Originally Posted by Kodiakisland
Originally Posted by Bristoe
Originally Posted by JMR40
The bakers sound like hypocrites to me who got what they deserved.


So people should be forced by the government to do business with people that they don't want to do business with?


The government did not force them to open a public, for profit business. If you decide to open a public, for profit business, there are hundreds of laws you are required to adhere to. Whether you agree with it or not, you know that going into it. It was their choice to break one of those rules and now they want to bitch about the consequences.


.Gov is forcing a person to violate their religious beliefs in order to stay in business. Being in business goes to the core of our liberties protected by the Constitution. Forcing a Christian or muslim to participate in an event that violates their religious beliefs under penalty of law isn't constitutional. The free exercise of religion obviously includes choosing to not participate in events you find religiously objectionable. It is no different than a Christian couple suing to force an Orthodox Jewish caterer to make pork tenderloin with oyster dressing. Not all Jewish caterers hold this belief, yet no one would ever consider doing that. How is forcing a fundamentalist Christian to participate in a a gay wedding any different from forcing an ordained minister with the same beliefs to officiate one?

The actions of the baker are not discriminatory because it is the EVENT they can't support. They didn't deny service to the couple because they were gay. In fact, they were more than willing to sell them anything they baked , except for the one thing which would violate their religious beliefs. You want a birthday cake? No problem. It's a selective denial of service.


"And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."

[Linked Image]