Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 152

Thread: Gay Wedding Cakes

  1. #31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigPiney View Post
    I am worried that the gay wedding cakes will devalue traditional wedding cakes.
    You must only have straight sons.
    A man who views the world the same at fifty as he did at twenty has wasted thirty years of his life. - Mohammad Ali

  2. #32
    Senior Member Crockett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Orygun
    Posts
    700

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ted View Post
    But I suspect that religions that don't conform to recognizing gay marriage will become obsolete in the long run... so add this to my prediction: Someday gays will enjoy being married in the temple as well. Of course, they may not be married for time and "all eternity" for what may seem like an eternity but I would guess they will be married "for time" within my child's lifetime. Someday the church leadership may look back on the ban on gay marriage and write in their FAQ "we don't know where that came from."
    So if the Church decides its okay to perform gay marriages for time -- i.e., homosexual relations are not sinful -- then why not for eternity, too? Why the difference?

  3. #33
    My Mic Sounds Nice falafel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Wegas!
    Posts
    26,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crockett View Post
    So if the Church decides its okay to perform gay marriages for time -- i.e., homosexual relations are not sinful -- then why not for eternity, too? Why the difference?
    Still can't procreate! Spiritual penises and spiritual butt holes can't produce spiritual children.
    Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

    "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  4. #34
    𐐐𐐄𐐢𐐆𐐤𐐝 𐐓𐐅 𐐜 𐐢𐐃𐐡𐐔 Uncle Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Where ∑ ★'s = 1
    Posts
    17,564

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crockett View Post
    So if the Church decides its okay to perform gay marriages for time -- i.e., homosexual relations are not sinful -- then why not for eternity, too? Why the difference?
    The marriage rules are different in heaven, of course. That is why men can be sealed to multiple women even the church doesn't recognize plural marriage (in this life) any more. In heaven you are expected to live by a higher law and stuff.
    "If there is one thing I am, it's always right." -Ted Nugent.
    "I honestly believe saying someone is a smart lawyer is damning with faint praise. The smartest people become engineers and scientists." -SU.
    "I never preached in Texas, but I have preached in places as wicked..." -Brigham Young.
    "If we do nothing we'll be substantially behind (other Power leagues) a decade from now." -Bob Bowlsby on Big 12 expansion.
    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  5. #35
    𐐐𐐄𐐢𐐆𐐤𐐝 𐐓𐐅 𐐜 𐐢𐐃𐐡𐐔 Uncle Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Where ∑ ★'s = 1
    Posts
    17,564

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by falafel View Post
    Still can't procreate! Spiritual penises and spiritual butt holes can't produce spiritual children.
    Yeah, good point.
    "If there is one thing I am, it's always right." -Ted Nugent.
    "I honestly believe saying someone is a smart lawyer is damning with faint praise. The smartest people become engineers and scientists." -SU.
    "I never preached in Texas, but I have preached in places as wicked..." -Brigham Young.
    "If we do nothing we'll be substantially behind (other Power leagues) a decade from now." -Bob Bowlsby on Big 12 expansion.
    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  6. #36
    One man.....one pie Moliere's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    The Republic of Tejas
    Posts
    19,654

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ted View Post
    But I suspect that religions that don't conform to recognizing gay marriage will become obsolete in the long run... so add this to my prediction: Someday gays will enjoy being married in the temple as well. Of course, they may not be married for time and "all eternity" for what may seem like an eternity but I would guess they will be married "for time" within my child's lifetime. Someday the church leadership may look back on the ban on gay marriage and write in their FAQ "we don't know where that came from."
    Is sex required to make spirit babies? Just curious since that seems really weird. I know some Mormons believe that polygamy will be needed in heaven so we can populate worlds with spirit babies, which might mean Thant heaven is just one big orgy

    But if we don’t believe sec is needed to make a spirit baby (which I don’t think it is but really couldn’t care less) then there’s no reason gay marriage can’t be eternal and not just for time.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    "Discipleship is not a spectator sport. We cannot expect to experience the blessing of faith by standing inactive on the sidelines any more than we can experience the benefits of health by sitting on a sofa watching sporting events on television and giving advice to the athletes. And yet for some, “spectator discipleship” is a preferred if not primary way of worshipping." -Pres. Uchtdorf

