What is a "religion"? I could make up a religion with any belief system I want. Is my religion on equal footing, constitutional wise, with Christianity? Who decides?
If my religion teaches that gays must be killed, shouldn't it be "disfavored."
Anyone have an update on the gay wedding cake case at the Supreme Court?
- Thread starter BrianNole09
- Start date
What is a "religion"? I could make up a religion with any belief system I want. Is my religion on equal footing, constitutional wise, with Christianity? Who decides?
If my religion teaches that gays must be killed, shouldn't it be "disfavored."
If the print shop sells printing-related products (eg, printers and ink cartridges and whatnot) to the general public in addition to offering cusomized sign services then it is a retail store and therefore a business of public accomodation. And by the standard you outlined, all services offered as part of the business must be provided for all customers who request them.
So log off of HROT and get busy making my “ABORTION IS MURDER!” signs.
You absolutely can make up any religion you want and it would be on equal footing in the eyes of the EEOC, at least, as long as your religious belief is "sincerely held."
However, the limits of the accommodations you're entitled to as an employee under the Civil Rights Act are (1) your accommodation request must be reasonable and (2) it can't be an undue hardship on the employer.
The employer also has to have at least 15 employees before being subjected to these regulations.
In terms of public accommodation, there needs to be similar limits, else we have chaos.
That's not a "gay cake" at all. That's exactly what I was referring to in your attempt to equate it to a hotel. There is no "gay honeymoon suite." There's just a honeymoon suite.
If the cake bigot doesn't want to bake cakes based on his prejudices, then, personally, I'd prefer that the public simply ostracize his obvious bigotry. You really can't legislate morality. However, if he is has applied for a public business license, then he must be checking his prejudices at the door for a multitude of indiscretions that don't meet to his prejudiced ideology.
So, you can't pick-and-choose your prejudices if you're going to have a public business.
The farther I feel from Brian, the closer I feel to Jesus.
This case would have been so much more bitchin' if it were a Muslim wedding cake shop. None of nine justices would have know who to screw. That would have been like -
You should make that your signature! LOL
I literally busted-out laughing!
Organized religion is ALWAYS on the wrong side of history when it comes to social prejudices. The church quoted Scripture to defend slavery, to defend segregation, to defend keeping women as 2nd-class citizens, and even to maintain the Divine Right of Kings and prevent the Magna Carta from being an accepted standard. The church wants everything to stay exactly as the same so they maintain their control and keep getting that financial reward.
You should study Jesus more...because you certainly don't know much about Him
(It's OK...neither do the other liberal HROT atheists that misunderstand Him.)
THERE we go. It only took 4 pages for the true reason for this to come out. I will give you credit for being honest, unlike your brethren. Let Playboy sexuality PhD author Debra Soh, and her Pulitzer Prize winning editor, Scientific American author/editor Gareth Cook explain...
https://www.scientificamerican.com/...l-evidence-for-the-genetics-of-homosexuality/
Jesus just told me you're too judge-y. We're praying for you, though.You should study Jesus more...because you certainly don't know much about Him
(It's OK...neither do the other liberal HROT atheists that misunderstand Him.)
So, the devoutly religious can't own businesses?
That's preposterous, and totally unconstitutional.
You were on the right track when you started talking about letting the public deal with it. That's freedom and liberty. Keep the government out of it.
You are soooooooo full of ****, Menace.
You and your liberal friends just want to bully anyone that disagrees with you.
Debra Soh, LOL.
Thanks for the laughs.
Research the twin studies on homosexuality. There has never been a "gay gene" shown. It's controversial.
Again, you don't know anything about Jesus. You're simply uneducated and proud, Rudolph.
Jesus be like "Brian be projecting like a mug but I still luzz me some Brian."
And if business owners are required to "hang their religious beliefs at the door" then the employees should have to do that as well, don't you think?
We have all sorts of people who can't work on their Sabbath. This creates an issue in trying to ensure our patients are cared for. I'd like to be able to say that the patients are more important than our employees' religious beliefs, but we can't do that.
Why not?
Because religious discrimination is unlawful in this country, and that's what the state of Colorado engaged in here.
We have all sorts of people who can't work on their Sabbath. This creates an issue in trying to ensure our patients are cared for. I'd like to be able to say that the patients are more important than our employees' religious beliefs, but we can't do that.
Why not?
Because religious discrimination is unlawful in this country, and that's what the state of Colorado engaged in here.
Clearly you didn't read it in those few seconds. Shame you are so closed minded to science. I mean science is not as reliable as a book thousands of years old, written by humans hundreds or thousands of years after the actual events, but oh well. *shrug*
The "church" initiated and organized the abolitionist movement. MLK and the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s was "church" based. It really depends on the quality of the people leading the church. The church has not always been on the wrong side of history.
BrianNole already outed your argument here. Time to give it up. You can end the discrimination card here. You want the freedom to hate gays and discriminate against them. Shame you just can't be as honest.
I already know that homosexuality has not been proven genetic.
Again, you have an agenda. You try to bully those that don't agree with you.
You hate freedom...
Sure they can own businesses! They just have to keep the prejudiced aspects of their religious mythologies away from the codified laws of how business is conducted.
You refuse to read anything that counters your agenda and I hate freedom. LOL. You are still a child in a cult, boy.
Lame.
I don't want the freedom because I don't hate gays.
We're talking about the devout. I'm not devout, but their rights are as important, if not more, than the rights of gays.
How do you find a balance, here? The answer can't be for the religious to "hang their faith at the door" before going to work.
I read it.
Have you read the twins study which refute your agenda?
Eight major studies of identical twins in Australia, the U.S., and Scandinavia during the last two decades all arrive at the same conclusion: gays were not born that way.
“At best genetics is a minor factor,” says Dr. Neil Whitehead, PhD. Whitehead worked for the New Zealand government as a scientific researcher for 24 years, then spent four years working for the United Nations and International Atomic Energy Agency. Most recently, he serves as a consultant to Japanese universities about the effects of radiation exposure. His PhD is in biochemistry and statistics.
Identical twins have the same genes or DNA. They are nurtured in equal prenatal conditions. If homosexuality is caused by genetics or prenatal conditions and one twin is gay, the co-twin should also be gay.
“Because they have identical DNA, it ought to be 100%,” Dr. Whitehead notes. But the studies reveal something else. “If an identical twin has same-sex attraction the chances the co-twin has it are only about 11% for men and 14% for women.”
Because identical twins are always genetically identical, homosexuality cannot be genetically dictated. “No-one is born gay,” he notes. “The predominant things that create homosexuality in one identical twin and not in the other have to be post-birth factors.”
The predominant things that create homosexuality in one identical twin and not in the other have to be post-birth factors. Dr. Whitehead believes same-sex attraction (SSA) is caused by “non-shared factors,” things happening to one twin but not the other, or a personal response to an event by one of the twins and not the other.
For example, one twin might have exposure to pornography or sexual abuse, but not the other. One twin may interpret and respond to their family or classroom environment differently than the other. “These individual and idiosyncratic responses to random events and to common environmental factors predominate,” he says. The first very large, reliable study of identical twins was conducted in Australia in 1991, followed by a large U.S. study about 1997. Then Australia and the U.S. conducted more twin studies in 2000, followed by several studies in Scandinavia, according to Dr. Whitehead.
“Twin registers are the foundation of modern twin studies. They are now very large, and exist in many countries. A gigantic European twin register with a projected 600,000 members is being organized, but one of the largest in use is in Australia, with more than 25,000 twins on the books.”
A significant twin study among adolescents shows an even weaker genetic correlation. In 2002 Bearman and Brueckner studied tens of thousands of adolescent students in the U.S. The same-sex attraction concordance between identical twins was only 7.7% for males and 5.3% for females—lower than the 11% and 14% in the Australian study by Bailey et al conducted in 2000.
In the identical twin studies, Dr. Whitehead has been struck by how fluid and changeable sexual identity can be.
“Neutral academic surveys show there is substantial change. About half of the homosexual/bisexual population (in a non-therapeutic environment) moves towards heterosexuality over a lifetime. About 3% of the present heterosexual population once firmly believed themselves to be homosexual or bisexual.”
“Sexual orientation is not set in concrete,” he notes.
Most changes in sexual orientation are towards exclusive heterosexuality.
Even more remarkable, most of the changes occur without counseling or therapy. “These changes are not therapeutically induced, but happen ‘naturally’ in life, some very quickly,” Dr. Whitehead observes. “Most changes in sexual orientation are towards exclusive heterosexuality.” Numbers of people who have changed towards exclusive heterosexuality are greater than current numbers of bisexuals and homosexuals combined. In other words, ex-gays outnumber actual gays.
The fluidity is even more pronounced among adolescents, as Bearman and Brueckner’s study demonstrated. “They found that from 16 to 17-years-old, if a person had a romantic attraction to the same sex, almost all had switched one year later.”
“The authors were pro-gay and they commented that the only stability was among the heterosexuals, who stayed the same year after year. Adolescents are a special case—generally changing their attractions from year to year.”
Still, many misconceptions persist in the popular culture. Namely, that homosexuality is genetic – so hard-wired into one’s identity that it can’t be changed. “The academics who work in the field are not happy with the portrayals by the media on the subject,” Dr. Whitehead notes. “But they prefer to stick with their academic research and not get involved in the activist side.”
You should follow your own advice and not comment on things you don't understand. Go Google.
For the record, I firmly believe homosexuals are born that way. But c’mon, man, don’t be quoting Canadians to make your point.
Yep. Thank you for admitting that people who want to hide behind their religion, are welcome to discriminate against people born a certain way. A religion whose savior never uttered one word against homosexuality. Weird, huh?
You skipped the Google . Your definition of a business of public accommodation is wrong.
We're talking about the Constitution.
Freedom of religion is explicitly cited as a constitutional right.
Sex discrimination is only regulated under law; it's not an enumerated right under the constitution.
Except now there is increasing evidence that a lot of what assumed about identical twins in DNA studies is wrong...
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/identical-twins-genes-are-not-identical/
My point remains: it has not been scientifically proven that all homosexuals were born that way. Your original claim was false.
Regardless, even if they were all born gay, that doesn't mean everyone should be forced to accept homosexual acts as good or normal.
Don't forget, 1 out of 6 gay men is HIV positive.
1 out of 2 for gay men of color.
Tell that to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Retail stores are specifically mentioned in their website.
https://www.eeoc.gov/facts/adaqa2.html
And, they were also on every "wrong side" that I mentioned.
And, I should clarify; The "church" is always experiencing "awakenings." As it evolves, it can find itself on the side that advances humanity being kind. OR... you can have the people defending prejudice.
True. And we need federal laws on the books to protect gays/lesbians. But law is law, and we need laws to protect from some people's "religion".
And the "test" is if the religious belief is infringing upon the rights of others.
Refusing to bake a gay cake in Denver isn't infringing upon anyone's rights. There are lots of places to buy a cake in Denver.
No matter how much evidence piles up against you, you will never change your mind. That's an ideologue. Your HIV statistics are trying to prove what? Is that an anti-gay argument or white supremacy argument? Are you going to claim women should have less rights because they have higher rates of chlamydia? I am assuming you aren't, and you are just making an irrelevant point.
No, that is asinine because this isn't just about Denver. This is the Supreme Court of the United States. If this place in Denver is allowed to, what about a place in a podunk town with one baker within a 100 miles. I'm convinced that you are smarter than this and intentionally dancing around the issue.
Similar threads
