images

A Northern Ireland bakery run by devout Christians could face legal action after it refused to make a gay-themed cake depicting the Sesame Street couple Bert and Ernie.

Ashers Baking Company published a statement on its website defending its decision to refuse to bake the cake as the slogan above the puppets was in support of gay marriage. Northern Ireland’s first openly gay mayor, Andrew Muir, has backed legal action against the bakery, saying businesses should not be able to pick and choose who they serve.
images
In its statement, the firm’s general manager, Daniel McArthur, said: “The directors and myself looked at it and considered it and thought that this order was at odds with our beliefs. It certainly was at odds with what the Bible teaches, and on the following Monday we rang the customer to let him know that we couldn’t take his order.”

McArthur said the company had offered to fully refund the customer, who wanted to have the logo of the pressure group QueerSpace on the cake.

Continuing the lefts agenda to shut down any business that disagrees with them. I’m not sure which is worse, the fundamental Christians or the radical Left when it comes to shoving their ideals down your throat. Either way, it’s extremely annoying to me.



  1. Marcel says:

    “quote” saying businesses should not be able to pick and choose who they serve.

    I think that it would be my fundamental right to be able to decide who I do business with…

    • Ted says:

      So I should demand a Big Mac and Coke at Taco Bell? They can’t choose to only sell me Mexi-American food and Pepsi products.

  2. Marcel says:

    “quote: saying businesses should not be able to pick and choose who they serve.”

    I think that it would be my fundamental right to be able to decide who I do business with…

    • Mr Diesel says:

      Twice as good the second time. 😉

      The mayor’s comments are unadulterated bullshit. My business, my clients, my decision to serve said clients.

  3. bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

    Continuing the lefts agenda to shut down any business that disagrees with them. //// A very DISHONEST way to phrase the conflict unless you sincerely and deeply believe that gays are a subspecies of humanity not deserving of common social and business intercourse. Who else should we abuse after the gays? Every other religion not mine comes to mind starting with agnostics, jews, and anybody with a high school diploma. You know….. those intellectuals who want to be left alone. When you go into BUSINESS, you are no longer practicing your religion.

    I’m not sure which is worse, the fundamental Christians or the radical Left when it comes to shoving their ideals down your throat. //// Very akin to the defendant claiming the victim hit the defendants fist with his face. Yes, I suppose demanding that you be treated the same as everyone else is ramming your ideals down someone’s throat…… but consider the downstream affects. First its the gays, then the jews, then the single females, then the labor unions….etc. You confuse the FREEEEEEDOM with agreeing with your own particular values. You need to widen your context.

    Either way, it’s extremely annoying to me. /// Yeah, sounds like it. You need to think your way through it.

    • McCullough says:

      So, by the same token….if the Westboro Baptist Church walked into a Gay-owned bakery, and requested a cake, do you think they should have the right to refuse THEM service?

      I say yes.

      Your argument is just so much BS, as usual.

      • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

        No, only you….. as it is as plain as day that you think discriminating against gays is “ok.” You are in pretty good company though: the majority of the Supremes also agree: confusing the face with the fist as if it was the same injury.

        You give up some of your “fundamental rights” when YOU CHOOSE TO GO INTO BUSINESS. Thats why the Amish to great degree just trade among themselves in a private manner. but go and get a BUSINESS LICENSE and you are part of COMMERCE that should not be hog tied by stupidity and prejudice.

        I know this confuses so many faux “libertarians” who confuse being 12 years old with having a mature ideology regarding FREEEEEEDOM. Your right to practice your religion/bigotry/whatever ends when it conflicts with my right to access the goods and services of commerce the same as anyone else.

        Your opinion/feelings/emotions/only partially thought through position is maintainable ONLY because you have only one short example….. just flesh it out though. Businesses discriminating and not providing their services to all kinds of people for all kinds of reasons.

        Ha, ha….. I could go all OTOH to the degree the service here is not of general commerce but rather of personal services…. or is it. “40 Years and Still Happily Married.”

        You do recognize those are puppets……. right?

      • NewFormatSux says:

        This isn’t even refusing service to an individual, but refusing to bake a particular cake. How about a Jewish bakery being told to bake a cake with a swastika on it?

        Now perhaps the people wanting the cake are Hindus, but does that mean they should be allowed to sue the Jew to make them bake the cake they want?

        • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

          You sure are Naive there NFS. OF COURSE the jewish bakery should make the swastika because they chose to go into business and SERVE THE PUBLIC.

          Course….. in the real world, the Nazi Swastika would be made out of dog shit, and the Hindu Swastika would be made out of Double Dutch Chocolate…. but that is a different issue.

          I crack myself up.

    • NewFormatSux says:

      I imagine the bakers would object if a non-gay person came in and requested the same cake.

  4. dusanmal says:

    “I’m not sure which is worse, the fundamental Christians or the radical Left when it comes to shoving their ideals down your throat.” – ah, but that is so easy.
    Question: when did Conservative Right ever attempted shutting down Leftist right to their Left opinions? – Never. You won’t find lawsuits of say, coal mine against Leftist baker refusing to bake them a cake for mine anniversary (or other such collision of ideas). Because Right demand is for INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM. Which INCLUDES Left individuals right to think as they do and Right individuals to think as they do. Lefties want contraception for all? – fine, you, individual go get it… Right too demands for it to be available… but opposes opinion that everyone must pay for it, even those who do not want anything to do with it.
    Left interpretation of what freedom is kind of lies on Clinton phrase “what the definition of is is?”… In free World baker who refuses coal mine cake or gay cake order must not even think twice. Because he is free.
    Leftists shove their ideals down others throats. Right want to keep their own ideals themselves and even right of those who do not think like them to keep their own ideals for themselves. That is the difference.

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

      Why isn’t refusing to sell a cake with puppets on it “shoving their beliefs” down someone’s throat? That makes the potential customer have to get in their car and go find another bakery if another one exists in that town.

      Its the differential consequences you fail to include when who is doing the shoving.

      I can see how that would be tricky for some. ((12 yo’s))

      • Tommy says:

        Should a Christian Book store be forced to sell copies of Ass Masters Magazine?

        • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

          No. That is a stocking decision.

          If they had a program of ordering books from distributors they dealt with and such a book was available that way…. then yes.

          How is selling books a religious sacrament?

  5. Tim says:

    I guess it matters not that the cake is a lie.

  6. McCullough says:

    “Because Right demand is for INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM. Which INCLUDES Left individuals right to think as they do and Right individuals to think as they do. ”

    Well, correct me if I’m wrong, but I remember a time when the Right tried to force me into a uniform to go kill Southesat Asians. It was against my (at that time) religion to kill people, but the Right didnt seem too bothered by that.

    I am also seeing an effort by the Right to oppose legalized marijuana in Colorado.

    The Right is not for individual freedom, that seems to be the domain of Libertarians.

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

      McCullough–you have a good start but get hung up when rights are in conflict with one another. Thats why I say “widen your context.” Throw in a few more facts and CONSEQUENCES of adopting one right over the other.

      I’m sure you will see the light.

      • McCullough says:

        One more thing and I’m done, it’s just work you know…that thing that funds gov’t waste.

        So the gay bakery should be FORCED to do business with Westboro. What if they wanted the cake to say God Hates Fags…what then?

        • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

          Well THAT is a different fact pattern. You do know that when the facts change the analysis changes and the answer might be different because the question is different?

          Ha, ha. …… yes, its true.

          Yes….. as with the Swastika, you are raising the issue of “Hate Speech.

          Unintentional or unrecognized bigotry. I still “feel it” in myself…. I was afterall born and raised in USA. But I recognize it when the bile climbs up the back of my throat. I don’t have to “agree” with you to be civil. Celebrating 40 years of marriage is being civil. Hating Fags…. is not being civil.

          See the difference?…………….Its right there.

          ………………………just look.

          Grow….. be a better person.

          • ± says:

            There is no such thing as “hate speech”, just speech and ideas that liberals don’t like.

            You can say any fucked up thing you want. Really. I don’t care except some times I can’t help myself and have to point it out to you in front of others. Other than that, no harm, no foul.

          • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

            Hey PM—-pop quiz: what does bobbo think about Hate Speech?

            I can and do help myself, not a passive victim of vague emotions, and I put that out there for everyone to see.

            Stop kneejerking. Its unseeming.

          • NewFormatSux says:

            No it is not civil to force a Christian to engage in speech in which he disapproves.

        • Tim says:

          “”God Hates Fags

          God loves bobbo. Your argument is invalid.
          ———————–

          …It’s got gay, gay gay, gay, spam, eggs, sausage, gay, cheese, and gay.

          Have you got something with a bit less gay in it?

          Well there is chicken pot pie; It’s got chicken, spam, msg, peas, spam, DU, gay, and crust.

          I don’t wan’t any gay!!

          Try the Iranian Aash-e Aab Leemoo — it’s like psuedo-french cows with all the gay sprayed off with a high pressure hose.

          can i get an extra jellypack with that?

          • Tim says:

            “”can i get an extra jellypack with that?

            What?? It’s great for my nailbeds.

          • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

            I have to opine that if you got crust….. you got too much gay.

            Its all about balance.

  7. McCullough says:

    “So the gay bakery should be FORCED to do business with Westboro.”

    Avoidance of the basic question does not make you look any more intelligent. Now seriously, I need to get to work so you have no interruption in your food-stamp allotment.

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

      There is no such thing as “a gay bakery.” Yes…. I know what you mean….. but its that lazy conflationary lack of thinking that creates the very error you make.

      Actions can be very close to one another and yet very different. How you tease out the relevant factors is a matter of desire and practice….. or you can just chant the dogma.

  8. LibertyLover says:

    I’m not sure which is worse, the fundamental Christians or the radical Left when it comes to shoving their ideals down your throat.

    Two sides of the same coin.

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

      If you were gay, or discriminated against for some other factor you had no choice in, you would know that is not true.

      Sucks to be 12 years old. ((Grow up.))

      • LibertyLover says:

        Lovin’ the worship!

      • The Ad Council says:

        if you are a post-apocalyptic mutant-child with two webbed fingers then keep the blinds shut because no one wants to see that shit.

  9. Marcel says:

    I am hard a core atheist and really dislike almost all religions, also I don’t really have anything against gay rights (or gay people in general) but being brutally honest with myself I am little homophobic (I don’t like to hang out with gays).

    I think the FREEDOM to choose is the main issue here…
    Bakery should not be forced to do business with anyone (or be sued) and any business should be free to refuse the service (notalwaysright dot com)

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

      Yep, thats the Wrong Paul 12 yo libertarian position.

      So…. would you also allow businesses to not serve blacks?

      If not, whats the difference?

      • Marcel says:

        They did not refuse service because the client was gay, they refused to provide service / product client demanded.
        If you had a business and customer had an unreasonable (unreasonable to you) request I think it’s perfectly fine to say “we don’t offer what’re looking for”.

        • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

          Well Marcel==you didn’t answer the question at all. I (don’t) wonder why.

          In the cake ot, what was the unreasonable request?

          Try again.

          • Marcel says:

            I am not defending bakery, they refused service because of their stupid religious prejudice. People that are offended by this should vote with their wallets and not support their business.
            If you check my first post, you will see that what I find unreasonable is for a business to be forced to accept every customer no matter what.
            Example: if I owned a bar and there was unruly customer (being too drunk and picking fights) I would no issue to kick him out

          • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

            Marcel–you are defending the bakery.

            Certainly the offended customers SHOULD have the right to sue and win for unlawful refusal to provide said services based on illegal discrimination.

            Voting with one’s wallet is only an additional remedy.

            Do you really “think” that ejecting an unruly drunk raises anything close to the same issue?

            WORDS HAVE MEANING. Think better….. and when your own brain tells you that you are wrong===>listen to yourself.

            Always amusing when otherwise intelligent people refuse to listen to themselves and accept BS lies.

            Silly Hoomans……. not that I think you aren’t dignified…. don’t ya know.