  7. #37
    My Mic Sounds Nice falafel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Wegas!
    Posts
    26,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Moliere View Post
    Is sex required to make spirit babies? Just curious since that seems really weird. I know some Mormons believe that polygamy will be needed in heaven so we can populate worlds with spirit babies, which might mean Thant heaven is just one big orgy

    But if we don’t believe sec is needed to make a spirit baby (which I don’t think it is but really couldn’t care less) then there’s no reason gay marriage can’t be eternal and not just for time.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    If sex isn't needed for spirit children, I suspect the output will be significantly lower than it is on earth.
    Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

    "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  8. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by old_gregg View Post
    what in tarnation is the “business world”? private enterprises that do not provide necessary public services or accommodations should be free to discriminate against whomever they please on whatever basis they feel like. a wedding cake bakery does not provide lodging, facilitate travel or provide staple foods.
    I guess 'business world' is a poor term. Let me try to state my general opinion. If you own a business, and you receive all the benefits the law affords you for having a business, the law can forbid you from discriminating against groups of customers based on personal prejudices. And I think the government should protect against discrimination, even if your business doesn't provide essential services.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
    You are painting an inherently complex issue in black and white terms. It is not that simple and it is not equivalent to racial discrimination.'

    Also, you said:



    The "government's rules" include freedom of religion. We have a classic case of competing interests here.
    I see no easy distinction. Both forms of discrimination are based on prejudices that should have no place in society. If there is no rational societal basis for discrimination, it shouldn't be tolerated in private business. Again, anyone who claims freedom of religion for prejudicial thought/action can run with it in their church or private life. If your business operates in the private sector, leave your religious beliefs behind. There should be a societal responsibility to treat all citizens fairly.

  9. #39
    Senior Member BigFatMeanie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    South Jordan, UT
    Posts
    2,400

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Northwestcoug View Post
    I guess 'business world' is a poor term. Let me try to state my general opinion. If you own a business, and you receive all the benefits the law affords you for having a business, the law can forbid you from discriminating against groups of customers based on personal prejudices. And I think the government should protect against discrimination, even if your business doesn't provide essential services.



    I see no easy distinction. Both forms of discrimination are based on prejudices that should have no place in society. If there is no rational societal basis for discrimination, it shouldn't be tolerated in private business. Again, anyone who claims freedom of religion for prejudicial thought/action can run with it in their church or private life. If your business operates in the private sector, leave your religious beliefs behind. There should be a societal responsibility to treat all citizens fairly.
    So, when the pornographers come to my business demanding I set up a website for them, I'm not allowed to refuse them because it goes against my religious/moral beliefs? You're full of it.

    This isn't a hypothetical, by the way. As previously stated, my company currently refuses to accept business from pornographers.

  10. #40
    Trump-hating snowflake Jeff Lebowski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The heart of the UC
    Posts
    44,379

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Northwestcoug View Post
    I guess 'business world' is a poor term. Let me try to state my general opinion. If you own a business, and you receive all the benefits the law affords you for having a business, the law can forbid you from discriminating against groups of customers based on personal prejudices. And I think the government should protect against discrimination, even if your business doesn't provide essential services.



    I see no easy distinction. Both forms of discrimination are based on prejudices that should have no place in society. If there is no rational societal basis for discrimination, it shouldn't be tolerated in private business. Again, anyone who claims freedom of religion for prejudicial thought/action can run with it in their church or private life. If your business operates in the private sector, leave your religious beliefs behind. There should be a societal responsibility to treat all citizens fairly.
    If it were that simple the case never would have made it all the way to the Supreme Court.
    "Socialism is not bad IMHO" - byu71
    "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
    "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.

