Brownshirts, were homosexuals.  I think wem should call these 'gay Nazis' the Brown Pants. 

Posted by: Speller at March 31, 2015 10:21 AM (PsEVn)

742 161 Re: Closing Apple stores. How would you ever get the battery changed in your device if they closed the stores? Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 02:14 PM (39g3+) --- https://www.ifixit.com/Device/iPhone_6

Posted by: despair at March 31, 2015 10:21 AM (J6suc)

743 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:20 PM (XsOa7) You also apparently have no clue about logic or argumentation either.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 10:21 AM (2Ojst)

744 I don't know how closely HBO hews to the historical record, it hasn't aired yet. But barn fires were a pretty common occurence back then.

Posted by: Lincolntf at March 31, 2015 10:21 AM (2cS/G)

745 Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 03:19 PM (0LHZx) Please stay with the topic. moo moo. This is not a thread about your anti Theism .

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 31, 2015 10:21 AM (DXzRD)

746 Boy, you sure gave THAT straw man a good whomping. Posted by: Jay Guevara at March 31, 2015 03:20 PM (oKE6c) Forget it Jay, it's Hector.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at March 31, 2015 10:21 AM (/kVvc)

747 We just didn't have a cake topper of two men in tuxedos going at it doggie style.

Posted by: the Bakery at March 31, 2015 10:21 AM (wAQA5)

748 Practice religion all you want. Believe in whatever Sky God you want. Have a blast. But when... And this is the usual leftist cant on religion: believe whatever you want as long as it has no tangible, visible impact on how you behave or what you do. Keep it to yourself, God boy.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 10:22 AM (39g3+)

749 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:19 PM (XsOa7) Okay, so how do you enforce that? How do you establish that the business owner refused to serve Joe Shmoe 99 because he discriminates against retards and not because Joe Schmoe left the house without shoes on again, which is a hygiene issue? And what if the business owner is an out and out bigot? In his mind, only black people deserve to eat his delicious food and he refuses to serve to white people. You would throw him in jail when he refused to serve white people and refused to pay the fines? You would stick a gun in his face because you disagreed with the way he ran his business?

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:22 AM (AkOaV)

750

@605 JoeShmoe99

 

"Instead, we'll just have a balkanized society where everyone will discriminate against everyone else."

 

Astute, but you are aware there is a portion of society that continuely focuses on divisions in order to control the divided groups (divide et impera).  Who benefits from this situation?   If people were left alone to pursue their pathes, the divisions would go away but the those currently in power will never let that happen.

Posted by: Buckeye Abroad at March 31, 2015 10:22 AM (i4hxh)

751 Mooboy really hates people  with morals.

Posted by: Soona at March 31, 2015 10:22 AM (/HX7u)

752 You think that you will be able to exterminate Latinos, but you will be in for a shock. **** dafuq? see... like I said, machismo followed by pathos. But he's slavic, so the alcoholism can be a bitch and then white knighting for your latina bride can lead to ... whatever the hell it is that makes a slavic man write "You think that you will be able to exterminate Latinos, but you will be in for a shock."

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:22 AM (th6S/)

753 it's whether the state can constitutionally *force* you in your private business to act contrary to your religious beliefs the answer should be no Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 03:19 PM (YoW4p) __________ My religion says taxes are sinful. Therefore at my store I will not collect sales tax nor will I pay any income tax.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:22 AM (0LHZx)

754

@715

We know how all this ends, Vashta. At this point, a part of me's not even sure it's a negative.

-"For it has been granted on behalf o Christ, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake" Phillipians 1:29

"No wound? No scar?

Yet, as the Master shall the servant be

And pierced are the feet that follow me

But thine are whole; can he have followed far

Who hast no wound or scar?"

-"No Scar" - Amy Carmichael

Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Plush Porcupine at March 31, 2015 10:22 AM (k8xvx)

755 Bbbbut don't you see, the sinners can sin and we love sinners but we just can't love the sinners when they commit the sin.

Or something.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo

 

The answer is no, and you aren't going to make me. Just like Apple isn't about to say jack shit to Saudi Arabia.

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 10:22 AM (Spluw)

756 moo, the real fantasy is what you think the future will be like

Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 10:22 AM (YoW4p)

757 And this is the usual leftist cant on religion: believe whatever you want as long as it has no tangible, visible impact on how you behave or what you do. Keep it to yourself, God boy. Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 03:22 PM (39g3+) Indeed. Add in "and we'll put a gun to your head and FORCE you to keep it to yourself" and you've got moo moo and joeshmoe's positions down pat.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 10:23 AM (2Ojst)

758 731 the issue isn't "homosexuality"

it's whether the state can constitutionally *force* you in your private business to act contrary to your religious beliefs

the answer should be no

Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 03:19 PM (YoW4p)


You make joke, right?



You ever heard of the 1964 Civil Rights Act?  Same thing.  Goldwater voted no.

Posted by: Nip Sip at March 31, 2015 10:23 AM (0FSuD)

759 >>I am Slavic and marries to a Latina. People like you who want to exterminate her and her people are my enemy. What you are is a liar. Nobody, not once, has ever talked about exterminating your wife or any other Latino. The argument is about people, whether they are Latino, Europeo, Russio, or any other "o" being here illegally. This is why a guy like Ted Cruz, of Latin heritage, is a hero to many conservatives while the guy who snuck over the boarder from Mexico is not. This is not a tough concept for anyone who is honest about the issue instead of a screaming child. You have no defense for someone being here illegal so you resort to the cheapest sort of slander. You are, a leftist liar.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2015 10:23 AM (g1DWB)

760 "just ones that are importan" For the 100th freaking time, they are opposed to the ceremony not the people involved in the ceremony. There are a million examples of people refusing to participate in a ceremony that isn't ZOMG DISCRIMINATION!!11! Here's a good example. I have a friend who's an atheist. She was asked to be a god mother for a Catholic friend's daughter. She declined because she didn't feel it would be an appropriate role, but assured her friend that she would always be there for her daughter and wouldn't hesitate to step in in a non spiritual way should something happen to the friend. She refused to take part in the ceremony. Was this ZOMG DISCRIMINATION!!11! ?

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 10:23 AM (MYCIw)

761 Cripes, the trolls are out in force today.

Posted by: Moderate Salami at March 31, 2015 10:23 AM (/Ho8c)

762 Charge 1 million dollars for the wedding cake.

Posted by: Dan at March 31, 2015 10:23 AM (COpZ4)

763 753 Mooboy really hates people with morals. Posted by: Soona at March 31, 2015 03:22 PM (/HX7u) He has none. His only guiding principle is avarice.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 10:23 AM (2Ojst)

764 740 Not my comment but I saw it on another blog. This means a black musician or entertainer would have to preform at a KKK rally. Posted by: redenzo at March 31, 2015 03:21 PM (WCnJW) Well, of course they would. Otherwise that would be discriminating against skin heads, and the black musician would have to be thrown in jail. Right JoeSchmoe?

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:24 AM (AkOaV)

765 I am Slavic and marries to a Latina. People like you who want to exterminate her and her people are my enemy. **** fucking goofy

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:24 AM (th6S/)

766 Or maybe you're just thinking that libertarianism is synonym for anarchism? Because that's not what it means. Libertarianism as you use it means YOU get what YOU want, and people who don't want what YOU want take a hike. It's all about maximizing YOUR liberty. Which is part of why I'm not a libertarian. Lacks an anchor to prevent devolution into Me-Special-Snowflake-ism.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 10:24 AM (0NdlF)

767 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:13 PM (XsOa7) You do realize that none of this stems from the 14th Amendment, right? That had nothing to do with private businesses, and everything to do with government- equal protection under the law. This all stems from the 1960s and the Civil Rights Act. Now, I will agree that homosexuals should have equal protection under the law. They should be free to do everything I can do legally. That includes get married (the question about gay marriage is not whether or not it should be legal, but whether or not such a thing exists), visit loved ones in the hospital, vote, get a driver's license, and so forth. None of that has jack squat to do with whether or not I conduct any business with one. Segregation continued long after the 14th Amendment was ratified- by law. Upheld by the Supreme Court. It wasn't until much later that "separate" was defined as "by definition not 'equal.'" So, with that straw man out of the way: by what moral authority does the government say I *must* engage in any given economic activity in which I do not wish to engage? If such moral authority exists, then what moral authority constrains the government at all? Or do you believe that the Constitution is the only empowering/constraining authority, and it can *and should be able to* enumerate the Rights of the People?

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 10:24 AM (kff5f)

768 >>Posted by: Sean Bannion at March 31, 2015 03:19 PM (/kVvc) <<

It's just stunning that people make these arguments in a vacuum when their favorite politician is in charge and their favorite group is marching in the streets (again), no matter how empty, sophistic, fallacious, delusional and anarchistic the argument is.

The shoe will be on the other foot when new people are in charge that leverage this nonsense to do the converse.

You never put that power in other people's hands.

They treat politics like it's a sport. Get "your team" or tribe to win at any cost. It's pathetic and destructive.

Freedom works because it gives liberty to the individual. Anything less is a dangerous departure from democracy.

Posted by: Marcus T. at March 31, 2015 10:24 AM (GGCsk)

769 moo, which religion is against federal income tax again? sign me up

Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 10:24 AM (YoW4p)

770 And this is the usual leftist cant on religion: believe whatever you want as long as it has no tangible, visible impact on how you behave or what you do. Keep it to yourself, God boy. Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 03:22 PM (39g3+) ________- 1. I'm no leftist 2. I don't give a fuck what you do. Believe what you want. Walk around with a giant sign on your head that says I HEART JESUS. Decorate your house in wall to wall Jesus carpeting and tell the world about it. I don't give a fuck. What I do give a fuck about is when your "religion" means discriminating against other people who don't believe in your nonsense.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:24 AM (0LHZx)

771 Thanks for your witness, lurkingestlurker.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 31, 2015 10:24 AM (DXzRD)

772 FTSB - Oh Lord Dusseldorf, Germany (CNN)Video found in the wreckage on a French mountainside shows the nightmarish final seconds of Germanwings Flight 9525, reports said Tuesday. Taken on a cell phone, the video "was so chaotic that it was hard to identify people, but the sounds of the screaming passengers made it perfectly clear that they were aware of what was about to happen to them," according to the French magazine Paris Match, which obtained the video along with the German newspaper Bild.

Posted by: toby928(C) at March 31, 2015 10:25 AM (evdj2)

773 The first amendment is to protect religious EXPRESSION, not REPRESSION. When someone demands that a religious person shut up, they become that which the First Amendment is there to eliminate - repression of religious expression. The First Amendment does not logically give the Anti-Religious comparative standing. It is there to protect the faithful from the faithless.

Posted by: Inspector Cussword at March 31, 2015 10:25 AM (S8V5R)

774 If I believe that a black man and a white woman shouldn't be allowed to get a legal marriage, should I be allowed to refuse to sell them goods or services for their wedding? That is also a political act? Do you think discriminating in that way should be legal? Hell if you have an actual belief that people should be able to refuse service to blacks, then doing so is inherently a political act. Therefore, under Ace's standard, all of that discrimination should be legal.

Posted by: The truth at March 31, 2015 10:25 AM (ibvmu)

775

 

My religion says taxes are sinful. Therefore at my store I will not collect sales tax nor will I pay any income tax.

 

really moo moo?thats pathetic you use to do much better than that

Posted by: kj at March 31, 2015 10:25 AM (lKyWE)

776 A school can force children to not wear American flag t shirts, and the government can force you to take part in a gay wedding. New America as envisioned by the Left.

Posted by: Dan at March 31, 2015 10:25 AM (COpZ4)

777 Tim Cook is the bullet in the charging rino's brain. He's just a symptom. Apple was Steve Jobs. That was proved when he retired and the company started to tank, so he had to come back and save it. The guy wasn't the grand dynamic genius visionary that he's considered by drooling Apple fans, but he was very gifted at realizing what seemed super cool and futuristic and would appeal to gadget lovers. Without his vision... Apple is just a really overpriced logo, and that momentum can't last. I think the watch thing is the beginning of the end for them.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 10:25 AM (39g3+)

778 No, it's a government states that if you want to run a business that caters to the public, you won't discriminate against paying customers on the basis of their beliefs or personal lives. The horror!

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:19 PM (XsOa7)

-----------------------------


Oh, so the black baker must be forced by the state to make a KKK cake with a lynching on top?

No matter how innocuously you want to phrase it what it comes down to is you want the state to bankrupt someone who hurts someone's feelings AND you want the state to strip you of your basic rights as a condition of being part of the public square.

You've totally inverted the liberties here.  There is no horror being visited on gay people.  But you want the state to bankrupt people just for hurting their feelings. So when it comes down to "balancing" individual liberties like speech, association, conscience, religion and property rights AGAINST the "right" to not be offended you're for throwing out all the individual liberties.

Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 10:25 AM (nyxv/)

779

And this is the usual leftist cant on religion: believe whatever you want as long as it has no tangible, visible impact on how you behave or what you do. Keep it to yourself, God boy.

 

You missed the greater point; this applies to only some religions. Fucking with religions that might very well kill him isn't their style.

 

See mark Steyn's rule of provocation: #1, pick someone who won't be provoked.

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 10:26 AM (Spluw)

780 771 moo, which religion is against federal income tax again? sign me up Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 03:24 PM (YoW4p) ___________ The Church of the Almight Moo. We just started and are accepting applications for new membership. The annual fee si $10K a year. It's ultra exclusive.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:26 AM (0LHZx)

781 Apple's Iwatch battery is only good for 18 hours... *** So, in my iCar at 35 mph top cruising speed I can just make it to Denver before I have to stop and recharge my watch. Awesome.

Posted by: Muldoon, a solid man at March 31, 2015 10:26 AM (NeFrd)

782 My point is thatAngl Saxons are not invincible. They can bleed like any other human. You think that you will be able to exterminate Latinos, but you will be in for a shock. Well, since it was the English and their close relatives the Dutch that actually whupped 'em, your data doesn't back the conclusion you are trying to prove. BTW, Europeans were predicting that the Mexican-American War would end in 12 weeks with the Mexicans marching into Washington. The Mexicans had a bigger army with recent combat experience, you see. Something for you to ponder...

Posted by: Grey Fox at March 31, 2015 10:26 AM (4hIUY)

783 Apple, are total hypocrites, and maybe even repressed Puritans - Well Steve Jobs sure was. I happen to know for a fact they have no problem declining to sell certain ebooks in their marketplace.

Posted by: Rodney C. Johnson at March 31, 2015 10:26 AM (M2oVh)

784 Oops. We just ran out of sugar and used Ex-Lax instead.

Posted by: the Bakery at March 31, 2015 10:26 AM (wAQA5)

785 Dave Chappelle in race attack after he was hit with a banana peel while performing in New Mexico stage http://goo.gl/wuS4N1

Posted by: Bruce J. at March 31, 2015 10:26 AM (iQIUe)

786 If I believe that a black man and a white woman shouldn't be allowed to get a legal marriage, should I be allowed to refuse to sell them goods or services for their wedding? I'll say it one more time: freedom requires putting up with ugly, stupid, and mean things. Liberty requires us tolerating things we don't like. As soon as you remove that, then you are on the road to serfdom.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 10:26 AM (39g3+)

787 Okay, so how do you enforce that? How do you establish that the business owner refused to serve Joe Shmoe 99 because he discriminates against retards and not because Joe Schmoe left the house without shoes on again, which is a hygiene issue? And what if the business owner is an out and out bigot? In his mind, only black people deserve to eat his delicious food and he refuses to serve to white people. You would throw him in jail when he refused to serve white people and refused to pay the fines? You would stick a gun in his face because you disagreed with the way he ran his business? Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 03:22 PM (AkOaV) As I said, I think government properly bans discrimination on the basis of immutable characteristics. You can make it all scary-sounding with guns to faces, etc., but the fact of the matter is that I'd rather live in a society where anyone can go into a place of public accommodation and know he or she will be served without having to fear being kicked out for his race, having a penis or vagina, wearing a cross or a Magen David, etc. If that makes a libertarian-minus, then so be it.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:26 AM (XsOa7)

788 Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 01:57 PM (MYCIw)
-----------------
I keep hearing this gay = black argument, or this "how dare you discriminate against homosexuals" line, but I never hear WHY homosexuals are or should be protected under the 14th Amendment.  Behavior is not protected, but a CLASS is.  Race and biological sex are protected because they are immutable. We all KNOW why peopel are men or woemn, or why they are white, black etc. - they are clearly born that way its obvious, its proven.  No one become black as a product of abuse, or mental illness, etc. 

You can't prove homosexuality is always a because of birth.  In fact, it can be demonstrated that other causes are just as likely, if not more likely. So in the absence of proof, homosexuality, and its admission to the "class", is based on behavior. And behavior is not protected, and can be criminalized or discriminated against.

Christianity considers it a behavior, and takes it further by calling it sinful behavior.  Law and mental health feilds used to call it criminal or deviant or abnormal.  Then they got handwaved as "ok now" due to politics.

So why is homosexuality "protected"?  What "class" does it belong to?  "Sexual Orientation"?

There are a lot of sexual orientations. Does that class include pedos, bestiality, necros, etc?  If not, why? Those are also criminal acts, but the people who perform those acts are gonna say they were "born that way" and deserve protection. Any "harm" these acts cause is really caused by society's view of them.  Sound familiar?

And what test protects them - rational basis, intermediate scrutiny, or strict scrutiny?


Posted by: Saltyron at March 31, 2015 10:27 AM (i6shs)

789 I am Slavic and marries to a Latina. People like you who want to exterminate her and her people are my enemy. ----- WTF does this even mean? Are you drunk?

Posted by: Seems Legit at March 31, 2015 10:27 AM (A98Xu)

790 Sweet Meteor of Calgon take me away...

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at March 31, 2015 10:27 AM (rSBBR)

791 What I do give a fuck about is when your "religion" means discriminating against other people who don't believe in your nonsense. I note you're discriminating against religion. You're just asking that your philosophy be given greater authority than other people's religions. And as religion is practiced beliefs - you want your god-less religion of practiced beliefs to be made supreme in this nation. Because. Reasons.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 10:28 AM (0NdlF)

792 Here is my take on the free market. That Samsung S6 looks much nicer then my iPhone. Think I'll be trying it.

Posted by: Marcus T. at March 31, 2015 10:28 AM (GGCsk)

793

@ 772

No, you're not a leftist, just a statist.

Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Plush Porcupine at March 31, 2015 10:28 AM (k8xvx)

794 771 moo, which religion is against federal income tax again?

sign me up

Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 03:24 PM (YoW4p)


If Moo Moo,  piece worker and financial genius, doesn't know, that would be the Amish.  They are exempt

Posted by: Nip Sip at March 31, 2015 10:28 AM (0FSuD)

795 Oh, so the black baker must be forced by the state to make a KKK cake with a lynching on top Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 03:25 PM (nyxv/) _________ Apples and Oranges as usual. The black baker isn't discriminating against a group of people. He's not saying I'll bake the KKK cake for black people, but I won't bake it for white people. He's saying I don't bake KKK cakes, period. On the other hand the SoCon wackjob says I'll gladly bake wedding cakes for everyone....except gays. See the difference?

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:28 AM (0LHZx)

796 @768 You want a society that resembles Iran or Saudi Arabia. That is why Conservatism is dying. You are not getting any new members from young people. Libertarianism will be around longer after conservatism is in the ash heap of history.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 10:28 AM (2SnmG)

797 And this is the usual leftist cant on religion: believe whatever you want as long as it has no tangible, visible impact on how you behave or what you do. Keep it to yourself, God boy. ***** This whole RFRA thing is bullshit. It may be the donk's attempt to make 2016 a social issue election but if the GOP is so ham handed that it can't fight back against DNC vicious anti-religious bent when a good portion of its base is religious, then we are going to lose because of this attack or the next one. Then again, if ISIS or Iran nukes a blue city, then it's going to be hard for the donks to lose even one voter fraud repository.

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:28 AM (th6S/)

798

@ Mr. Moo Moo

 

"It just shows how silly all religions are. And yes it should be illegal to discriminate."

 

Said the high priest of narcissim.

 

You discriminate every day, but only publicly acknowledge it as "freedom of choice."

 

We should put people like you in prison.

Posted by: Buckeye Abroad at March 31, 2015 10:28 AM (i4hxh)

799 "Churches sell fantasy. 1000 years ago, everyone bought since nobody really knew any better. Starting a few hundred years ago, people started figuring out it was all bullshit. In a few hundred more years, people will look back on religion and think, man what the fuck were those people thinking?" Whereas what's really going to happen is that inside of fifty years, militant Muslims will have attained a demographic critical mass in Western countries including the USA, and the likes of Moo Moo will suddenly become very very quiet about their previously voiced opinions of how "religion is bullshit".

Posted by: torquewrench at March 31, 2015 10:28 AM (noWW6)

800 Oh, so the black baker must be forced by the state to make a KKK cake with a lynching on top?No matter how innocuously you want to phrase it what it comes down to is you want the state to bankrupt someone who hurts someone's feelings AND you want the state to strip you of your basic rights as a condition of being part of the public square.You've totally inverted the liberties here. There is no horror being visited on gay people. But you want the state to bankrupt people just for hurting their feelings. So when it comes down to "balancing" individual liberties like speech, association, conscience, religion and property rights AGAINST the "right" to not be offended you're for throwing out all the individual liberties. Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 03:25 PM (nyxv/) My tolerance of anti-discrimination laws extends only to immutable characteristics and religion, not political beliefs. So, no, a black baker shouldn't be forced to bake a cake for the KKK because membership in the KKK is voluntary. And a Jew shouldn't be forced to bake a cake for a neonazi.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:29 AM (XsOa7)

801 Posted by: Saltyron at March 31, 2015 03:27 PM (i6shs) _______ Do you honestly believe gays choose to be gay?

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:29 AM (0LHZx)

802 Lauren is it time to set up SAC PAC?

Follow the moolah after all.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at March 31, 2015 10:29 AM (rSBBR)

803 What I do give a fuck about is when your "religion" means discriminating against other people who don't believe in your nonsense. Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 03:24 PM (0LHZx) Okay, so I'm an atheist so I'm not the best religious source here. But as I mentioned upthread, the local pizza place is owned by a Muslim. He refuses to put real pepperoni on pizza. I live with it, because, hey, his business. He also doesn't serve alcohol. Now should I be able to sue him to force him to serve pepperoni and beer? After all, his store is open to the public and those two options were available before he bought the store. Before you say "THATS DIFFERENT BECAUSE HE WONT SERVE ALCOHOL OR PORK TO ANYONE NOT JUST YOU" that's true, but the wedding cake vendors will not serve gay marriage wedding cakes to anyone, straight or gay. They'll only serve straight wedding cakes.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:29 AM (AkOaV)

804 Well, if anyone is an expert on fantasy, I'd say it's Bangladeshi piece worker Moo Moo.

Posted by: @JohnTant at March 31, 2015 10:30 AM (eytER)

805 So, no, a black baker shouldn't be forced to bake a cake for the KKK because membership in the KKK is voluntary.

Same-sex marriage is also voluntary (for now).

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at March 31, 2015 10:30 AM (/kI1Q)

806 I think they should make gayness safe, legal and rare.

Oh wait.

Posted by: Marcus T. at March 31, 2015 10:30 AM (GGCsk)

807 Do you honestly believe gays choose to be gay? Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 03:29 PM (0LHZx) Do you honestly believe pedophiles choose to be pedophiles? What fucking difference does it make if its choice or biology or childhood trauma or whatever?

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:30 AM (AkOaV)

808 "What I do give a fuck about is when your "religion" means discriminating against other people who don't believe in your nonsense." - mr. moomoo, bigot In other words, my rights die when I am in deadly peril of my eternal soul because anal sex rulez. I do not discriminate against people, I do against events, tasks, and actions. You would have me either deny my faith or go to prison for having my faith. That is not a decision. That is outlawing faith. You just don't admit that because you are a bigot who gets off on imprisoning people for their faith. It's quite obvious, no need to lie anymore - you hate Christians and want us all dead or in prison or slaves. That Is What Will Result. Period. Dead, prison, or enslaved, no other outcome with your formulation.

Posted by: Inspector Cussword at March 31, 2015 10:30 AM (S8V5R)

809 Whereas what's really going to happen is that inside of fifty years, militant Muslims will have attained a demographic critical mass in Western countries including the USA, and the likes of Moo Moo will suddenly become very very quiet about their previously voiced opinions of how "religion is bullshit". Posted by: torquewrench at March 31, 2015 03:28 PM (noWW6) ___________ Oh I think Islam as as fucked up as any other religion. They're all ridiculous. But the Muslims are substantially more fucked up than all the rest since their Sky Wizard tells them to kill lots of people.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:30 AM (0LHZx)

810 Libertarianism will be around longer after conservatism is in the ash heap of history. Oh, you think you're a libertarian? Too bad that you're actually a totalitarian. You're excited to destroy conservatives using leftists/Marxists, after all. But you're not actually in control and pulling levers - you're just their useful idiot.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 10:30 AM (0NdlF)

811 "And the corollary: 'The government shouldn't force me to do anything I don't feel like doing, because I'm not one of those bad people.'" Oh, yes indeed, there are *always* such corollaries being invoked. To say nothing of the emanations and penumbras! Special pleading for special snowflakes.

Posted by: torquewrench at March 31, 2015 10:30 AM (noWW6)

812

I can't believe this bridezilla thread is still up top

 

And I can't believe people are defending the rights of the bridezillas.

Posted by: Bigby's Ring Finger at March 31, 2015 10:31 AM (3ZtZW)

813 If there can be a law forcing bakers to transact with gays, then there should also be a law forcing gays to buy food from Chick-fil-a. Fair is fair.

Posted by: Mikey at March 31, 2015 10:31 AM (Uff7i)

814 BTW, Europeans were predicting that the Mexican-American War would end in 12 weeks with the Mexicans marching into Washington. The Mexicans had a bigger army with recent combat experience, you see. Something for you to ponder... *** interesting. I guess the Spanish cultural self-destruct mechanism brought about by their gold-lust and bad ship driving skills was bequeathed to their new world kin. But I wasn't talking about mexicans per se with my 5000-1 comment. Just in general, us old men who are about to die can kill real good. until our forefather's cultural suicide gene kicked in and we are now arguing about laws that protect bakers from getting sued by lawyered up SJW-ghey mafia types

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:31 AM (th6S/)

815 Posted by: Saltyron at March 31, 2015 03:27 PM (i6shs) I think homosexuality is not a choice (for the most part), and therefore should be afforded the same constitutional protections as race, ethnicity, etc. Who gives a rat's ass what you do in bed with a consenting adult? I don't.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:31 AM (XsOa7)

816 nip, right, 1964, etc I guess it's all about getting yourself defined as a protected class do that, and might makes right

Posted by: Feh at March 31, 2015 10:31 AM (YoW4p)

817 @797 You pretty much summed it up.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 10:31 AM (2SnmG)

818 Libertarianism has failed without ever having been formally tried. Open borders? Total fucking disaster. Isolationism? Total fucking disaster. The rest of their philosophy, apart from the seething atheist wing of the movement, whose hatred of Religious citizens oozes out of their every word, fits with basic conservatism. Many Libertarians are as anti-corporate (which means anti free market) as they are anti-government. It's a catch-all philosophy for people who know Leftism is horrible, but can't handle the work it takes to defeat them. So declare a pox on both their houses and declare yourself above it all. Simpletons.

Posted by: Lincolntf at March 31, 2015 10:31 AM (2cS/G)

819 As I said, I think government properly bans discrimination on the basis of immutable characteristics. Yet, you are arguing that discrimination based on an action - getting married to a member of the same sex - is wrong. You are also assuming that sexual preference is immutable, which is pretty debatable.

Posted by: Grey Fox at March 31, 2015 10:31 AM (4hIUY)

820 I think Dairy Queen should be required to give away those ice cream cakes because yummy.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at March 31, 2015 10:32 AM (dOk+5)

821

 

what ever happened to we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone?

Posted by: kj at March 31, 2015 10:32 AM (lKyWE)

822 2. I don't give a fuck what you do. That's why I come on here every day to lecture you all about how much money I make.

Posted by: Mister Poo Poo at March 31, 2015 10:32 AM (Q819Q)

823 Apples and Oranges as usual.

The black baker isn't discriminating against a group of people. He's not saying I'll bake the KKK cake for black people, but I won't bake it for white people. He's saying I don't bake KKK cakes, period.

On the other hand the SoCon wackjob says I'll gladly bake wedding cakes for everyone....except gays.

See the difference?

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 03:28 PM (0LHZx)

-------------------------

And you're amply demonstrating why we had a bill of rights that meant something.


Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 10:32 AM (+7Usq)

824 I'm wondering when moo becomes self-aware enough to realize he is living in a country founded by Christians on Christian principles. Should be a hoot to watch him meltdown.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2015 10:32 AM (g1DWB)

825 815 If there can be a law forcing bakers to transact with gays, then there should also be a law forcing gays to buy food from Chick-fil-a. Fair is fair. Posted by: Mikey at March 31, 2015 03:31 PM (Uff7i) Your analogy is wrong bud.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:32 AM (XsOa7)

826 But as I mentioned upthread, the local pizza place is owned by a Muslim. He refuses to put real pepperoni on pizza. I live with it, because, hey, his business. He also doesn't serve alcohol. Now should I be able to sue him to force him to serve pepperoni and beer? After all, his store is open to the public and those two options were available before he bought the store. _________ For the 1001st time... He is not discriminating against a group of people. It's not like he says OK Mr Smith, you get ham on your pizza, but Ms Jones, I'm sorry I can't give you ham because my religion says people like you shouldn't get ham. He just don't do ham on pizza, period. That is different than the wedding cake baker who says, OK Joe and Sally I will bake you a cake. But Bob and Steve, sorry no cake for you since you are gay. Surely you can see the difference?

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:32 AM (0LHZx)

827 No, it's a government states that if you want to run a business that caters to the public, you won't discriminate against paying customers on the basis of their beliefs or personal lives. The horror! I've asked two or three times, but I'll ask one more time before just ignoring you: If government has the moral authority to force me into any particular act of economic activity, what does the government *not* have the moral authority to force me to do? From what other, higher moral authority is this restriction derived?

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 10:32 AM (kff5f)

828 Come for the Val-U-Rite
stay for the circular firing squad
Or not.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at March 31, 2015 10:32 AM (rSBBR)

829 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:29 PM (XsOa7) Whoa, whoa, whoa. deeply held world views and political beliefs are just as immutable as deeply held religious beliefs or sexuality preferences or any other characteristic other than race. I thought we were on the same side, here Joe! I thought we were agreeing that black musicians should be thrown in jail if they refuse to perform at KKK concerts and that Jewish bakers should be be fined and imprisoned if they refused to write a "happy birthday Adolf" cake and that American bakers should be put out of business if they refuse to make a "death to america" cake for an Iranian customer.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:33 AM (AkOaV)

830 Yes, and those tenets don't come with the word "unfettered" in front of them. So, I suggest you bone up on your logic skills, because you're missing many. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:20 PM (XsOa7) By definition... how can a RIGHT, be FETTERED? If you have to ask government permission... or can be sanctioned for performing that Right... its no longer a Right... its a privilege the Government allows you. Thus, you 'fetter' the Freedom of Association, until there IS not Freedom of Association.... because if you choose not to associate, you are punished. You also FORCE people into speech... by not allowing them to remain silent if someone orders a damn cake? You are just the type who wants to control which Freedoms we have... you, are a Statist...

Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 10:33 AM (qh617)

831 Having sex with anyone is a choice. Unless you are a chick in college.

Posted by: NCKate at March 31, 2015 10:33 AM (y63s1)

832 Other examples of the when religious freedom bills have been used: A 5 year old boy from a tribe that does not cut children's hair til a certain age was given an exemption from a dress code that mandated boys not have hair below their ears. A Jewish inmate fought to have kosher meals inside a prison. A muslim inmate fought to grow a short beard. A Christian organization fought a city ordinance to be able to run a halfway house for non violent criminals A Sikh woman sued her employer for wrongful termination after she was fired because she wore the ceremonial blade required by her religion. And some unsuccessful attempts to use the law: A group of churches tried to use the law for a property dispute. The Church of the Holy Mary Jane tried to use the law to get around the fact that they were busted for having a lot of weed.

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 10:33 AM (MYCIw)

833 I think when marijuana is no longer illegal in all 50 states (because: the taxes!), libertarianism will cease to exist as a political movement of any import whatsoever, such as it has any right now. Nearly every libertarian I know has that as their driving force: let me smoke weed. Its not that the basic principles of smaller government and non interference are bad, its that most of the membership seems to be about their particular personal vice rather than a philosophical agreement.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 10:33 AM (39g3+)

834 One of my pet theories is that a pluralistic society only works when the religious are in the plurality.

Posted by: toby928(C) at March 31, 2015 10:33 AM (evdj2)

835 Yet, you are arguing that discrimination based on an action - getting married to a member of the same sex - is wrong. You are also assuming that sexual preference is immutable, which is pretty debatable. Posted by: Grey Fox at March 31, 2015 03:31 PM (4hIUY) Part of having an immutable characteristic is acting on it. I think sexual preference is immutable. If someone proves it's voluntary then I'll reconsider.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:33 AM (XsOa7)

836 And for people not believing any better when in the days when religion was at its peak, I will put the average High Middle Ages or Renaissance European businessman against Moo any day of the week. They actually had to have things in their heads because books and writing were dear things, and they didn't have iphones or internet. A businessman in those days had to speak many different languages, and didn't have the luxury of big firms of specialists. The amount of actually retained knowledge among the educated class was probably higher than it is today just because there isn't as much urgency to really learn or remember today as there was back then. .

Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Plush Porcupine at March 31, 2015 10:34 AM (k8xvx)

837 Whereas what's really going to happen is that inside of fifty years, militant Muslims will have attained a demographic critical mass in Western countries including the USA, and the likes of Moo Moo will suddenly become very very quiet about their previously voiced opinions of how "religion is bullshit". Posted by: torquewrench at March 31, 2015 03:28 PM (noWW6) ------ hahahahaha----So true. He'll shut up the fastest.

Posted by: Seems Legit at March 31, 2015 10:34 AM (A98Xu)

838 dang, spacing issues.

Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Plush Porcupine at March 31, 2015 10:34 AM (k8xvx)

839 >>> You want a society that resembles Iran or Saudi Arabia. Well can you blame us...female drivers, am I right? I mean even *I* hate us! /sarc AtC and the others that just avoid these threads entirely...the wisest of us all.

Posted by: LizLem at March 31, 2015 10:34 AM (yRwC8)

840 @661 Of course it is. I predict that in less than twelve months, the locus will have shifed from bakers and photographers to churches and ministers. ------------------- The court-backed attacks started back when SSM was still only legal in Massachusetts. A court found that a church that doesn't believe in SSM can still be forced to allow SSM ceremonies to take place on church-owned property where marriages have been performed in the past, and that is not part of the religious facilities of the church. So, for instance, if a church owns a distinct plot of land adjacent to the church building, and has allowed marriages to occur there in the past (no matter how infrequently), then the church cannot block a group from using the plot of land to perform a SSM ceremony.

Posted by: junior at March 31, 2015 10:34 AM (UWFpX)

841 Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 03:32 PM (kff5f) The government does not have the authority to allow you to force your theocratic jesus land stupid fly over country redneck cousin kissin gun slanging banjo pickin views on my special snowflake ears! That much is for damned sure, so just shut up you inbred hick. God! Those Christians just have NO tolerance for others. Too bad we can't just deport them all.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:34 AM (AkOaV)

842 >>>Do you honestly believe gays choose to be gay?<<<

I was led to believe gays choose to be fabulous!

Posted by: Fritz at March 31, 2015 10:34 AM (UzPAd)

843 @817 I know we were arguing over immigration, but I am totally with you on this and your comment is spot on.

Posted by: Pass the Dutchie at March 31, 2015 10:34 AM (2SnmG)

844 >>And this is the usual leftist cant on religion: believe whatever you want as long as it has no tangible, visible impact on how you behave or what you do. Keep it to yourself, God boy.

Exactly. Do what you want in church on Sunday but don't you dare put it in my face in any other forum.

What also riles is the double-standard - Muslims rarely have to endure the two minutes of hate for their religious beliefs informing their activities outside of the mosque.

Posted by: Lizzy[/i] at March 31, 2015 10:35 AM (TLTHv)

845 830 Come for the Val-U-Rite stay for the circular firing squad Or not. Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at March 31, 2015 03:32 PM (rSBBR) I don't think this firing squad is circular...more like constitutionalists v. fascists.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 10:35 AM (2Ojst)

846 Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 03:33 PM (AkOaV) Hmmmm.. even better... The CEO is talking about not doing business with an entire STATE... How the hell does THAT work in this worldview... should he not be FORCED to do business there... Should not the bands who cancelled concerts be FORCED to play there???? Its the exact same F'n Logic.

Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 10:35 AM (qh617)

847 @768 You want a society that resembles Iran or Saudi Arabia. That is why Conservatism is dying. You are not getting any new members from young people. *** what a dick. liberals are always forecasting right-wing dystopias and ending up living in their own hell holes. Saudi Arabia is about as American as Mars. The muslim prophet does not create societies or kingdoms that are informed by our western judeo Christian understandings. But the lefty atheist impulse to forecast some sort of handmaidens tale of Christian theocracy is ... just dumb.

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:35 AM (th6S/)

848 My tolerance of anti-discrimination laws extends only to immutable characteristics and religion, not political beliefs. So, no, a black baker shouldn't be forced to bake a cake for the KKK because membership in the KKK is voluntary. And a Jew shouldn't be forced to bake a cake for a neonazi.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:29 PM (XsOa7)

-----------------

So you're basically agreeing that in fact you do hate the bill of rights as outdated and dangerous.  Good to know.

Our country is so fortunate to have enlightened souls like you and moo moo who get to decide when people get to enjoy their inalienable and most basic rights.

You glibly rob people of their rights and have yet to show what the down side is to balance it out?  A gay couple has to find another baker? No big deal.  Yet against that - hurting their feelings - you want to strip someone of their most basic rights.

Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 10:35 AM (nyxv/)

849 "Your analogy is wrong bud." Wow! What a thoughtful argument!

Posted by: Mikey at March 31, 2015 10:35 AM (Uff7i)

850 Moo moo's entire argument on discrimination boils down to this: its okay unless it is directed against a leftist approved identity group. And Lauren, I love you for trying to bring up other non-gay marriage parts of the RFRA acts, because its so important but the people opposed to it don't give a damn. They don't care about the truth, they don't care about logic, the constitution, reason, or reality. They have their position and damn the torpedos.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 10:35 AM (39g3+)

851

People often forget that the civil rights acts were    in response to government sanctioned and created discrimination.  The goal was to stop government entities from creating a    privileged class of people.

 

You, just like what is going on now    with homosexuals.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2015 10:35 AM (BbwTO)

852 As I said, I think government properly bans discrimination on the basis of immutable characteristics. You can make it all scary-sounding with guns to faces, etc., but the fact of the matter is that I'd rather live in a society where anyone can go into a place of public accommodation and know he or she will be served without having to fear being kicked out for his race, having a penis or vagina, wearing a cross or a Magen David, etc. If that makes a libertarian-minus, then so be it.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:26 PM (XsOa7)

 

 

------------------------------------------

 

 

I think a business owner should be able to serve whomever he wishes.  And decline service to whomever he wishes.  He doesn't serve blacks?  So be it.  He's missing out on  business (profit) if he does.  He's only hurting his own endeavor.  

 

As for the black person?  He'll find a place that will serve him, and the owner will profit from his business.  Free markets.  The word "free" is the key. 

Posted by: Soona at March 31, 2015 10:36 AM (/HX7u)

853 I think sexual preference is immutable. If someone proves it's voluntary then I'll reconsider. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:33 PM (XsOa7) How would someone prove such a thing? And if they could prove it, then you'd be okay with Christian bakers not baking cakes for gay marriage?

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:36 AM (AkOaV)

854 The black baker isn't discriminating against a group of people.

Seems to me he's discriminating against people that like KKK cakes, which would be a group of people.

Posted by: Moderate Salami at March 31, 2015 10:36 AM (/Ho8c)

855 "At any rate, NASCAR like any other institution that isn't explicitly conservative will be taken over by the Left." NASCAR is more explicitly conservative than CPAC.

Posted by: despair at March 31, 2015 10:36 AM (J6suc)

856 God! Those Christians just have NO tolerance for others. Too bad we can't just deport them all. Maybe we could force them to just wear an armband with a yellow cross on it, and make them live in special communities. Let's call them "ghettos."

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 10:36 AM (39g3+)

857 Posted by: Soona at March 31, 2015 03:36 PM (/HX7u) Yeah, I think all of us save a few trolls are 100% on the same page with that.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:37 AM (AkOaV)

858 Libertarians are the dumbest people I have never met. They support open borders which floods the country with socialist voters, then they bitch and moan about how the government expands and their freedom is curtailed! Make the connection dumbass!

Posted by: Dan at March 31, 2015 10:37 AM (COpZ4)

859 That is different than the wedding cake baker who says, OK Joe and Sally I will bake you a cake. But Bob and Steve, sorry no cake for you since you are gay.

Surely you can see the difference?

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo

"I" do cater events, but I won't cater interracial events, won't cater jewish events, and I won't cater gay events.

 

Make me. Your dear leader certainly won't.

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 10:37 AM (Spluw)

860 There are religions that preach not paying taxes. The jails are full of them. And the asshole who say's his business does not believe in paying taxes swore he pays more taxes than any of us here make in a year.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 10:37 AM (rDqRv)

861

 

Do you honestly believe gays choose to be gay?

yes

Posted by: kj at March 31, 2015 10:37 AM (lKyWE)

862 Anna Puma, Yep. SAC PAC. Now accepting donations. Also, Moo Moo is my friend guilty of discrimination for refusing to participate in her friend's baby's baptism? I'm pretty sure she'd be a "legal next of kin" to a secular couple's baby. Or even that particular baby. It's just that religious element that causes a hiccup.

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 10:37 AM (MYCIw)

863 No espadrilles, no V-neck t-shirt, NO SERVICE!

Posted by: Castro Street Bakery at March 31, 2015 10:37 AM (wAQA5)

864 By definition... how can a RIGHT, be FETTERED? If you have to ask government permission... or can be sanctioned for performing that Right... its no longer a Right... its a privilege the Government allows you. Thus, you 'fetter' the Freedom of Association, until there IS not Freedom of Association.... because if you choose not to associate, you are punished. You also FORCE people into speech... by not allowing them to remain silent if someone orders a damn cake? You are just the type who wants to control which Freedoms we have... you, are a Statist... Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 03:33 PM (qh617) How can a right be fettered? You have the right to have a weapon for protection, but not hand grenades. Boom. No one is forcing anyone into anything. You don't have to bake cakes for the public. But if you choose to go into that line of work, you give up some of your freedoms. No one forces you into the military (anymore), but if you voluntarily join you give up some of your rights. If you decide to become a doctor, you give up the right to ignore a patient's plea for help. If you decide to be a government employee, you give up the right to associate with people who wish to overthrow the government using violence. I could go on and on. Your position is, literally, that we shouldn't have any laws because they restrain us from doing whatever we want to do in the absence of the laws. That's anarchy.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:37 AM (XsOa7)

865 *sigh* I miss the old days when we were free...

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this sh1t [/i][/s][/b][/u] at March 31, 2015 10:37 AM (0HooB)

866 As for the black person? He'll find a place that will serve him, and the owner will profit from his business. Free markets. The word "free" is the key. Posted by: Soona at March 31, 2015 03:36 PM (/HX7u) ------ Yes, yes x 1000

Posted by: Seems Legit at March 31, 2015 10:37 AM (A98Xu)

867 "I" do cater events, but I won't cater interracial events, won't cater jewish events, and I won't cater gay events. Make me. Your dear leader certainly won't. Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 03:37 PM (Spluw) __________ So you're saying because intolerant ass wipes like NOI do it, Christians should also do it. OK then. You've won me over with that argument.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:38 AM (0LHZx)

868 Save us Ace!

Posted by: Golfman at March 31, 2015 10:38 AM (48QDY)

869 Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 03:36 PM (39g3+) Hey, I like where your heads at... But the problem is, they'd just be a drain on the resources of us tolerant folks. Maybe we should set up some sort of... work institution where they at least make themselves useful. We'll draw them in by telling them "Arbeit macht Frei" so they know that if they work hard, they'll be able to leave. That should entice those hateful, intolerant, bigoted, sexist, inbred, knuckle dragging Jesus freaks to come, right?

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:39 AM (AkOaV)

870

@847

Agreed. It's not so much circular firing squad as it's freemen vs. slavers or lovers of freedom vs. statists in sheep's clothing.

 

Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Plush Porcupine at March 31, 2015 10:39 AM (k8xvx)

871 Do you honestly believe gays choose to be gay?
yes Posted by: kj


I don't know--I'm not gay, so I don't know how that works.  Sorry.

Posted by: Moderate Salami at March 31, 2015 10:39 AM (/Ho8c)

872 Network Newscasts Devote 300% More Time to Indiana Religious Freedom Law Than Hillary E Mail Server Wipe Shocked? Didnt think so. Weasel Zippers

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 10:39 AM (rDqRv)

873 It may be as high as 3% but the number who want to get married is a small percentage of even that number. According to Canadian census data, the number of marriages that are same-sex (Canada's had gay marriage for a while now) is 0.33% of total married couples. That's not a statistic highlighted anywhere, but it's easy enough to find and compute.

Posted by: AmishDude at March 31, 2015 10:39 AM (L2xDv)

874 How would someone prove such a thing? And if they could prove it, then you'd be okay with Christian bakers not baking cakes for gay marriage? Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 03:36 PM (AkOaV) I haven't the foggiest. Someone proved that e=mc(squared). Seems like an equally difficult task. Sure, as I said, my support of anti-discrimination laws extends only to immutable characteristics and religion. Other than, discriminate away. I couldn't care less.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 10:39 AM (XsOa7)

875 Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 03:38 PM (0LHZx) That's not what he said, nor was it his point. You're arguing in bad faith, as usual.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 10:40 AM (2Ojst)

876 For the 1001st time...

He is not discriminating against a group of people. It's not like he says OK Mr Smith, you get ham on your pizza, but Ms Jones, I'm sorry I can't give you ham because my religion says people like you shouldn't get ham.

He just don't do ham on pizza, period.

That is different than the wedding cake baker who says, OK Joe and Sally I will bake you a cake. But Bob and Steve, sorry no cake for you since you are gay.

Surely you can see the difference?

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 03:32 PM (0LHZx)

--------------------------------------

And the bakers and photographers and florists didn't refuse to serve gay customers.  They refused a specific event they felt they could not in good conscience support with their labor and talent (speech).

But fortunately you're going to bankrupt them into seeing the light and showing them the way.  That way a gay couple will never have their feelings hurt again.  It all balances out, I guess as ruining someone is on par with hurting someone's feelings.  All in the name of tolerance of course.

Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 10:40 AM (TJ8HB)

877 Just wondering if it's OK if Apple refuses to sell iPhones to Catholics.

Posted by: @JohnTant at March 31, 2015 10:40 AM (eytER)

878 No Apple products in my house already.  Not sure what else I can do to the schmuck but point and laugh.

Posted by: Richard McEnroe at March 31, 2015 10:40 AM (XO6WW)

879 I miss the old days when we were free...

I don't think we've been free within my lifetime.  The constraints were just less in-your-face.

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at March 31, 2015 10:40 AM (/kI1Q)

880 A heterosexuality check from earlier http://is.gd/ZHXCqf

Posted by: toby928(C) at March 31, 2015 10:40 AM (evdj2)

881 According to Canadian census data, the number of marriages that are same-sex (Canada's had gay marriage for a while now) is 0.33% of total married couples. That's not a statistic highlighted anywhere, but it's easy enough to find and compute. Posted by: AmishDude at March 31, 2015 03:39 PM (L2xDv) ___________ So because it's a small population, it's cool to discriminate against it. Makes sense.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:40 AM (0LHZx)

882 That's anarchy. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:37 PM (XsOa7) So if I decide to work for a living, I give up my 1st amendment rights? It's just one of those trade offs? Otherwise its anarchy? Alright, I guess I should just stop working and go on welfare so that I can still enjoy my constitutionally protected rights to free speech and free association.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:41 AM (AkOaV)

883 People often forget that the civil rights acts were in response to government sanctioned and created discrimination. The goal was to stop government entities from creating a privileged class of people. This is a very good point. What the left is arguing is exactly what the government argued back then. The effort was to end any sort of protected class. And now we're swinging back to it. NASCAR is more explicitly conservative than CPAC. No, its fan base is. NASCAR as a business is not at all, as proven repeatedly in recent years.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 10:41 AM (39g3+)

884 And a Jew shouldn't be forced to bake a cake for a neonazi. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:29 PM (XsOa7) *** Are you comparing gays to Nazis? Are you sure this is the argument you should be making? *** And as for Jews baking cakes for Nazis, are you comparing gays to Nazis? I don't think that's the argument you should be making, folks. Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:25 PM (XsOa7)

Posted by: Muldoon, a solid man at March 31, 2015 10:41 AM (NeFrd)

885

Neither you or your precious dear leader will eve lead a boycott against me.

 

You will will never sign your name to something against me.

 

You are a fucking poser.

 

That is what I'm saying. You don't give a tinker's damn about rights or accomodation.

 

You have all the attributes of a rat in a cradle at midnight. You'll happily attack a couple with a wedding chapel. You will NOT take on the dear leader.

 

Or Saudis. or Louis Farrakan

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 10:41 AM (Spluw)

886 How can a right be fettered? You have the right to have a weapon for protection, but not hand grenades. Boom.

Actually, that's technically incorrect at present.

And moreover, the current restrictions in place that limit ownership of hand grenades are not Constitutional.  So, that argument sorta sucks. 

Posted by: Moderate Salami at March 31, 2015 10:41 AM (/Ho8c)

887

"I think homosexuality is not a choice (for the most part), and therefore should be afforded the same constitutional protections as race, ethnicity, etc."JoeSchmoe

If homosexuality isn't a choice, if it's a characteristic that is in-born,(no proof that it's in-born) then why do they have Gay Pride parades?

Posted by: Speller at March 31, 2015 10:41 AM (PsEVn)

888 What difference, at this point, does it make?1/1/1!?1/1/!?/?/ Wait,,, What was the question again?

Posted by: Hillary Clinton at March 31, 2015 10:41 AM (HSmrB)

889 For the 100th freaking time, they are opposed to the ceremony not the people involved in the ceremony.

There are a million examples of people refusing to participate in a ceremony that isn't ZOMG DISCRIMINATION!!11!


Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 03:23 PM (MYCIw)




Require everyone to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, and watch the leftist howling commence.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 10:41 AM (oKE6c)

890

@877

Moo doesn't even argue. That requires actual engagement with people. He doesn't do that. He just hectors in bad faith.

Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Plush Porcupine at March 31, 2015 10:41 AM (k8xvx)

891 According to Canadian census data, the number of marriages that are same-sex (Canada's had gay marriage for a while now) is 0.33% of total married couples. *** and 50% of those are not monogamous.

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:42 AM (th6S/)

892 706 -Yes, because we know that the politicians in Albany are so pure.  The place is a cesspool but they'll make a statement about IN?

Posted by: Cheri at March 31, 2015 10:42 AM (G+Wff)

893 And yes, I know, racial discrimination is different than opposition to gay marriage, but it's still discrimination based on an immutable characteristic.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 01:52 PM (XsOa7)



Immutable characteristic, when it suits their agenda, and likewise a personal choice, when it suits their agenda.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at March 31, 2015 10:42 AM (eenKj)

894 So because it's a small population, it's cool to discriminate against it. Once again he waves the flag of surrender in the debate and tries to win with sophistry. Lacking an actual logical argument, we see the flailing about hoping to win over the crowd with emotion and red herrings.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 10:42 AM (39g3+)

895 Do you honestly believe gays choose to be gay?

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 03:29 PM (0LHZx)


Well, Moo here's one Ray Warren.  Married, had two kids and decided after reading the internet that he was really ghey.  I am not making that up.


http://tinyurl.com/pm84zoh

Posted by: Nip Sip at March 31, 2015 10:42 AM (0FSuD)

896 And as for "gay people don't choose/can't change" Oh, children. I want to a women's college. We had a term for women like that. Slugs. S(name of college) Lesbians Until Graduation. My roommate was a SLUG. She later married an older rich guy who had a few kids and moved to California.

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 10:43 AM (MYCIw)

897 852 Moo moo's entire argument on discrimination boils down to this: its okay unless it is directed against a leftist approved identity group.

And Lauren, I love you for trying to bring up other non-gay marriage parts of the RFRA acts, because its so important but the people opposed to it don't give a damn. They don't care about the truth, they don't care about logic, the constitution, reason, or reality. They have their position and damn the torpedos.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 03:35 PM (39g3+)



+10000

Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 10:43 AM (nyxv/)

898

@896
I hate herrings, red or not. (And wouldn't a red herring be a herring with some really funky mold on it?)

 

Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Plush Porcupine at March 31, 2015 10:43 AM (k8xvx)

899 It's official.  Ace hates us.

Posted by: Bandersnatch, now half gay at March 31, 2015 10:43 AM (JtwS4)

900 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:37 PM (XsOa7) Horseshit... they are being punished for not taking an action.... They will lose property, their livelihood.... how is that NOT coercion?

Posted by: BB Wolf at March 31, 2015 10:43 AM (qh617)

901 *wanders off with Budweiser listening to Robin Trower.

Posted by: Golfman at March 31, 2015 10:43 AM (48QDY)

902 Do you honestly believe gays choose to be gay?

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 03:29 PM (0LHZx)

A longitudinal study of thousands of identical twins would at least suggest there are non-genetic influences.

One twin was gay, one was straight.  Genetically, they're identical.  They were raised in the same home, by the same parents under the same environment.

They had different sexual orientations when it was all said and done.

Explain how this is possible if genetics is the only indicator.

Posted by: Math at March 31, 2015 10:43 AM (fwARV)

903 "And as for Jews baking cakes for Nazis, are you comparing gays to Nazis?" If the shoe fits...

Posted by: despair at March 31, 2015 10:43 AM (J6suc)

904 I see the concern trolls are still trolling. Diseased bigots gotta disease.

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 10:43 AM (ZPrif)

905 Ya know I am more worried about Tanaka's arm that what any gay fucker does.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 10:44 AM (rDqRv)

906 That is different than the wedding cake baker who says, OK Joe and Sally I will bake you a cake. But Bob and Steve, sorry no cake for you since you are gay. The argument is not about the "cake" it's being asked to be part of something that their religious belief/morals says for them is wrong. You make a wedding cake is to be part of the wedding.

Posted by: wrg500 at March 31, 2015 10:44 AM (kQBSd)

907 I think sexual preference is immutable. If someone proves it's voluntary then I'll reconsider. Ever noticed that high rates of homosexuality tends to be correlated with limited social contact between men and women, like in Ancient Greece, Feudal Japan, and the modern Middle East?

Posted by: Grey Fox at March 31, 2015 10:44 AM (4hIUY)

908 And the bakers and photographers and florists didn't refuse to serve gay customers. They refused a specific event they felt they could not in good conscience support with their labor and talent (speech).But fortunately you're going to bankrupt them into seeing the light and showing them the way. That way a gay couple will never have their feelings hurt again. It all balances out, I guess as ruining someone is on par with hurting someone's feelings. All in the name of tolerance of course. Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 03:40 PM (TJ8HB) ___________ Fuck that bullshit. In good conscience? You can't support two adults, of their own free will, getting married... "in good conscience"? Oh wait the bible says it's not good. Hmmm...OK the bible also says eating fish isn't cool. So I guess the bakers won;t cater any wedding with fish on the menu. The bible also says pre marital sex is a no-no. So that removes about 95% of weddings as well from the schedule. Oh wait...the bakers never give a fuck about fish or pre-marital sex. They only have a "conscience" issue when it's 2 men getting married. Odd.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:44 AM (0LHZx)

909 Next up?  Orthodox Jews sued for closing on Saturdays, cause gheys need to eat bagels on Saturday.


Don't laugh

Posted by: Nip Sip at March 31, 2015 10:44 AM (0FSuD)

910 I'm a Veteran, and if I were a baker and some ISIS wannabe from the local mosque came into my shop to order a "Death to America" cake complete with a pile of executed gays, do I have to bake it?

Posted by: Lincolntf at March 31, 2015 10:44 AM (2cS/G)

911 Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 03:43 PM (MYCIw) Did you go to college in VA by any chance?

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:44 AM (AkOaV)

912 And as for Jews baking cakes for Nazis, are you comparing gays to Nazis? There were a whole shitload of gheys in the SA. Just sayin'.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 10:45 AM (2Ojst)

913

We need to hire Alan Dershowitz   to sue     Tim Cook, and     force    him     to sell products in Indiana.

 

  His personal beliefs are discriminatory, and should not be allowed.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2015 10:45 AM (BbwTO)

914 hectoring in bad faith works This entire RFRA bullshit is the Left (and other assorted human trash) hectoring in bad faith.

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 10:45 AM (ZPrif)

915 I'm a Veteran, and if I were a baker and some ISIS wannabe from the local mosque came into my shop to order a "Death to America" cake complete with a pile of executed gays, do I have to bake it? Posted by: Lincolntf at March 31, 2015 03:44 PM (2cS/G) yes but first you shoot him between the eyes

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 10:45 AM (rDqRv)

916 I personally love these threads, I learn a shit ton about people.

Posted by: Seems Legit at March 31, 2015 10:45 AM (A98Xu)

917 So in a world of reassignment surgery on demand and a "use-whatever-public-bathroom-you-choose" society we now learn that gender is an immutable characteristic? Oh my!

Posted by: Muldoon, a solid man at March 31, 2015 10:46 AM (NeFrd)

918 It is immutable, proven absolute fact that some people choose to engage in homosexual acts. It happens regularly and often with collge girls "experimenting." I know personally a young lady who declared she was lesbian at age 16 then decided she wasn't when she met a great guy and married him at 25. Are some people born homosexual? Probably, we're all born with various inclinations and tendencies. Nobody is compelled to act upon those. I love women. I love beauty. I would love to have sex with lots of beautiful women. I don't; not because I'm hideous, but because I believe it is immoral and my faith restricts that to within marriage bonds. I am not compelled to find a woman and have sex, no matter how I feel about the issue or what my natural inclinations are like. I'm sick of people acting like being some way means you're bound and compelled to act upon it. That's a personal choice.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 10:46 AM (39g3+)

919 Oh wait the bible says it's not good. Hmmm...OK the bible also says eating fish isn't cool. So I guess the bakers won;t cater any wedding with fish on the menu. The bible also says pre marital sex is a no-no. So that removes about 95% of weddings as well from the schedule. *** ? has this been going on throughout the whole non-laRaza portion of the thread?

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:46 AM (th6S/)

920 This entire RFRA bullshit is the Left (and other assorted human trash) hectoring in bad faith.
Yup.

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at March 31, 2015 10:46 AM (/kI1Q)

921 I'm a Veteran, and if I were a baker and some ISIS wannabe from the local mosque came into my shop to order a "Death to America" cake complete with a pile of executed gays, do I have to bake it? Posted by: Lincolntf at March 31, 2015 03:44 PM (2cS/G) yes but first you shoot him between the eyes Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 03:45 PM (rDqRv) oh unless your at Cornell University, then you fund him

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 10:46 AM (rDqRv)

922 Individual Liberty rocks ... until you do shit I find distasteful. Then Government needs to step in. But that shit will never happen to me ... because all my expressions of Individual Liberty are totes cool and will never piss anybody off.

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 31, 2015 10:46 AM (wQ9BN)

923 Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:37 PM (XsOa7) Shear sophistry- and really bad sophistry at that. Not to mention gross violation of the Strawman Protection Act. 1- I would argue, and history actually backs me up on this, that I *do* have a right to own hand grenades. The word "arms" as used in the late 18th century meant "military grade weaponry" and many of the cannon used in the revolutionary war, the war of 1812, and the civil war were purchased by private funds and then donated to the various armies. It was only Progressive hysteria later which changed that. 2- The "no one is forcing you to do anything!" argument is bullshit. At the very least you are forcing me to choose between using my labor- which I own- for something I enjoy doing and to my own profit and using my labor for something I do not enjoy. You are forcing on me a labor decision you have no moral authority to make. However, you will not even address the moral authority issue (I've asked you -directly- several times now). This is likely because you know there is none. Either moral authority is on the side which says "My labor is mine, not yours, and you have no right to tell me how I must spend it" or there is no moral authority at all. And be careful about saying there is no moral authority at all, because that has consequences I really don't think you'll like. Not that I'll know, since your continued disingenuousness has added you along-side the Moo Moo into the dungeon of the ignore user script. You may not care, but it will help my blood pressure to no end.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at March 31, 2015 10:46 AM (kff5f)

924 That's not what he said, nor was it his point. You're arguing in bad faith, as usual.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 03:40 PM (2Ojst)

 

 

--------------------------------------

 

 

His  whole  life is run on bad faith.  It's no wonder he argues for it.

Posted by: Soona at March 31, 2015 10:47 AM (/HX7u)

925 918 I personally love these threads, I learn a shit ton about people. Posted by: Seems Legit at March 31, 2015 03:45 PM (A98Xu) Agreed.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 10:47 AM (2Ojst)

926 Do you honestly believe pedophiles choose to be pedophiles?

What fucking difference does it make if its choice or biology or childhood trauma or whatever?

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 03:30 PM (AkOaV)



You tell him!

Posted by: Ed Gein[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 10:47 AM (oKE6c)

927 Too late, already shot him.

Posted by: Lincolntf at March 31, 2015 10:47 AM (2cS/G)

928 Best thing Erickson ever wrote. Two years ago. Predicted this exact RFRA bullshit, fake outrage nonsense. You Will Be Made to Care | RedState http://www.redstate.com/2013/03/29/you-will-be-made-to-care/

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 10:47 AM (ZPrif)

929 Oh, we're poking Moo with a stick. Can I help?

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this sh1t [/i][/s][/b][/u] at March 31, 2015 10:47 AM (0HooB)

930 912 I'm a Veteran, and if I were a baker and some ISIS wannabe from the local mosque came into my shop to order a "Death to America" cake complete with a pile of executed gays, do I have to bake it? Posted by: Lincolntf at March 31, 2015 03:44 PM (2cS/G) ___________ If you baked one for a Christian but refused to bake one for a Muslim, then you'd be in violation of the law. If you told anyone who wanted such a cake to fuck off, you'd be well within your rights. Compare that to the SoCon fanatic who says I will bake a cake for this group (straights) but says fuck you to another group (gays). Surely you can see the difference.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:47 AM (0LHZx)

931 A key libertarian tenet is "the right to swing your arms ends at my nose." The arguing point of some self-styled "libertarians" on this thread is "you shall not move your nose away from the arc of my fist as I swing my arm, because that would discriminate against my freedom of motion." Okay, then.

Posted by: filbert at March 31, 2015 10:47 AM (h6Mpm)

932 918 I personally love these threads, I learn a shit ton about people.
Posted by: Seems Legit at March 31, 2015 03:45 PM (A98Xu)

Agreed. Posted by: Insomniac


Yup.

Posted by: Moderate Salami at March 31, 2015 10:47 AM (/Ho8c)

933 We really need a nood.

Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Plush Porcupine at March 31, 2015 10:47 AM (k8xvx)

934 It's not fish, it's shellfish, and I'm pretty sure a caterer would have to take lobster off the menu if they were catering a Jewish wedding. But wait, that would involve a provider and customer figuring out a dispute between religion and service without suing anyone and the world can't have that!

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 10:48 AM (MYCIw)

935

"And as for Jews baking cakes for Nazis, are you comparing gays to Nazis?"

..............................................

Really. Just because we like to dress up like them doesn't mean anything.

Posted by: Castro Street Bakery at March 31, 2015 10:48 AM (wAQA5)

936 >>"I think homosexuality is not a choice (for the most part), and therefore should be afforded the same constitutional protections as race, ethnicity, etc."JoeSchmoe And it is. Nothing in this law changes that. I can guarantee you that if I went to the same hypothetical baker and said I want you to bake me a cake for my open marriage which isn't really so much a marriage as me shacking up with 3 women but it wasn't a choice for me this was the way I was born and they declined to make me a cake because they didn't approve of my lifestyle exactly nobody would give a shit. The only reason, THE ONLY REASON, anyone gives a shit about this is because the love that will not speak has become the love that will not shut the fuck up and it has become oh so trendy to jump to the defense of the poor gaystapo. Soon, people will tire of their constant whining and demands and they can go back to quiet self-loathing. Not soon enough though.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2015 10:48 AM (g1DWB)

937 Oh wait the bible says it's not good. Hmmm...OK the bible also says eating fish isn't cool. So I guess the bakers won;t cater any wedding with fish on the menu. The bible also says pre marital sex is a no-no. So that removes about 95% of weddings as well from the schedule. Oh wait...the bakers never give a fuck about fish or pre-marital sex. They only have a "conscience" issue when it's 2 men getting married. Odd. A little less odd when you consider that the prohibition on fish you just pretty much made up from whole cloth, and that making a wedding cake for a couple that planted their corn before building their fences doesn't endorse the pre-marital sex, the actual sin - if anything, it celebrates them rectifying their error.

Posted by: Grey Fox at March 31, 2015 10:48 AM (4hIUY)

938 Some people want 'fair' more than 'free.'

Posted by: Zap Rowsdower at March 31, 2015 10:48 AM (MMC8r)

939 It's not fish, it's shellfish Shh. He's rolling.

Posted by: toby928(C) at March 31, 2015 10:48 AM (evdj2)

940 Individual Liberty rocks ... until you do shit I find distasteful. Then Government needs to step in. *** word. let's get some people fired, fined, or incarcerated. But remember, anti-hate laws can never be used against non progressive clients

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:48 AM (th6S/)

941

This entire RFRA bullshit is the Left (and other assorted human trash) hectoring in bad faith.
Yup.

 

Well, yeah.  If someone wants to tell me how this RFRA is substantively different from the other 19 state and one federal RFRAs I'd love to examine that.

 

Otherwise it's something new to shriek about.

Posted by: Bandersnatch, now half gay at March 31, 2015 10:49 AM (JtwS4)

942 Earlier today there was the reforming GOP thread. If this comments thread is at all representative of the GOP party, it's already past saving/reforming. It's a dead party walking.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 10:49 AM (0LHZx)

943 "evil peddles tolerance until it is dominant then seeks to silence good"

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 10:49 AM (ZPrif)

944 Compare that to the SoCon fanatic who says I will bake a cake for this group (straights) but says fuck you to another group (gays).

Surely you can see the difference.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo

 

Surely you've noticed that mino moo ran away again. Say it with me mini moo: Nation of Islam does this every day, and you'll do nothing. Just like the Apple asshole gleefully selling shit in Saudi Arabia.

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 10:49 AM (Spluw)

945 Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 03:47 PM (0LHZx) So if my blanket policy is to only bake cakes for people celebrating the christian sacrament of marriage, but to refuse to bake cakes for anyone engaging in a gay marriage, I'm all good by your standards? I only get in trouble the first time I bake a gay marriage cake?

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:49 AM (AkOaV)

946 The go away

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 31, 2015 10:49 AM (rDqRv)

947 A little less odd when you consider that the prohibition on fish you just pretty much made up from whole cloth, and that making a wedding cake for a couple that planted their corn before building their fences doesn't endorse the pre-marital sex, the actual sin - if anything, it celebrates them rectifying their error. *** I don't think he was making a point so much as doing the thing where the narcissist focuses on the flaws of the messenger

Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 10:49 AM (th6S/)

948 NASCAR seems to be as clueless as the GOPe

Posted by: CrowSting at March 31, 2015 10:49 AM (61BD9)

949 Posted by: Bandersnatch, now half gay at March 31, 2015 03:49 PM (JtwS4) Pence is a potential candidate and as such must be shamed.

Posted by: Golfman at March 31, 2015 10:50 AM (48QDY)

950 You can't support two adults, of their own free will, getting married... "in good conscience"? The fact that you disagree with their beliefs does not somehow make his point go away. His personal beliefs are discriminatory, and should not be allowed. Yeah the call to boycott Indiana is contradictory and goofy. Their call is "they allow some businesses to not do business with others and that's evil so we should do no business with them!!!! Uh....

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 10:50 AM (39g3+)

951 Noodity.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 10:50 AM (0NdlF)

952 People who insist on making what should be their private proclivities my business may discover they don't care much for how I conduct my business.

Posted by: jwpaine at March 31, 2015 10:50 AM (a3NCX)

953 "Did you go to college in VA by any chance" North Carolina, but I know which college you're thinking of. We played volleyball against them.

Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 10:50 AM (MYCIw)

954 Part of having an immutable characteristic is acting on it.

I think sexual preference is immutable. If someone proves it's voluntary then I'll reconsider.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:33 PM (XsOa7)
------------------------------
That's completely ass-backwards. If you are seeking legal protection for what you are, YOU have to prove what you are, that you are part of that protected class.  You can't just assume it from the door - that's the whole issue.  Homosexuals never had to meet a burden of proof on causation of their being, so what separates their state of being from a pedo or other sexual deviant?

Further, an immutable characteristic doesn't require action.  You take no action to be "black" or a man. You simply ARE just by dropping from the twat, and that is PROVEN. There isn't any choice in the matter. Whereas, even though the normal, default sexuality for humanity is heterosexuality, since it results in perpetuation of the species, you can CHOOSE to deviate from that for any number of reasons and motives (such as pleasure, hedonism, abuse, mental illness, etc.) but it doesn't change the default, normal reality. [Sure, I can stick a screwdriver in an electical outlet, and it will give me the tingles, but that's not what the screwdriver was made for].

You are not naturally diminished by being black or a man.  Being homosexual (say, by birth) naturally, biologically removes you from procreation, since the primary purpose of sexuality is reproduction. Sure, you can find ways around that "handicap", as if it were a physical/mental disability, but that goes to show the state of being is not the norm.

I could see classifying homosexuality as a disability (like being born without legs or losing legs due to a life event - what difference does it make) far more than I could see it as akin to biological sex or race.

Bottom line - I don't see homosexuality as sinful or even criminal, but I sure as hell don't see it as normal, naturally healthy morally praiseworthy, or legally protected.

Posted by: Saltyron at March 31, 2015 10:50 AM (i6shs)

955 If this comments thread is at all representative of the GOP party, it's already past saving/reforming. It's a dead party walking.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo

 

Is it:

A. As lively

B. More lively

C. deader than

a gay guy that was murdered in Saudi Arabia, while holding an Apple product?

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 10:50 AM (Spluw)

956 How much do you want to bet Mr. Moo Moo is a member of "The Idiot Generation"? http://tinyurl.com/oa3rj7s

Posted by: Foul Harold at March 31, 2015 10:50 AM (FGvan)

957 >>This entire RFRA bullshit is the Left (and other assorted human trash) hectoring in bad faith.

Yeah, it's just the latest in the war of western civilization/Judeo-Christian values.

Think making bakers participate in a same-sex wedding is no big deal? Fine. But they'll get around to something that you value soon enough. Just like the war on smokers led to war on junk food, and now meat. They're all about control, using the state to implement what they value. That's what so disturbing, the mobilization of the SJWs, the media, and people like Apple CEO/NASCAR/Angie List to all participate in two minutes of hate for today's target. Just pray you're not the target next week or next month.

Posted by: Lizzy[/i] at March 31, 2015 10:51 AM (TLTHv)

958

 Oh wait the bible says it's not good. Hmmm...OK the bible also says eating fish isn't cool. So I guess the bakers won;t cater any wedding with fish on the menu. The bible also says pre marital sex is a no-no. So that removes about 95% of weddings as well from the schedule.

 

 

--------------------------------------------

 

 

Had a preacher turn down doing the wedding ceremony of my last marriage.  He found out we had been living together.  No big deal.  We found another preacher  who would marry us.

Posted by: Soona at March 31, 2015 10:51 AM (/HX7u)

959 So if my blanket policy is to only bake cakes for people celebrating the christian sacrament of marriage, but to refuse to bake cakes for anyone engaging in a gay marriage, I'm all good by your standards? I only get in trouble the first time I bake a gay marriage cake? Ding! You win.

Posted by: @JohnTant at March 31, 2015 10:51 AM (eytER)

960 Before we attack each other, let's realize that none of these self-righteous political posturings has anything to do with the ostensible concern, (gays, racism, sexism, etc.) and everything to do with positioning the speaker as superior, more empathetic than thou. Works for the politicians so now their corporate sponsors are following suit. A mere gesture or pronouncement is enough for the Idiocracy to fall to its knees and worship even and despite objective evidence of actions hypocritically in opposition to the words.

Posted by: AMartel at March 31, 2015 10:51 AM (WWgnZ)

961 I don't think he was making a point so much as doing the thing where the narcissist focuses on the flaws of the messenger Posted by: joe-impeachin44 at March 31, 2015 03:49 PM (th6S/) And appointing himself the ultimate arbiter of what constitutes the genuine, proper and appropriate exercise of religion by other people who, as an aside, he hates and holds in contempt. Also narcissistic.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2015 10:51 AM (2Ojst)

962 Immutable characteristic, when it suits their agenda, and likewise a personal choice, when it suits their agenda.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at March 31, 2015 03:42 PM (eenKj)



Channeling Gershwin, immutability is a sometime thing.

Posted by: Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at March 31, 2015 10:51 AM (oKE6c)

963 How can a right be fettered? You have the right to have a weapon for protection, but not hand grenades. Boom.

No one is forcing anyone into anything. You don't have to bake cakes for the public. But if you choose to go into that line of work, you give up some of your freedoms. No one forces you into the military (anymore), but if you voluntarily join you give up some of your rights. If you decide to become a doctor, you give up the right to ignore a patient's plea for help. If you decide to be a government employee, you give up the right to associate with people who wish to overthrow the government using violence. I could go on and on. Your position is, literally, that we shouldn't have any laws because they restrain us from doing whatever we want to do in the absence of the laws. That's anarchy.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:37 PM (XsOa7)


---------------------------------------

That's a total BS argument and you know it.
You don't have to make a living but if you do then you'll just need to surrender your rights!
You're really on to something here!  Hey, you can operate a news paper you just can't say anything bad about progressives!  You still have freedom of speech because you don't have to run or work for a newspaper!

And no one is saying that we shouldn't have any laws we're saying when laws infringe on basic liberties then the state should be required to demonstrate it serves a legitimate and compelling state interest and that the state is pursuing the least restrictive means possible.

And not hurting a gay persons feelings is not a compelling state interest.  You have yet to show the reason the state should violate someones rights in this case.  If the state doesn't bankrupt these people then please tell us of the horrors this will unleash on society?
Go ahead.  Make an actual argument for state action.

You start with the assumption that of course the state can take away your rights as a condition of participating in society and making a living.  That's a complete inversion of what rights are - the state has to have a compelling case to take away your rights.

Posted by: gwelf at March 31, 2015 10:51 AM (+7Usq)

964 Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2015 03:48 PM (g1DWB) I think I like your religion.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:51 AM (AkOaV)

965


North Carolina, but I know which college you're thinking of. We played volleyball against them.

 

One day, we must get SLUG stories from you.

Posted by: Nation of Islam at March 31, 2015 10:51 AM (Spluw)

966 So much of this conflict is between Christianity and gays. So many gays grew up in Christian households, wherein they either came out to criticism or they feared coming out because of their parents reactions and/or the reaction of the church. Thus, they don't care about Islam and its strong reaction to homosexuality, because they've never experienced that "repression". However, they're very angry at their parents and communities and the religion embraced by both- thus, the war on Christianity, for perceived slights (he won't bake me a cake) when they're really trying to get back at their parents.

Posted by: Matt in Tampa at March 31, 2015 10:52 AM (vDEpI)

967 Exercise choice. If one baker won't make you a fcinkin' fag wedding cake go to a baker who will.

Posted by: RioBravo at March 31, 2015 10:52 AM (NUqwG)

968 Read the damn cases... they were not putting flowers on a cake... they were putting sayings that the people buying the cake wanted. Trollin' for torts.

Posted by: AmishDude at March 31, 2015 10:52 AM (L2xDv)

969 Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2015 03:48 PM (g1DWB) ----- Possibly my favorite comment thus far. I love saying "thus."

Posted by: Seems Legit at March 31, 2015 10:52 AM (A98Xu)

970 No, Moo Moo, I'd be objecting to the message that was being sent, no matter who ordered it. Just as Christian bakers who object to spreading the message that marriage is not the bond between a man and a woman would object to spreading that message. I don't care what informs people's views, but they're not going to force me to trumpet them.

Posted by: Lincolntf at March 31, 2015 10:53 AM (2cS/G)

971 Some people want 'fair' more than 'free.' Despite the fact that life never has been and never will be fair. I'm certain that, had these little special snowflakes a father in the house, they'd know that simple fact. All these efforts to make life "fair" are just leftards, OWSers, socialists, facists, communists and progressives (BIRM muchly) shoving their disproven theories down our throats. They can all fuck off.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this sh1t [/i][/s][/b][/u] at March 31, 2015 10:53 AM (0HooB)

972 We played volleyball against them. Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 03:50 PM (MYCIw) ::snickers:: types... deletes.... Yes, yes, I'm sure you did.

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:54 AM (AkOaV)

973 Should we all be suing the Pope for discrimination? Posted by: Lauren at March 31, 2015 02:44 PM (MYCIw) That shit will be next. Twenty years ago it was, "Noooo. We want no part of that awful hetero institution of marriage. We just want to do our thing and be left alone." Ten years ago it was, "Nooooo. We don't want to force people to participate in our ceremonies. You can still have your religious conscience objections. We just want to get married and be left alone." Right now it's, "Nooooooo. We don't want your churches to be forced to perform our same sex ceremonies. We'll leave your pastors alone." Next step is suing the churches. You can bank on it.

Posted by: Mandy P., lurking lurker who lurks at March 31, 2015 10:54 AM (KkVB6)

974 Oh wait the bible says it's not good. Hmmm...OK the bible also says eating fish isn't cool. So I guess the bakers won;t cater any wedding with fish on the menu. The bible also says pre marital sex is a no-no. So that removes about 95% of weddings as well from the schedule. Is it any surprise that the No Discrimination! guy does not have the mental capacity to discriminate and understand what the Bible actually teaches?

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 10:54 AM (0NdlF)

975 Anti-Christian bigots just want to destroy the church. When your enemy says he wants to destroy you, you should believe him. And you should defend yourself.

Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 31, 2015 10:54 AM (ZPrif)

976

 

really how friggin hard can it be to find a gay florist or baker?

Posted by: kj at March 31, 2015 10:55 AM (lKyWE)

977 if I went to the same hypothetical baker and said I want you to bake me a cake for my open marriage which isn't really so much a marriage as me shacking up with 3 women but it wasn't a choice for me this was the way I was born and they declined to make me a cake because they didn't approve of my lifestyle exactly nobody would give a shit. Indeed. The problem is a violation of religious conscience, not homosexuality. Any violation will receive the same response, and is protected by the 1st amendment as about 16 court decisions have already agreed upon and over 20 states have passed laws endorsing. Including a law sponsored and voted in by Illinois state senator Obama.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 10:55 AM (39g3+)

978 Free enterprise should sort this problem out in a jiffy. Instead of standing around on the street being gay, learn to bake a cake.

Posted by: goon at March 31, 2015 10:56 AM (A53Jp)

979 Next step is suing the churches. You can bank on it.

Posted by: Mandy P., lurking lurker who lurks at March 31, 2015 03:54 PM (KkVB6)


Already happening in England. 

Posted by: Math at March 31, 2015 10:57 AM (fwARV)

980

The Bible says eating  fish isn't cool?

 

Facts are raciss.

Posted by: eleven at March 31, 2015 10:57 AM (ykfyK)

981 The Bible says eating fish isn't cool? You know how Jesus was sinless? Except for those couple of times he decided to feed people fish. Fish! We're doomed.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at March 31, 2015 10:58 AM (0NdlF)

982 gay nood btw

Posted by: mynewhandle at March 31, 2015 10:58 AM (AkOaV)

983 thus, the war on Christianity, for perceived slights (he won't bake me a cake) when they're really trying to get back at their parents. And society as a whole. A lot of homosexuals seem to think they'll stop feeling guilty and uncomfortable about themselves if only all society celebrates and endorses their behavior.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 10:58 AM (39g3+)

984 Free enterprise should sort this problem out in a jiffy -------- Jiffy cakes suck though the corn bread is not bad.

Posted by: RioBravo at March 31, 2015 10:59 AM (NUqwG)

985 >>Next step is suing the churches. You can bank on it.

Already happened in the UK: 
"The first legal challenge to the Church of England's ban on same-sex marriage was launched today - months before the first gay wedding can take place. Gay father Barrie Drewitt-Barlow declared: 'I want to go into my church and marry my husband.' He added: 'The only way forward for us now is to make a challenge in the courts against the Church.' "

Posted by: Lizzy[/i] at March 31, 2015 10:59 AM (TLTHv)

986

 

homosexuallity is a mortal sin in the catholic church,it is also a mortal sin to facilitate another in committing a mortal sin

Posted by: kj at March 31, 2015 10:59 AM (lKyWE)

987 "So should restaurants in the South owned by KKK members be permitted to refuse service to blacks? Are you really going to go there?" Yes.

Posted by: despair at March 31, 2015 10:59 AM (J6suc)

988 God I hate the celebrity-worship culture that we have gotten to in the US.

Who cares what this guy says? Why is he featured in the WaPo?

Because he is a celebrity (CEO of an iconic company). Also he gets soapbox points because he himself is gay, which of course has no bearing on his actual argument.

Our country is fu***d. SMOD 2016.

Posted by: dan-O at March 31, 2015 01:55 PM (D0bIN)



No, it is even worse than that. He is a celebrity because he has a large head to body ratio; like all famous people. If you don't have that large head to body ratio you can't ever be famous. This is true even of conservative politicians. We are a country run by the sub set of people who appear to have large heads. 


Posted by: [/i] [/u] [/s] [/b] An Observation at March 31, 2015 10:59 AM (Azj5O)

989 You think this shit is out of control?  Try to sell real estate.


HUD  REQUIRES you to include Blacks in your ads or you can be sued. REQUIRES you to include their logo and a non discrimination disclaimer.



Then they send out fake buyers to try and catch you in some sort of discriminatory act.  Then they troll apt owners, usually small ones, with various ploys to "Discover" discrimination.



Yes, the Gestapo is already here.

Posted by: Nip Sip at March 31, 2015 10:59 AM (0FSuD)

990 We are a country run by the sub set of people who appear to have large heads. It looks attractive on camera, very strange effect but well established. HUD REQUIRES you to include Blacks in your ads or you can be sued. REQUIRES you to include their logo and a non discrimination disclaimer. Wow, really? I just figured it was the same stupid stock photo stuff colleges did with their sampler platter of ethnic groups in every picture. Evidently McDonald's doesn't have to follow these rules with their ethnically pure ads.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2015 11:02 AM (39g3+)

991 Off, Mathematical sock

Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at March 31, 2015 11:02 AM (fwARV)

992 It's definitely an indication that his 1st priority isn't making the best products, or making Apple a more successful company. He tells business owners that picking sides on contentious social issues will damage their business. Then, he does the EXACT same thing.

Posted by: qzy at March 31, 2015 11:03 AM (FG4PG)

993 So should restaurants in the South owned by KKK members be permitted to refuse service to blacks? Are you really going to go there?" ------- Should they be required to cater an NAACP BBQ?

Posted by: RioBravo at March 31, 2015 11:07 AM (NUqwG)

994

@835 CT

 

"Nearly every libertarian I know has that as their driving force: let me smoke weed."

 


Same here.  That's their whole arguement.  Let me little habit be sociallably acceptable.  The whole "small govt." schtick is passe after that.

Posted by: Buckeye Abroad at March 31, 2015 11:08 AM (i4hxh)

995 *No, it's a government states that if you want to run a business that caters to the public, you won't discriminate against paying customers on the basis of their beliefs or personal lives. The horror!* Jewish Baker. Hitler cake. Under your premise, you want to force the Jewish Baker to bake that cake.

Posted by: Matt in Tampa at March 31, 2015 11:09 AM (vDEpI)

996 Solution: mandate that Apple must serve its Indiana customers

Posted by: cap'n crunch at March 31, 2015 11:11 AM (EmS9T)

997 And as for Jews baking cakes for Nazis, are you comparing gays to Nazis? I don't think that's the argument you should be making, folks.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 02:25 PM (XsOa7)



Comparing gays to Nazis? Comparing? Many of the top Nazis were gay. Ernst Rohm, the Strasser brothers, many others. Pederasts, in fact.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at March 31, 2015 11:14 AM (eenKj)

998 I smell way too much cow shit in this thread. Tim Cook can go fuck himself. I'm sure he will enjoy it.

Posted by: mpfs at March 31, 2015 11:17 AM (si/E8)

999

@966 Matt in Tampa

 

"However, they're very angry at their parents and communities and the religion embraced by both- thus, the war on Christianity, for perceived slights (he won't bake me a cake) when they're really trying to get back at their parents."

 

Read an article 20 years ago noting that the top femnists in the US all have the same back ground.. no father while growing up.  It suggests that a big draw for femnists is the victomology and abandonment issues they seem to all have in common.

Posted by: Buckeye Abroad at March 31, 2015 11:18 AM (i4hxh)

1000 There is a lot of clever shit in the lawfare the left is using against us. Besides judge shopping there is also the process of letting weak opposing lawsuits proceed through the legal system while delaying any lawsuits with strong attorneys or which have strong arguments to support them. Then when the weak lawsuits wind up being lost they let us go "Oh well the courts ruled against us - so precedent", and give up on the strong lawsuits.

Why was the Baker allowed to get his gay wedding cake  case all the way to the supreme court so quickly? Because the left could see he didn't have Ted Cruz arguing his case - if he had somebody like Cruz on his side he'd still be held up in discovery on the original court case.

Posted by: [/i] [/u] [/s] [/b] An Observation at March 31, 2015 11:20 AM (Azj5O)

1001 628 Forcing me to participate in a gay marriage is forcing me to deny my faith publicly. It can be argued that by doing so, you forever lose your salvation in that is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. I do not agree, but I see why some hold to that argument. IN any case, I would rather die than deny my faith for any reason. This is an targeted attempt to force people of faith to either deny their faith or face deadly force in being arrested by the State and see their property stolen for their "crime" of being faithful. Those who do not see any problem with this are bigots who enjoy turning Christian citizens into sub-human slaves without rights. Period. Posted by: Inspector Cussword at March 31, 2015 03:06 PM (S8V5R) This. A thousand goddamned times.

Posted by: Hawkins1701 at March 31, 2015 11:31 AM (JgGWZ)

1002 66 It was completely manifest that the gheys sponsored by the radical left would have behaved like spoiled brats once they started getting some grounds. It was a clear cut case of give them an inch and they take a mile. In retrospect, it was a mistake to even grant them civil unions because, any half intelligent person knows where we are heading to. There is also another aspect which was extremely easy to guess: MSM will cover up, misinform, muddle up any lie said by any representative of Big Anus (TM), in this case Tim Cook. He flat out told lies in his statement but nobody is calling him out on it, exactly like they would do with a Democrat politician. Same for the Dolce and Gabbana statement. An entirely legit opinion turned into a feces throwing match (one-way) from the ever tolerant ghey left. And consider that Elton John beside being a fag, he was perceived to be not extremely leftist (based on his opinion of Israel and the Rush Limbaugh marriage). Dissent is forbidden. Again, entirely predictable. I hope all the idiots that have said for decades that they have no opinion on ghey marriage or that it does not change their lives altogether are intellectually honest enough to admit that they are responsible for the consequences. So the only reason why you still deny that this will lead to the entire criminalization of people with some religious conscience is that you too want to eliminate religion altogether. For the rest, you have been 200% idiot, it is like voting Barak Obama twice. There are no excuses. ------------ A perfect example of the saying @ give them an inch and they start being a ruler,"

Posted by: Chilling the most at March 31, 2015 11:35 AM (zW5rQ)

1003 Do you honestly believe gays choose to be gay?

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 31, 2015 03:29 PM (0LHZx)
--------------

Yes.  It is not a question of "belief".  It is a proven fact that some people certainly do "choose it". 

Hell, why do I have to take sexual orientation form birth on faith - you think they are ALL born that way, fine, PROVE it.  If you can, I can be convinced otherwise.

Some people who are homosexual may be a product of a birth factor (like a disability), but others engage in the act out of "nurture" and not nature, out of hedonism, a fetish, as a result of a mental illness, a product of abuse (as in, they were homosexually molested and repeat the behvaior as a way of "making it ok"), or as a result of confinement (prison sex), where you screw the only hole there is available.  You could also be groomed into it at an early age, taught that the act is OK, so why not do it? There is plenty of documentation on this, and although it is no longer "PC" these days, that doesn't make it false. Homosexuality does not arise from one source, unlike race or biological sex. So you can't "protect it".

As far as that goes, your attitude comes across as considering the behavior "wrong", as in "why would ANYONE CHOOSE to be THAT?!"  Those so inclined don't see anything "wrong" with it and would be offended at your tone, but I'm sure fecal fetishists think their behavior is the bee's knees, too, and I'm not quick to normalize shiat-eating either.

Posted by: Saltyron at March 31, 2015 12:07 PM (i6shs)

1004 I think homosexuality is not a choice (for the most part), and therefore should be afforded the same constitutional protections as race, ethnicity, etc. Who gives a rat's ass what you do in bed with a consenting adult? I don't.

Posted by: JoeShmoe99 at March 31, 2015 03:31 PM (XsOa7)

-------------------------

I "give a rat's ass" because the behavior that was supposed to be private, i.e. "in bed", is now on the street, dressed up as a protected class that wants me to support it, protect it, fund it, normalize it like race or bio sex.  Sorry, one of these things is not like the other.

"([F]or the most part)" undermines the whole justification for providing constitutional protections like those that race, ethnicity receive. You can't say "race is not a choice (for the most part)" - its NOT a choice. Period. There are no exceptions.

For example, I don't think hockey players are evil, or that hockey should be an illegal act, but I don't see why hockey players in general would need to be grouped into a "protected class" based on their behavior.

Posted by: Saltyron at March 31, 2015 12:12 PM (i6shs)

1005 Well, if nothing else, it should be abundantly clear by now that Teh Buttsecks causes brain damage.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at March 31, 2015 12:19 PM (eenKj)

1006 Really late to this thread but Tim Cook makes my BP spike so here's a release.

He can take his opinions and shove them where the sun doesn't shine.

He's a rank hypocritical faggot trying to jam his worldview down my throat.

There's another reason to despise Apple products, their CEO is an flaming faggot that has no clue about the man in the mirror. When he tells everyone else in the world the same thing he said when he came here to Alabama to recieve some acheivement award and make a speech I might start listening. Until and when that happens he can shut the fuck up about how I should respect his shitty life style.

Posted by: Gmac- Pulling in feelers in preperation... at March 31, 2015 12:55 PM (74McK)

1007 Heh. Stoaty is 2.6% Neanderthal: http://sweasel.com/archives/14732 And she is very proud of it, too! NEANDERTHAL POWER!!!

Posted by: Bruce J. at March 31, 2015 01:05 PM (iQIUe)

1008 Hear about the new Apple iPak? It comes with a gerbil and Vaseline.

Posted by: RushCT at March 31, 2015 04:06 PM (cv7Lg)

Hide Comments | Add Comment




What colour is a green orange?




613kb generated in CPU 0.7, elapsed 1.9559 seconds.
64 queries taking 1.3711 seconds, 1246 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.