      • Tim says:

        “”So…. would you also allow businesses to not serve blacks?

        if you’ve got a problem with that then extend it to cops, …, people who archive anatomically correct dolls, … , pedros’ new Zeta little-buddy tax write-off…

        Get’em before they are all picked over people… they are just going to make you quarter them, anyways.

        I want me one of those ones that moves lots of pot instead of one that pulls peoples’ fingernails out — So exciting. It’s like ruffing it in line to get the new iphone.

        times. they are a’changin’

      • a roadragged and haggled traveler that the only thing the last 30 miles was a Denny's so he turned back because he just didn't know says:

        do you serve blacks here?

        Why, of course, sir!

        good {cough cough}. i’d like one freid…

        • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

          With or without crust?

          • Tim says:

            *crust* seems to be composed of something called “proprietary enzymes” — I think it’s probably mostly gay.

          • bobbo, the only true Libertarian posting here who recognizes its a nice concept the precepts of which should not be applied as an absolute unless you are alone on your own little island says:

            Its all Santorum to me.

  10. Marcel says:

    If you put it that way then yes I am defending bakery, you are too politically correct for me…
    If someone wants to sue them, let them, however, I stand by what I said as a free individual I should be free to choose with whom I will do business or not.

    • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

      If you put it that way /// I’m not putting it any way except disagreeing with you. YOU are then recognizing the truth of the error of your position but refuse to change your dogma…. so you blame me instead of growing as a person. Its a very conservative mindset. Not open to new ideas. When did you start dying?

      then yes I am defending bakery, you are too politically correct for me…//// I’ll bet you $10 you can’t define politically correct so that such a statement makes any sense at all. Hmmmm…. well of course you define it as anything you disagree with so let me add in the unstated premise: you can’t find a definition in a dictionary …..

      If someone wants to sue them, let them, however, I stand by what I said as a free individual I should be free to choose with whom I will do business or not. /// Well Marcel==the WHOLE POINT OF MY DISAGREEMENT and your own unrecognized agreement is that YOU SHOULD NOT BE FREE to discriminate against other people.

      That would make you an asshat.

      • Marcel says:

        That bakery is not a government funded public service, they don’t have duty to serve anyone. They do have a licence to sell to the public but not an obligation to do business with whomever.

        Earlier, your have said: “You give up some of your “fundamental rights” when YOU CHOOSE TO GO INTO BUSINESS.”

        I just can not agree with such nonsense. I don’t feel it’s right to sue them for refusing service, but if some want to sue some else that’s their right too. I just wonder who would judge side with.
        Bakery owners are religious dumbasses and if they refused service to me I would sabotage their business by not shopping there anymore and maybe even convincing my friend to do the same but I would not feel a need to sue them.

        Once again I am not going to change my dogma as you put it, I used to run a small business myself (custom made PCs) and no one could ever force me to sell my products to anyone against my will or modify a product in such I way I did not agree with. Some clients were too stupid to handle the computer and I knew they would be too much trouble down the road to be worth the little profit I would make. I lost out on a business opportunity in such case but it my right, the same way as I cannot force anyone to buy from me and no one else. Or prevent me to choose with whom I am going to be friends with or not.

        You seem to be someone who feels to be oppressed for some reason and have a need to fight against “discrimination” or someone who enjoys deep philosophical discussions and have deep set need to prove your point and supremacy.

  11. bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

    I recall a series of articles about 2 years ago about a bunch of Muslim Cab Drivers in Minnesota or Wisconsin who refused to take on passengers who had been drinking or who were with unmarried members of the opposite sex.

    I think the resolution was that in order to keep their license they had to drop that shit.

    Its a whole other layer of complexity==do you want rules to fracture society or to bring it together?

    Not to be politically correct….. seems rather pragmatic to me.

  12. bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

    Just reading elsewhere:

    10 Celebrities That Don’t Support Gay Rights:

    http://viewmixed.com/10-anti-gay-celebrities/1856

    Read what your fellow “libertarians” have to say.

    Fine group of people.

    • Tommy says:

      Using kids puppets to promote the gay lifestyle is just fucking twisted.

    • McCullough says:

      Ronald Reagan’s a Celebrity Libertarian?

      Back away from the beer bong.