  11. #41
    Anti-Mormon Gadfly
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    12,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cowboy View Post
    Most people see this case as another version of Katzenbach v. McClung, but I disagree. It would be one thing to refuse service to people because they are gay, but this is opposition to the activity, not the person. The counter argument, of course, is this is a legal activity, and they would not be opposed to providing service if the participants weren't gay. I disagree. Taking this to a ridiculous extreme, this would seem to imply that a female photographer who photographs nude women should be compelled to do the same for a man. No analogy is perfect, so I don't want to go far with that one, but the point is that I don't think anyone should be compelled to provide a service for an activity that they don't want to participate in.

    Before anyone starts calling me a homophobe, I have a business that provided material for a gay wedding, and I'd do it again. I didn't know what it was for at the time, but I certainly didn't have a problem with it. The customer has returned a few times for other things. I just think people should have the freedom to say no.
    I think you are giving this individual a huge benefit of the doubt in saying it is about the marriage not refusing service because the individuals are gay.
    The crux of what has traumatized us about CUF/CG is that we thought they were our friends. And their identity as BYU fans turned out to be the most important thing to them. What empty lives! What a damning indictment of the LDS Church!
    --SeattleUte

  12. #42
    Anti-Mormon Gadfly
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    12,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigFatMeanie View Post
    An interesting analogy, in my opinion, is whether the government should be able to compel technical/software companies or individuals to do things that violate the religious/moral/expression principles the company disagrees with.

    My company refuses all business from pornographers. Should we be forced to take on their business?
    Should the software engineers at Apple be forced to create government backdoors or to otherwise hack into customer data that the customer hasn't granted them access to?

    If I was an individual contract software engineer, should I be forced to take on projects and write code for things that I felt were morally objectionable?
    You should not be forced to take business pornographers. Of course, pornographers are not a protected class and a pornographer makes a choice. LGBTQ individuals are not making a choice.
    The crux of what has traumatized us about CUF/CG is that we thought they were our friends. And their identity as BYU fans turned out to be the most important thing to them. What empty lives! What a damning indictment of the LDS Church!
    --SeattleUte

  13. #43
    My Mic Sounds Nice falafel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Wegas!
    Posts
    26,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mpfunk View Post
    You should not be forced to take business pornographers. Of course, pornographers are not a protected class and a pornographer makes a choice. LGBTQ individuals are not making a choice.
    They are making a choice of baker!
    Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

    "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  14. #44

    Default

    can somebody - lebowki perhaps since he said it - help me understand how this is different than racial discrimination? TIA

    I'm a baker, black guy comes in and asks me to bake a cake for his wedding. sorry won't do that for you because you're black.

    gay guy comes in and asks me to bake a cake for his wedding. sorry won't do that for you because you're gay.

    I don't see the difference, but to be fair, I'm not very smart.
    I'm like LeBron James.
    -mpfunk

  15. #45
    Anti-Mormon Gadfly
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    12,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smokymountainrain View Post
    can somebody - lebowki perhaps since he said it - help me understand how this is different than racial discrimination? TIA

    I'm a baker, black guy comes in and asks me to bake a cake for his wedding. sorry won't do that for you because you're black.

    gay guy comes in and asks me to bake a cake for his wedding. sorry won't do that for you because you're gay.

    I don't see the difference, but to be fair, I'm not very smart.
    I'd like an answer to this question as well.

    I think the only way you can answer it and draw and distinction is if you believe that there is some choice involved with being LGTBQ. I don't think that there is any choice involved, so I see no difference.
    The crux of what has traumatized us about CUF/CG is that we thought they were our friends. And their identity as BYU fans turned out to be the most important thing to them. What empty lives! What a damning indictment of the LDS Church!
    --SeattleUte

  16. #46
    My Mic Sounds Nice falafel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Wegas!
    Posts
    26,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mpfunk View Post
    I'd like an answer to this question as well.

    I think the only way you can answer it and draw and distinction is if you believe that there is some choice involved with being LGTBQ. I don't think that there is any choice involved, so I see no difference.
    I think you may be right about that. But regardless, I'll take a stab at a response.

