gay marriage: Do Cakes And Floral Arrangements Raise First Amendment Issues?

[Guest123018-4]

How many of you drink at gay bars?

I mean, how many of you that do not consider yourselves gay, go to gay bars to drink?

What this sounds like to me is a great opportunity for gays, or those that exploit gays, to open a bakery that caters to gay marriage and such. They could make a killing.

I have an interesting story about being discriminated against at a gay bar. In a nutshell, they would not let me in because I was straight. Well that and the cousin of the girl I was with got a little homophobic when he found out that it was a gay par. His date suggested the place for drinks and dancing. Seems they did not allow or welcome straight dates at the club. Shit, that was in the 70's. Damn it does not seem so long ago......

[WTF]

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

What we have now is not the government that was set forth but a corruption of the government it was intended to be, small and extremely limited.

If we cut out all of the government but the Defense Industry portion.....It would still be way larger than our Founders intended it to be.

Yet there are nuts posting here who call for a bigger and more expensive military.

We all seem to pick and choose which portion of the government is good. That usually entails the portion that benefits that particular person/group.




.

[Rey Lengua]

Originally Posted by Trey

Yeah fake god creates lots of issues of importance. Like cake baking and flowers for homos. If you bake that cake god is gonna get you.

Since YOU lying liberals think we should bend over to all the muzzies ( thanks to YOUR hero odummer's love for them and promotion of them as " peaceful " ) , do the muzzies get a pass on baking cakes for YOU homos ? They too worship a " God " in their religion. Mebbe the muzzies would just take YOU peter puffers up to some high roof and give YOU all flying lessons for blaspheming their religion and God ! But, since they are muzzies, they get a pass from YOU lying liberals.

[Guest123018-4]

The only military authorized by the Constitution to, or should I say required, is a navy.
The res t was limited to no more than a 2 year funding because the founders knew how expensive it was to maintain a standing army.
This was one of the reason that the 2nd amendment exists so that the citizens could bring their weapons to the defense of our nation until an army could be mustered.
The people are the militia.

But, we are not talking about the military here, we are talking about an overreaching government that is poised to determine if an individual can refuse to do business with somebody for an event that their religious convictions do not approve. The overreach of the government is what is the real issue and the erosion of our individual rights.

[dilbert firestorm]

here's a flip side of the argument. gay baker throws out christian abolitionist out of bakery.

https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2017/1...hem-out-video/

https://www.redstate.com/brandon_mor...hristian-rant/

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by grean

This is NOT a 1st ammendment against 1st ammendment issue.

Racial discrimination in restaurants was was rightly ended in 1964 albeit by allowing an over reaching use of the commerce clause. Just because it needed to be banned doesn't mean the way it was banned was correct.

are you talking about the case known as "hearts of atlanta" vs U.S.?

[WTF]

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

The only military authorized by the Constitution to, or should I say required, is a navy.
The res t was limited to no more than a 2 year funding because the founders knew how expensive it was to maintain a standing army.
This was one of the reason that the 2nd amendment exists so that the citizens could bring their weapons to the defense of our nation until an army could be mustered.
The people are the militia.

But, we are not talking about the military here, we are talking about an overreaching government that is poised to determine if an individual can refuse to do business with somebody for an event that their religious convictions do not approve. The overreach of the government is what is the real issue and the erosion of our individual rights.

You do not give a shit that the overreach in military spending has cost Trillions in debt and countless lives .....but you think making a dumbass cake decorator sell cakes to everyone is overreach.>

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

here's a flip side of the argument. gay baker throws out christian abolitionist out of bakery.

https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2017/1...hem-out-video/

https://www.redstate.com/brandon_mor...hristian-rant/

if a gay baker can refuse service to a christian, why can't a hetro baker refuse service to gays.

[Guest123018-4]

That is not what I said or what I think. The military budget and what is spent there is not the topic of this thread. If you want to discuss the bloated military budget start a thread about that. Try to stay on topic.

[JosieJames]

I'm just curious if a Muslim business can refuse to serve women who are not wearing burkas. Or deny service to some guy gnawing on a big tasty slab of bacon. Or gays, they don't like gays either.

But here's a secret you may not like, no matter how hard you try to deny there are gay people in this world they always have and always will be there.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

That is not what I said or what I think. The military budget and what is spent there is not the topic of this thread. If you want to discuss the bloated military budget start a thread about that. Try to stay on topic.