      • bobbo, they don't call me Sir Walter Raleigh for nothing says:

        Ha, ha. That was my very point Mc.

        • McCullough says:

          As usual your point is lost on me. If you don’t know what Libertarian means, just say so.

          • bobbo, the only true Libertarian posting here who recognizes its a nice concept the precepts of which should not be applied as an absolute unless you are alone on your own little island says:

            Libertarian: those who argue that discriminating against other people is an exercise of their own personal freedom. You will find them denying:

            1. Blacks seeking food and shelter when engaged in interstate commerce.

            2. Gays wanting to celebrate the sanctity of marriage.

            3. Women wanting full access to healthcare converage.

            4. Handicapped people wanting physical access.

            5. Girls wanting to play sports.

            The list really goes on and on.

            Each and everyone a libertarian ….. in their own mind. NOT recognizing that all rights by necessity are not absolute and must be balanced against all others.

            adding its unnatural, weird, disgusting, and against gods will is only icing on the cake.

            …..or is Wrong Paul living up to his name?

  13. bobbo, the only true Libertarian posting here who recognizes its a nice concept the precepts of which should not be applied as an absolute unless you are alone on your own little island says:

    NewFormatSux says:
    7/10/2014 at 3:29 pm

    No it is not civil to force a Christian to engage in speech in which he disapproves. /// I agree with that as a general proposition in a vacuum. That notion however does not apply to the OP. The Christian is not engaged in speech but rather in decorating a cake. It is not “his” speech, but rather the speech of the customer.

    The Christian gave up any such protestation when he decided to go into business.

    NFS–do you think Muslim cab drivers, say the three that are servicing the airport at midnight all refuse service to you because you are wearing a crucifix. Are you totally fine with waiting 2 hours until another cab can be found?

    And if you are you little Freedom Loving Wombat—what about the rest of us who aren’t?

    Business//// Commerce/////Society—it hangs together, or falls apart.

    • Tim says:

      Ohh, blather on. You’d argue for a law against squirting anal gush out of the pastry bag, as per your first correct solution.

      there is just not no confrict with some people.

  14. Kevin Roa says:

    This is all Presidents Clevelands faults.

  15. Leftist facism needs to be exposed! says:

    Bobbo, think of it this way. Suppose you and your partner

    http://dvorak.org/blog/2009/04/30/caption-this-photo-34/

    were required to serve Rush Limbaugh at the special Olympics?

    After all, you chose to participate in public activity, didn’t that require you lost any right to deny service to those you fundamentally disagree with?

    • bobbo, the only true Libertarian posting here who recognizes its a nice concept the precepts of which should not be applied as an absolute unless you are alone on your own little island says:

      That old chestnut. I was hoping that was the link.

      Alfie, you never change, never grow old, but where is the bible quote and the rant? Just tired I assume?

      You logic is a faulty as ever though.

      Good boy.

  16. dave m brewer says:

    Just make the cake… doesn’t mean you have to make it the way they wanted it to be… HAPPY BIRTHDAY.

    Can’t sue you for that…

  17. Ha Ha says:

    Q: How do you get a gay man to have sex with a woman?
    A: Smear shit in her cunt!

    Then fuck her right in the pussy. 😀

    … Yes, I read Reddit too.

  18. Confucious says:

    Pulling someone down will never help you reach the top

    … UNLESS THEY’RE STANDING ON YOUR FACE!

    Please! Stop with these bullshitty quotations.

    • bobbo, the only true Libertarian posting here who recognizes its a nice concept the precepts of which should not be applied as an absolute unless you are alone on your own little island says:

      I thought the same thing. Better to shoot them dead so they won’t be around to plot revenge.

      ………….but since you raised the issue.

  19. Carlos says:

    Being able to order a cake from the bakery of your choice, with the political slogan of your choice is a hooman right!! Sucks to all you phonohomic haters!

  20. bobbo, the only true Libertarian posting here who recognizes its a nice concept the precepts of which should not be applied as an absolute unless you are alone on your own little island says:

    Marcel says:
    7/10/2014 at 6:03 pm

    That bakery is not a government funded public service, they don’t have duty to serve anyone. /// Its good you know of the difference between gubment actors and private citizen actors. Different rules may apply to the two distinct groups…. unless a law says otherwise, which you continue to ignore.

    They do have a licence to sell to the public but not an obligation to do business with whomever. /// Isn’t the point of this case just exactly the opposite?

    Earlier, your have said: “You give up some of your “fundamental rights” when YOU CHOOSE TO GO INTO BUSINESS.”

    I just can not agree with such nonsense. //// Ding dong==thats the POINT of this case. Rephrase: when you are engaged in business you ARE NOT ALLOWED to discriminate against people for illegal reasons. Why?==>because it disrupts commerce.

    I don’t feel it’s right to sue them for refusing service, but if some want to sue some else that’s their right too. /// You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. Pick one position and be consistent. Wishy washy otherwise.

    I just wonder who would judge side with. /// What issues do you think have not been established?

    Bakery owners are religious dumbasses and if they refused service to me I would sabotage their business by not shopping there anymore and maybe even convincing my friend to do the same but I would not feel a need to sue them. /// Not shopping there would not be sabotaging them, not that such terminology changes anything. I just respect words, what words mean, the thinking that goes with them not to abuse them so. My typing notwithstanding.

    Once again I am not going to change my dogma as you put it, I used to run a small business myself (custom made PCs) and no one could ever force me to sell my products to anyone against my will or modify a product in such I way I did not agree with. Some clients were too stupid to handle the computer and I knew they would be too much trouble down the road to be worth the little profit I would make. I lost out on a business opportunity in such case but it my right, the same way as I cannot force anyone to buy from me and no one else. /// And would you be “right” to not sell your computers or services to gays, blacks, handicapped, wrong religion, ethnics, single people, married people, vegans, sports hunters or whatever other group your attention was drawn to? Can you see where attitudes such as yours would drive our society?? If you don’t want to interact in a civilized manner with people, DON’T GO INTO BUSINESS. Operate a forum instead.

    Or prevent me to choose with whom I am going to be friends with or not. /// Interesting how you sprinkle your analysis with totally irrelevant factors. I suspect you conflate these various issues. Your FEELINGS, with the rigors of fair dealing. Confusing issues of friendship with those of merchantilism all while assuming the moral universality of your own position over others.

    You seem to be someone who feels to be oppressed //// Huh? How am I oppressed? I am arguing in support of those others who are oppressed by your form of infantile libertarianism. But I am a Collossus striding forth upon the land.

    for some reason and have a need to fight against “discrimination” //// well, there is a glimmer of the light at the end of the tunnel. You can verbalize the issue. You just think your rights to be nasty are greater than the rights of others to be left alone, to be free in our society.

    or someone who enjoys deep philosophical discussions /// Actually, for several years now I’ve been searching for shallow philosophical discussions. Not deep enough to dip my toe, just skimming across the surface.

    and have deep set need to prove your point and supremacy. /// Deep set need?……. Imagine my disappointment.

    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    Well Marcel. Not that bad for a libertarian. What you really need is simply to experience the harm yourself instead of always dishing it out.

    Take the NFS challenge: Should society allow the 3 Muslim taxi drivers to refuse service to you at the airport at midnight…. or do they give up their own religious druthers when they choose to become licensed taxi drivers FOR THE PUBLIC?

    It should not be too hard a stretch from that to all other areas of commerce.

    Try it. Should only be uncomfortable the first several dozen times you try to act like a human being.

  21. bobbo, the only true Libertarian posting here who recognizes its a nice concept the precepts of which should not be applied as an absolute unless you are alone on your own little island says:

    I call myself the only true Libertarian and most others including all those posting here, infantile libertarians.

    I often post: FREEEEEEEEEEDOM: leaving other people alone. Another way to phrase that emphasizing a different point is: FREEEEEEEEEOM: being left alone. See the difference? The first is “true” the second is infantile.

    The first makes FREEEEEEEEEDOM an obligation ON YOU to perform, the second makes FREEEEEEEEEOM something you passively receive.

    We think with words, and flower with ideas.

    Its the same word/idea yet different at the same time.

    Ain’t that cool?