    The difference is based on one's religious beliefs. I'm not aware of any religion that preaches that its a sin to be black, or that society should discourage people from "being black." But there are certainly a large number of people (including a large number within your own church, SMR) that feel that it encouraging gay marriage in any form is contrary to their religion's teachings.
    Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

    "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  17. #47
    Anti-Mormon Gadfly
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    12,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by falafel View Post
    I think you may be right about that. But regardless, I'll take a stab at a response.

    The difference is based on one's religious beliefs. I'm not aware of any religion that preaches that its a sin to be black, or that society should discourage people from "being black." But there are certainly a large number of people (including a large number within your own church, SMR) that feel that it encouraging gay marriage in any form is contrary to their religion's teachings.
    Even under that explanation, it is still discrimination. It is just religiously justified discrimination.
    The crux of what has traumatized us about CUF/CG is that we thought they were our friends. And their identity as BYU fans turned out to be the most important thing to them. What empty lives! What a damning indictment of the LDS Church!
    --SeattleUte

  18. #48
    My Mic Sounds Nice falafel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Wegas!
    Posts
    26,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mpfunk View Post
    Even under that explanation, it is still discrimination. It is just religiously justified discrimination.
    Sure. But we discriminate all the time on any number of subjects. We are fine with some types of discrimination, and abhor others. The debate is whether people have the right to include gay marriage in their list of acceptable discrimination.
    Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

    "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  19. #49
    Striving for mediocrity Art Vandelay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,779

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by falafel View Post
    Sure. But we discriminate all the time on any number of subjects. We are fine with some types of discrimination, and abhor others. The debate is whether people have the right to include gay marriage in their list of acceptable discrimination.
    As I stated above I think the baker should have just made the cake. Based upon what I've seen in movies, Gay weddings look a lot funner than most traditional weddings anyway. If I was the Cake Boss, my only requirement would be no smashing the cake into one another's face.

    I do appreciate the argument falafel is trying to make. What if a straight couple wanted a sexually explicit (as defined by the baker) cake for their wedding? Would the same argument apply?

  20. #50
    My Mic Sounds Nice falafel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Wegas!
    Posts
    26,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Art Vandelay View Post
    As I stated above I think the baker should have just made the cake. Based upon what I've seen in movies, Gay weddings look a lot funner than most traditional weddings anyway. If I was the Cake Boss, my only requirement would be no smashing the cake into one another's face.

    I do appreciate the argument falafel is trying to make. What if a straight couple wanted a sexually explicit (as defined by the baker) cake for their wedding? Would the same argument apply?
    Spoiler for NSFW Cakes:


    Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

    "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  21. #51
    Senior Member Eddie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Davis County
    Posts
    5,734

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
    One of the interesting things about this case is differences of opinion. George Will argues that the cake baker does not have a case. David French of NRO disagrees:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...-still-obtains
    That's an interesting point, when they describe the cake as "art". My cousin makes wedding cakes - more often than not at least 1 of the layers is simply a foam cutout covered in frosting. Hard to argue that the cake is food when they are more interested in what it looks like than whether or not it is even edible.

    ---

    So - we're talking about "protected classes", which includes: race, religion, color, national origin, age, sex and/or sexual orientation, disability, veteran status, height, weight, marital status - am I missing anything?

    Does that mean you can discriminate on any other grounds as long as it doesn't fall into one of those?

    Next question - if "religion" is a protected class, how is the religion of both individuals within an exchange not part of the consideration?

    Honestly - I think this is kind of dumb. Count me among those who would just bake the dumb cake.

    On the other hand - do you really want someone who doesn't want to make your wedding cake making your wedding cake? This is "the most special day in your life" and you're bringing someone into it who REALLY doesn't want to be there? Why would you do that? Are you convinced they'll be doing their best work? Or that they'll be on time?

    I've interacted with people who acted like they weren't too interested in my business at the time, so I took my business elsewhere. Is this the ONLY bakery that makes wedding cakes in the area? That's about the only reason I can even think of to not be looking elsewhere.

  22. #52
    Princeps Inter Pares
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    10,793

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eddie View Post
    On the other hand - do you really want someone who doesn't want to make your wedding cake making your wedding cake? This is "the most special day in your life" and you're bringing someone into it who REALLY doesn't want to be there? Why would you do that? Are you convinced they'll be doing their best work? Or that they'll be on time?

    I've interacted with people who acted like they weren't too interested in my business at the time, so I took my business elsewhere. Is this the ONLY bakery that makes wedding cakes in the area? That's about the only reason I can even think of to not be looking elsewhere.
    This gets at what I think is the true underlying issue. Do they really care about having that specific baker bake them a cake? Probably not. Would you really want somebody who believes what you are doing violates their most deeply felt beliefs participating in your big day? I doubt it. This isn't about the cake. It's a challenge to the propriety of believing that gay marriage violates your religious beliefs.

    That belief might be wrong and it might be right, but I don't like government force being used as the vehicle to fight that battle.
    τὸν ἥλιον ἀνατέλλοντα πλείονες ἢ δυόμενον προσκυνοῦσιν

  23. #53
    CS Institutional Memory Jarid in Cedar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Up on western high
    Posts
    12,842

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by falafel View Post
    Spoiler for NSFW Cakes:


    There is not enough blood for that cake to represent a straight OP delivery
    "The first thing I learned upon becoming a head coach after fifteen years as an assistant was the enormous difference between making a suggestion and making a decision."

    "They talk about the economy this year. Hey, my hairline is in recession, my waistline is in inflation. Altogether, I'm in a depression."

    "I like to bike. I could beat Lance Armstrong, only because he couldn't pass me if he was behind me."

    -Rick Majerus

  24. #54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by falafel View Post
    I think you may be right about that. But regardless, I'll take a stab at a response.

    The difference is based on one's religious beliefs. I'm not aware of any religion that preaches that its a sin to be black, or that society should discourage people from "being black." But there are certainly a large number of people (including a large number within your own church, SMR) that feel that it encouraging gay marriage in any form is contrary to their religion's teachings.
    its an answer. probably even a good answer. but not an acceptable one. but thanks for the thoughtful response.
    I'm like LeBron James.
    -mpfunk

  25. #55
    Trump-hating snowflake Jeff Lebowski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The heart of the UC
    Posts
    44,379

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by All-American View Post
    This gets at what I think is the true underlying issue. Do they really care about having that specific baker bake them a cake? Probably not. Would you really want somebody who believes what you are doing violates their most deeply felt beliefs participating in your big day? I doubt it. This isn't about the cake. It's a challenge to the propriety of believing that gay marriage violates your religious beliefs.

    That belief might be wrong and it might be right, but I don't like government force being used as the vehicle to fight that battle.
    Yeah I think it’s dumb to refuse to bake the cake. But I think it’s equally dumb to force the baker to bake the cake.
    "Socialism is not bad IMHO" - byu71
    "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
    "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.

  26. #56
    Senior Member Crockett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Orygun
    Posts
    700

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mpfunk View Post
    I'd like an answer to this question as well.

    I think the only way you can answer it and draw and distinction is if you believe that there is some choice involved with being LGTBQ. I don't think that there is any choice involved, so I see no difference.
    It's not the only difference. Some also see providing a wedding cake, floral services, renting out your property for a wedding ceremony, etc. is more than providing a simple product. It's being part of a ceremony or act that they do not want to endorse or support. None of these bakers refuse to sell cakes or cookies to someone who is gay and comes into their store. It's the involvement in the ceremony that is the issue.

    Furthermore, there are always plenty of alternatives to providing cakes or whatever, so someone could always get the cake, etc. that they want elsewhere. So, this has become a way to legally punish anyone that possesses the wrong ideas. Remember when gay marriage advocates used to say how does two gay people wanting to get married hurt you? Well, because you are forced to care now or your livelihood is threatened. They were never going to stop there and the arguments that that is all they wanted were dishonest at the time. All thoughtcrime must eradicated and stuff.

  27. #57

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eddie View Post
    That's an interesting point, when they describe the cake as "art". My cousin makes wedding cakes - more often than not at least 1 of the layers is simply a foam cutout covered in frosting. Hard to argue that the cake is food when they are more interested in what it looks like than whether or not it is even edible.

    ---

    So - we're talking about "protected classes", which includes: race, religion, color, national origin, age, sex and/or sexual orientation, disability, veteran status, height, weight, marital status - am I missing anything?

    Does that mean you can discriminate on any other grounds as long as it doesn't fall into one of those?

    Next question - if "religion" is a protected class, how is the religion of both individuals within an exchange not part of the consideration?

    Honestly - I think this is kind of dumb. Count me among those who would just bake the dumb cake.
    ...
    That's your first problem. I've heard that there's no baking involved--they just use a foam cutout covered in frosting.
    "Seriously, is there a bigger high on the whole face of the earth than eating a salad?"--SeattleUte
    "The only Ute to cause even half the nationwide hysteria of Jimmermania was Ted Bundy."--TripletDaddy
    This is a tough, NYC broad, a doctor who deals with bleeding organs, dying people and testicles on a regular basis without crying."--oxcoug
    "I'm not impressed (and I'm even into choreography . . .)"--Donuthole
    "I too was fortunate to leave with my same balls."--byu71

  28. #58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigFatMeanie View Post
    So, when the pornographers come to my business demanding I set up a website for them, I'm not allowed to refuse them because it goes against my religious/moral beliefs? You're full of it.

    This isn't a hypothetical, by the way. As previously stated, my company currently refuses to accept business from pornographers.
    In general, I think the conservative/religious objections to porn are overblown. But even I am not persuaded by your implicit argument that pornographers are in the same oppressed class as gays/lesbians and other minorities.

    In all seriousness, I think businesses should have a significant amount of leeway deciding who to do business with. In your situation, it probably makes good business sense to reject pornography work. And if you have other objections associating with other groups, whether based on a community's perception or a judgement about general character, that should be OK. But not if your business's decision is based on systemic oppression of a minority class. They should be treated based on the same civic judgment as you would give any other citizen. That's where I'm drawing my black and white line.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
    If it were that simple the case never would have made it all the way to the Supreme Court.
    I never said that a post-modern society free of historical biases and prejudices would be easy; I only said it would be worth it.

    And I'm not arguing that my opinion is an easy or obvious answer to society. But it is an overarching statement that I hope would guide the necessary and messy deliberations SCOTUS (and society) needs to have.

  29. #59
    My Mic Sounds Nice falafel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Wegas!
    Posts
    26,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smokymountainrain View Post
    its an answer. probably even a good answer. but not an acceptable one. but thanks for the thoughtful response.
    Actually, it probably isn't. But oh well.
    Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

    "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  30. #60
    My Mic Sounds Nice falafel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Wegas!
    Posts
    26,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Northwestcoug View Post
    I guess 'business world' is a poor term. Let me try to state my general opinion. If you own a business, and you receive all the benefits the law affords you for having a business, the law can forbid you from discriminating against groups of customers based on personal prejudices. And I think the government should protect against discrimination, even if your business doesn't provide essential services.



    I see no easy distinction. Both forms of discrimination are based on prejudices that should have no place in society. If there is no rational societal basis for discrimination, it shouldn't be tolerated in private business. Again, anyone who claims freedom of religion for prejudicial thought/action can run with it in their church or private life. If your business operates in the private sector, leave your religious beliefs behind. There should be a societal responsibility to treat all citizens fairly.
    This is troubling. Freedom of religion is a real thing, a protected right. I don't believe the right ends when you leave your house or your church and step into your business. Freedom of religion for all, but only behind closed doors.

    Another issue is the definition of "personal prejudices." Surely you can see that what one group defines as a personal prejudice, another defines as a deeply held religious belief. While the goal of protecting against "discrimination" might sound nice in a hypothetical, it is extremely difficult in practice. Especially where, as described above, protecting one group's rights has the effect of trampling on another group's rights.
    Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

    "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •