LOL...you mad? So it isn't about the cake at all. There's no such thing as a "same-sex wedding cake". He refuses to serve these people based on their sexual orientation and THAT'S ILLEGAL.
Supreme Court Seems Ready to Back Web Designer Opposed to Same-Sex Marriage (Article)
- Thread starter Morrison71
- Start date
No - you're wrong. It's a same sex cake if it's sold for a same sex wedding.
If a gay person asked for one of those wedding cakes for a hetero wedding would he have made that? You won't answer because so I will - yes. He would have sold to a gay person.
No - you're wrong and you are a ****ing moron.
I've wasted enough time on your nonsense. You will undoubtedly continue - it's you're right to be a fool.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! And it's a black-couple cake if it's sold for a black wedding ceremony. And it's a Jewish-couple cake if it's sold for a Jewish wedding ceremony. And it's a Muslim-couple cake if it's sold for a Muslim wedding ceremony. Can he refuse to serve every black wedding ceremony? If a black couple walks into his shop and asks for a wedding cake, can your baker say, "No, I don't make cakes for black weddings. It violates my religious beliefs"? Yes or no?
LOL...best post you've made on this thread. You should retire from this discussion. You are clearly far out of your depth.
I think you are too focused on a technicality, but I'll change my wording so I can get your opinion on the important part of the matter.
The question I have is if the current court rules that the website designer can refuse service for a same sex wedding, what would stop her or another vendor from refusing to serve an interracial wedding? Some people still believe there are religious reasons against race mixing. Both types of unions are only legal because of SC decisions.
I think this is an excellent question and I believe the legal reason would be there's not a common religious objection to interracial marriage. And this is the very reason why I think the refusal for religious reasons is bogus at the core.
That’s the big payoff that you were leading up to? That was your “gotcha” moment? I almost feel sad for you.
Let me explain something here, Sport. It was Phillips’ policy not to make custom cakes for same-sex weddings. It doesn’t matter who the buyer was. If the father of one of the betrothed tried to buy a cake for the wedding and the father happened to be a staunchly heterosexual, gun-toting, flag-waving, God-fearing MAGAt, Phillips still ain’t making the cake. Custom-made cakes for same-sex weddings is not a service he provides, no matter who the customer is.
Conversely, if a same-sex couple came into the shop and wanted him to bake a custom birthday cake for their son or daughter, he would gladly do it.
Good grief…you two have to be the dumbest humans on the planet where this is concerned. Of course it is his policy. It is his policy to not make ANY wedding cake for same-sex weddings. THAT’S. THE. WHOLE. DAMN. POINT. Read this carefully and PLEASE try to process it:
REFUSING TO MAKE A PRODUCT FOR A PROTECTED CLASS NASED ON THE CHARACTERISTIC’S OF THAT CLASS IS DISCRIMINATION. PERIOD. END OF STORY. AND IT’S ILLEGAL. AGAINST THE LAW. VERBOTEN.
His claim is that his religious beliefs allow him to discriminate. To break the law. To do that which is illegal. The mere act of baking the cake is a “message”. YOU have been unable to discern ANY message from one single picture of a single cake. That’s because it isn’t about THE CAKE. It’s about the ACT OF BAKING THE CAKE. His religious beliefs supposedly prohibit him from providing anything that would celebrate a same sex marriage. Which means someone could claim their religious beliefs prohibit them from providing whatever they like to ANY protected class. You keep trying to weasel out of that by claiming THOSE beliefs aren’t found in the Bible. Who the hell do you think you are to tell anyone what they can pull out of that book? People have justified all kinds of bullshit based on how they interpret the Bible, dumbass. And YOU AND RILEY are trying to give them a legal justification to act on those beliefs.
Genocide was justified based on the Bible. Slavery was justified based on the Bible. Miscegenation was justified based on the Bible. Jim Crow was justified based on the Bible. Homophobia is being justified based on the Bible…and you and your dumbass buddy have now spent pages saying, “Well, I hate it…but that last one…it’s ok”.
It is a mind-numbingly stupid thing to say. And the sad part is that you might actually believe it.
Last edited:
