Favorite War Room poster

[Deleted member 159002]

People should not be forced to contribute to a celebration for something they find morally wrong.

 

[Bald1]

People should not be forced to contribute to a celebration that they think is a morally wrong thing to celebrate.

On first glance I can agree with this statement, but how about that Muslim cashier who refuses to ring up cigarettes and booze for a coming out party?

Many people object to many things for many reasons. Some of those reasons are outright ridiculous, arbitrary and random. Where do we draw the line?

 

[ucunc156]

It's much more difficult to know if this is someone's second marriage, but I can imagine some Christians not wanting to participate in that. That's irrelevant to the analogy of the black caterer.

Do you think it's right for a black caterer to reject a racist who wants to have his white nationalist dinner catered?

It's very easy to list a box to check if its your first marriage. Doesn't break any laws either (to my knowledge). Its definitely not irrelevant since the basis of not participating in a gay marriage ceremony on the fact that its against christian beliefs, is the same as that of not participating in a second marriage ceremony. Oddly enough, thats never protested though, probably because its a large enough group of the population where your business would be effected.

As I said earlier, a secular marriage isn't anti Christian. I would be fine with a christian caterer refusing to cater a satanist ceremony as its directly an anti Christian thing. Believe it or not, there's a lot of Christians that struggle with the fact they are gay. A black caterer rejecting a cake for a racist's marriage is totally different than rejecting catering for a white power dinner. Things don't have to be as black and white as you claim with the whole either "you reject both or you accept both otherwise its mental gymnastics".

 

[ucunc156]

On first glance I can agree with this statement, but how about that Muslim cashier who refuses to ring up cigarettes and booze for a coming out party?

Many people object to many things for many reasons. Some of those reasons are outright ridiculous, arbitrary and random. Where do we draw the line?

exactly. Thats my issue. See the second marriage point. Its people picking and choosing what rules they want to follow in order to discriminate against others. You aren't the church, the rules of church and state separation shouldn't apply. Again, this is a different story if hate speech is involved and your being antagonized to put two dicks iced onto a cake or a pentagram symbol, or a nazi sign if your a jewish baker.

 

[dontsnitch]

It's very easy to list a box to check if its your first marriage. Doesn't break any laws either (to my knowledge). Its definitely not irrelevant since the basis of not participating in a gay marriage ceremony on the fact that its against christian beliefs, is the same as that of not participating in a second marriage ceremony. Oddly enough, thats never protested though, probably because its a large enough group of the population where your business would be effected.

As I said earlier, a secular marriage isn't anti Christian. I would be fine with a christian caterer refusing to cater a satanist ceremony as its directly an anti Christian thing. Believe it or not, there's a lot of Christians that struggle with the fact they are gay. A black caterer rejecting a cake for a racist's marriage is totally different than rejecting catering for a white power dinner. Things don't have to be as black and white as you claim with the whole either "you reject both or you accept both otherwise its mental gymnastics".

You don't have to do anything, but you're not being consistent. You're trying to create a distinction when there isn't one.

 

[Bald1]

exactly. Thats my issue. See the second marriage point. Its people picking and choosing what rules they want to follow in order to discriminate against others. You aren't the church, the rules of church and state separation shouldn't apply. Again, this is a different story if hate speech is involved and your being antagonized to put two dicks iced onto a cake or a pentagram symbol, or a nazi sign if your a jewish baker.

Allright. Promoting hate and violence are a good starting point, I agree.

Some people think SSM is unnatural, will lead to the end of civilization, and is immoral. Now cake making has become the flip side of the "legislating morality" coin. Can we really tell people to go against their beliefs, or is this becoming a "for the greater good" type of argument? Which rights trump which?

 

[Islam Imamate]

So I'm not entirely sure of the laws, but isn't hate speech not protected? That would be the reasoning why something like a nazi sign couldn't be put on a cake. I would lol if it was a hindu family asking for it though.

I'm almost positive the US does not have laws against hate speech. Canada and France do but not the good ole US of A.