  22. NewFormatSux says:

    If you open a business, you work for the government, and must do whatever they say. That is the new fascism of the liberals.

    • bobbo, the only true Libertarian posting here who recognizes its a nice concept the precepts of which should not be applied as an absolute unless you are alone on your own little island says:

      Right you are NFS….. but its not new…… just the way it always is.

  23. JudgeHooker says:

    Why haven’t you guys gotten rid of Bobbo yet?

    • bobbo, the only true Libertarian posting here who recognizes its a nice concept the precepts of which should not be applied as an absolute unless you are alone on your own little island says:

      No one has made a cogent or even expressed argument.

      Yours is?

    • Ah_Yea says:

      Why is Bozo the Troll still here? Because this is a minor blog run mostly by children.

      If there were any adults in charge, eideard and bozo would have been gone long ago.

      Unfortunately the children in charge seem to think having eideard the hate monger and bozo the troll drives up page views. What these children cannot understand is it drives away the adults who have real insight to share.

      It’s mildly amusing every once in a while to check in to see how the peanut gallery is doing, such as I happened to do today. Otherwise, this blog is a waste of time.

      • bobbo, the only true Libertarian posting here who recognizes its a nice concept the precepts of which should not be applied as an absolute unless you are alone on your own little island says:

        Oh No!===We were somewhat friendly the first few months a few years back. Can you remember what I said/the topic that got you so cross wise with me?

        Seems to me you anti-bobbo types are too self centered. THE WHOLE POINT OF A FORUM, is an exchange of viewpoints. That means, some will agree, and some will disagree.

        Why don’t you respond to which ever camp you enjoy and stop trying to control this little part of the universe by your hurt feelings.

        Know what I mean?

    • IM75 says:

      Good question. Where do I vote?

  24. dave m brewer says:

    Just make the cake and put, “I LIKE IT IN THE BUTT HOLE.” on it…

    • bobbo, the only true Libertarian posting here who recognizes its a nice concept the precepts of which should not be applied as an absolute unless you are alone on your own little island says:

      The customers wanted to celebrate their marriage. Why would putting anything other than what they wanted be appropriate?

      Be honest, be direct.

      Do better.

      • NewFormatSux says:

        They wanted the Christian baker to celebrate their marriage. This is really hate speech on the part of the Left.

        • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

          No…they wanted the Baker to decorate their cake.

          Why don’t you deal with religious tenets being forced on you that you don’t agree with?

          The Muslims Taxicab Drivers======>GO!!!

          You are just a typical religious hypocritical bigot otherwise.

  25. Slartibautfaust says:

    Just another case of using religion/SUPERSTITION as justification for hatred and discrimination.

  26. Rottenham says:

    “I’m not sure which is worse, the fundamental Christians or the radical Left when it comes to shoving their ideals down your throat.”

    Man, ain’t that the truth!

    Comments on this post are packed with people who feel entitled to tell others what to think and feel, because of their own superior opinions. [spits on ground]

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

      How many ideas are tied?

  27. No matter how much we try to honor someone’s religious beliefs, sometimes a civilized society must insist that people do the right thing instead of following their superstitions. That is precisely why we no longer allow members of our society to put others to death for the “sin” of adultery with a married woman, as was the Biblical punishment prescribed and followed by early adherents of Judaism, from which Christianity evolved. These days, most of us would recognize that as murder, but it was part of their religion.

    Sometimes doing the right thing means ignoring religion, not following it. If we can insist that people not commit murder in the name of their religion, why shouldn’t we be able to insist that they refrain from harmful discrimination as well? We’ve already proven that we’re willing as a society to incarcerate people for following some of their religion’s worst practices and commandments, so whatever other encroachments on their religious “freedom” that we make is just a matter of degree, not principle.

  28. mfDX says:

    If a baker (or cab company)refuses to serve me based on my race, orientation or political beliefs, I say “fine” and take my business and money to his competitor. And I’ll encourage all who share my views to do the same.

    If a public servant refuses to serve me based on my race, orientation or political beliefs, we all have grounds to rally and remove that person from his post.

    …(me dropping the mic and walking away)

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

      Your personal choices are yours. This OP is actually about the legal/moral issues involved and the legitimacy of other decisions.

