Posted on 02/26/2014 6:50:47 PM PST by lbryce
The bills are required and the bills are failing! In Red States!!
“...then my comments still stand.”
Then you don’t understand freedom.
“...is our God-given right and duty.”
And it’s been taken away. We think electing Republicans is going to restore it. Nope. If we want it, we’ll have to take it back.
We’ll see good pastors put in prison. If not us, our children surely will. Crucifixions? Probably so.
...well, because they don’t feel like doing so...
The only problem is that they felt it necessary to explain why. A simple "We are booked up through the next month" would have sufficed.
It's still possible to refuse service to anyone for any reason - in this era of litigiousness you just have to keep your reasons to yourself.
“, the losses would have been much too high a price to pay. “
I don’t think God would have seen it that way.
Paraphrase from Edmund Burke - The only thing necessary for evil to triumph if for good men or women to do nothing.
I’m not sure I understand where religion comes into this. Why is the baker REQUIRED to serve anyone at all? Is a wedding cake from the baker of your choice now a fundamental right under the Constitution? The baker is not free in this scenario.
I agree. The first time it was reviewed by any court it would not have passed constitutional muster.
you may be done in more ways than one. It is not a new discussion that getting tax exemption puts God’s church in the position of having to ask the government for permission
And being in business means that you may have to do business with people you dislike and even have nothing in common with.
I think you misunderstand what the Arizona law actually would have done “But under this new law, whoever ran the bakery would have to bake the Nazi cake whether they detested the Nazis or not. Pandora’s box.” That is not at all what the law would have done
IF you are in business there are certain laws which will regulate and govern you. That was true before this law. Case law already exists where an unmarried couple wanted to rent a room together. The rentor declined on religious grounds. Courts made them rent to anyway.
People have a choice at that point. Those are matters of conscience. A contract was being negotiated and the baker was fine with baking a cake UNTIL they found out the couple was homosexual. This is not unlike being willing to sell a house to a person UNTIL you find out they are of a different race or religion.
Part of the hard part of living under a constitution that respects minority rights (and that does not mean what some people think it means), is that one ends up being unhappy sometimes. NAZIs had to be allowed to march in Skokie,Illinois.
IF our legislators are that concerned then they should craft a well written bit that would allow protection for all sides.
The only way a person can avoid government riles and regulations is to hide in the hills somewhere and hope they are never found
Because they were in business offering a service to the public for money.
Just as the inn keeper who does not want to rent a room to unmarried couples. That has already been litigated.
If one does not wish to make wedding cakes for certain people then be a word of mouth not a walk in bakery.
The other option is don’t bake wedding cakes at all.
Really? Does the roman church teach that baking a cake for business is the same thing as attending a religious celebration??? Those aren’t even close to being the same thing
Adulterers don’t have a pride parade to shove their lifestyle choice down your throat. “We are all sinners, judge not lest...yada yada
Why does this take precedence over other Bible teaching?
He should have made the cake and gotten the money up front, but maybe not on a timely basis.
I was at a wedding in 2012, the baker dropped the cake on the way into the pavilion the reception was using. Still got paid.
What I understand is that people are complaining for various reasons. I have made NO statement on my beliefs about homosexuality. I know what my faith teaches me and that is what guides me.
Legislative solutions are not the way to deal with these issues. These types of cases showcase this point.
The reason the ‘other side’ and the lefties keep ‘winning’ is because they are using the courts over and over again. That is where the battle ground is being lost.
I did not call the baker’s actions discrimination. Nor do I think they are discriminatory. I do in fact think that this case was a set up purposely picked so the couple could get into court.
Oh I understand both freedom AND the constitution
Take away the tax-exempt status of the Tides Foundation, and let’s see how much “charitable” work they do.
The baker made the religious argument (it is a California case and has already been litigated). The baker agreed to bake a wedding cake UNTIL the baker found out that the couple was homosexual, then refused.
Do I think the case was a set up. Of course. That is the way the left works. Our reaction to it by trying to legislate always back fires.
The baker is not ‘free’ in any case. He cannot refuse to sell cakes to those he dislikes just because he dislikes them. I will sell bread to you but not him. The baker has already gotten business licenses and health inspections and all sorts of other government permission.
“Is a wedding cake from the baker of your choice now a fundamental right under the Constitution” I never made that claim. It is silliness to make that type of jump but no doubt it is coming.
Like so many conservatives, protecting and defending the Constitution is of primary importance — except when it’s inconvenient to do so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.