 

[ucunc156]

I'm almost positive the US does not have laws against hate speech. Canada and France do but not the good ole US of A.

It seems like its a gray area:

To be sure, there are some kinds of speech that are unprotected by the First Amendment. But those narrow exceptions have nothing to do with “hate speech” in any conventionally used sense of the term. For instance, there is an exception for “fighting words” — face-to-face personal insults addressed to a specific person, of the sort that are likely to start an immediate fight. But this exception isn’t limited to racial or religious insults, nor does it cover all racially or religiously offensive statements.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...hate-speech-exception-to-the-first-amendment/

So a nazi sign, or even asking for a nazi sign at a jewish bakery could definitely be deemed fighting words and a face to face insult to provoke a fight. Likewise asking for 2 dicks to be iced onto a cake at a christian bakery could be a face to face insult to provoke a fight, ie "fighting words"

 

[Deleted member 159002]

On first glance I can agree with this statement, but how about that Muslim cashier who refuses to ring up cigarettes and booze for a coming out party?

Many people object to many things for many reasons. Some of those reasons are outright ridiculous, arbitrary and random. Where do we draw the line?

Let him refuse to cell cigs and beer.

Btw I like the outrage at Southwest. I *hope* Muslims boycott the airline business.

 

[Arkain2K]

@sodapopinski 's posting game has been on fire of late! Our Brexit discussions version 1 to 3 would not be as interesting as they are without his daily contributions, that's for sure!

His never-ending memes can be overwhelming at times, primarily because he doesn't exactly keep track of which one he has already posted before, but the tweets that he shares are generally on point and relevant to the latest discussion arc.

 

[Greoric]

@sodapopinski 's posting game has been on fire of late! Our Brexit discussions version 1 to 3 would not be as interesting as they are without his daily contributions, that's for sure!

His never-ending memes can be overwhelming at times, primarily because he doesn't exactly keep track of which one he has already posted before, but the tweets that he shares are generally on point and relevant to the latest discussion arc.

Seconded. Best comedic value on here...

 

[wcisdoomed]

Many people object to many things for many reasons. Some of those reasons are outright ridiculous, arbitrary and random. Where do we draw the line?

Don't draw the line nowhere. Nobody has a right to be served by a private business.

 

[Thurisaz]

Many people object to many things for many reasons. Some of those reasons are outright ridiculous, arbitrary and random. Where do we draw the line?

How's about letting people decide for themselves what to do with their property?

 

[Bald1]

How's about letting people decide for themselves what to do with their property?

Don't draw the line nowhere. Nobody has a right to be served by a private business.

Businesses should have the right to refuse service. That post, which both of you conveniently separated, was about an employee. There was a story over a year ago of a Muslim cashier (employee) refusing to ring in booze.

If you're going make a point, try to be sincere with your efforts.

 

[Thurisaz]

Businesses should have the right to refuse service. That post, which both of you conveniently separated, was about an employee. There was a story over a year ago of a Muslim cashier (employee) refusing to ring in booze.

I wasn't aware that you were talking about an employee. An employee obviously doesn't own what he is selling and so has no say in the matter. If he doesn't want to do what he's paid to do, it's time to find another job.

If you're going make a point, try to be sincere with your efforts.

I am.

 

[Bald1]

I wasn't aware that you were talking about an employee. An employee obviously doesn't own what he is selling and so has no say in the matter. If he doesn't want to do what he's paid to do, it's time to find another job.


I am.

Yeah, I looked at my original post and I wasn't clear.

 

[Devout Pessimist]

Sadly, that is the story of my life.

 

[wcisdoomed]

Businesses should have the right to refuse service. That post, which both of you conveniently separated, was about an employee. There was a story over a year ago of a Muslim cashier (employee) refusing to ring in booze.

If you're going make a point, try to be sincere with your efforts.

Missed the part about it being an employee. Sorry my oversight hurt your feelings.

If an employee is acting like a dick, his employer can fix it, unless the employer agrees of course.