      You do speak as if:
      1. You haven’t had a life of such discrimination that varies from harmless to life threatening.

      2. There are other providers conveniently available.

      Why the microphone analogy when you are posting on a forum? Is it anything at all like dropping a deuce and not flushing?

      • mfDX says:

        Wow. You are an ass.
        Do I really need to say that I’m a black anglophone who grew up in seperatist Quebec? Unable to flag cabs after dark? With store owners refusing to serve me in english?
        No. I didn’t need to.
        I simply took my money across the street.

        Yes. My statement was based on the assumption that there are other bakers in Northern Ireland. The news story didn’t allude to this being the only bakery in town. Or that anyone who hopes to make a living must shed their socio-political views.
        That’s why most wedding photographers don’t shoot porn.

      • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist and junior culture critic says:

        mfDX–YOU are the one posting that it is “OK” to discriminate against people. I would go into personalities that do that….as time may permit and only with your permission……….

        The news didn’t allude to there being other bakeries in town either. Its called: revealing ones own assumptions which is what I recited and you agreed with.

        “Or that anyone who hopes to make a living must shed their socio-political views.” //// Oh…but they must. THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS THREAD. ….. and why yes, I did put an edge on my post.

        What does shooting porn have to do with decorating a cake? ///// Such a statement is another duece!!!!!!

        We are in basic agreement on all issues, and you think I am an ass. …….. tick……. tock. Ain’t that a kick?

  29. bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

    Well, reviewing the last few posts, I see a fairly good example of …..

    CONFLATION.

    Conflate Defined: combine (two or more texts, ideas, etc.) into one.

    Its difficult to find any idea expressed without some degree of conflation going on. Its a great sin and leads to really bad thinking.

    mfDX–you did this expressly in your response and in your analysis.

    “If a baker (or cab company)….” //// This thread is about a baker and you conflate this with a cap company. Two very different things. Why did you do this? What confusion will it introduce??

    And then you do it again:

    “refuses to serve me based on my race, orientation or political beliefs, ” /// This thread is about a baker who refuses service based on orientation. You now add race or political beliefs. We now have 6 completely different variations on a theme, only ONE of which is relevant to the OP. The confusion???==If MY POST is about the baker who refuses service based on orientation and you respond in the context of any of the five other circumstance…. then we aren’t really connecting. All 6 instances have some things in common, but they also have many things that are different. Yes, CONFLATION = CONFUSION = COMMUNICATION FAILURE.

    I say “fine” and take my business and money to his competitor. /// If you return…. is it “fine?” And don’t conflate that with “you have no other choice.” Yes, all kinds of conflation available with every word we use.

    And I’ll encourage all who share my views to do the same. /// Do the analysis for all 6 variations. You know that “basically” market forces DON’T WORK. People don’t act in concert to a common goal. Thats why without exception people form gubberments and find that with all its pros and cons, its better than being left to one’s own individual efforts.

    If a public servant refuses to serve me based on my race, orientation or political beliefs, we all have grounds to rally and remove that person from his post. /// Quit BS’s yourself. Typically, gubberment workers DON’T discriminate because the Employer forbids it. A rally?? Please, grow up.

    …(me dropping the mic and walking away) //// Thats what really irritated me….. don’t know why. Acting as if you have the final word when all you have done is shit on the floor. What we need now, is some kind of rally to get it cleaned up.

    I posted without regard to race as THE NON-CONFLATED ISSUE was orientation NOT race. You add race, you got a different issue. See the evil of conflation? I assume you do. Stop it.

    When a cab passes you by, you don’t have a choice. The relevant issues are quite different from cake decoration.

    I am an ass all depending on how you define one. Just like everyone else.

    Know what I mean?

  30. Greg Allen says:

    Gays, like you and me, pay taxes that make businesses possible —

    — for the roads, the sewers, the legal system, the monitary system, the police, the fire, air transport, food inspection, and on and on and on.

    If gays pay the taxes, then some biblically-ignorant Christian businessman doesn’t get to deny them service.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 22199 access attempts in the last 7 days.