Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: An American dialogue


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: An American dialogue Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 1:17:53 PM   
WhoreMods


Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterDrakk

What difference does it make whether or not the ACLU was or was not involved?


If the ACLU were involved then it proves that this is the work of the liberal/socialist conspiracy to destroy America.

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to MasterDrakk)
Profile   Post #: 241
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 1:52:31 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3226
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission is the actual name of the case. Please stop lying.


Congratulations! Now I'm a liar. Hmmm ... you may want to check whether the ACLU had some involvement in the case, like the couple went to them first and were told: "We can't help you until you go the Colorado (whatever)"

But, it's okay. The name-calling takes care of that.

Thank you for your concession.



You've been caught in a deliberate and willful misrepresentation of the truth. The ACLU is not leading the charge on this case, though they certainly have a horse in the race. And at this point, the gay couple involved are simply witnesses and original complainants.

There isn't even room for your statement to be accurate "from a certain point of view".

Do you have an issue with the gay couple seeking out legal representation, or being informed of their legal rights, or what the proper steps of action would be?

The bakery has certainly done so. Should we look into just how this case has been fought by the bakery all the way to the Supreme Court? Should we look at where the money is coming from in support of the bakery?

Do you have a credible link to support the claim that the couple went to the ACLU immediately? And can you show us how they enabled the couple to circumvent Colorado law in any way?

< Message edited by JVoV -- 12/12/2017 2:50:32 PM >

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 242
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 2:11:52 PM   
MasterDrakk


Posts: 321
Status: offline
Rather thought the ACLU might be a rightwing operation like Judicial Watch.

https://www.aclu.org/news/aclu-asks-court-protect-confidentiality-rush-limbaughs-medical-records

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 243
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 2:43:39 PM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
You've been caught in a deliberate and willful misrepresentation of the truth.


I'll accept your apology, now. Two ACLU lawyers listed on the original court filing.





_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 244
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 2:52:08 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3226
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline
And again, I'll ask:

Do you have an issue with the gay couple seeking out legal representation, or being informed of their legal rights, or what the proper steps of action would be?

Because that's all you've proven. In fact, this was a response to legal action by the bakery.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 245
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 2:53:09 PM   
MasterDrakk


Posts: 321
Status: offline
Then how did the well first you got to go to Colorado.....nothingness come about.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 246
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 2:57:10 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3226
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline
That hurt my brain. Try again maybe?

(in reply to MasterDrakk)
Profile   Post #: 247
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 2:59:57 PM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

And again, I'll ask:

Do you have an issue with the gay couple seeking out legal representation, or being informed of their legal rights, or what the proper steps of action would be?

Because that's all you've proven. In fact, this was a response to legal action by the bakery.



That's not the issue, right now. You called me a liar. You've been proven wrong. Do the honorable thing.

I NEVER said they were "leading the charge". I said they were representing the couple.

The couple was, indeed, represented by the ACLU, right? Or, are YOU the fucking dishonorable liar?





_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 248
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 3:02:16 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3226
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

And again, I'll ask:

Do you have an issue with the gay couple seeking out legal representation, or being informed of their legal rights, or what the proper steps of action would be?

Because that's all you've proven. In fact, this was a response to legal action by the bakery.



That's not the issue, right now. You called me a liar. You've been proven wrong. Do the honorable thing.

The couple was, indeed, represented by the ACLU, right? Or, are YOU the fucking dishonorable liar?



Yet the Colorado Civil Rights Commission decided the matter. The ACLU did not.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 249
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 3:03:58 PM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

Yet the Colorado Civil Rights Commission decided the matter. The ACLU did not.


I never claimed the ACLU "decided" anything. You must think they're a court or something?

The ACLU decides NOTHING. They're a bunch of lawyers. They represent people and issues, you dishonorable fucking liar.





_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 250
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 3:06:52 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3226
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline
Therein lays my point. Thanks, Blanche.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 251
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 3:09:36 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3226
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

The gay couple did not pursue a civil suit against the bakery, but took the issue to the State agency that handled this sort of thing. From there, the State took over.



Only if the ACLU is a state agency, now.



Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission is the actual name of the case. Please stop lying.




quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

Yet the Colorado Civil Rights Commission decided the matter. The ACLU did not.


I never claimed the ACLU "decided" anything. You must think they're a court or something?

The ACLU decides NOTHING. They're a bunch of lawyers. They represent people and issues, you dishonorable fucking liar.



Which is it?

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 252
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 3:14:08 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3226
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline
You're demonizing people for seeking legal advice and representation. You've only provided a counter to a legal motion filed by the bakery as evidence to support your claim that the ACLU was consulted first. But big fucking deal if they were, because again, the gay couple has the right to legal counsel.

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 253
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 6:08:26 PM   
Awareness


Posts: 3918
Joined: 9/8/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
Gays have been marginalized, punished, and denied equal rights as promised by our Constitution. And what recent changes in our laws mean is certainly a matter that needs to be discussed openly.
No. That's a simplification of a complex social issue.

The idea that our society is somehow more 'evolved' and enlightened than past eras is a convenient self-deluding fiction. Social codes and mores serve to provide a framework in which masses of people can form a functioning society.

Homosexuality - for centuries - has been inherently transgressive. Societies in which the majority of the population function at close to subsistence levels are, as a consequence, focused upon social codes which keep the society functioning.

In short, societies need babies in order to thrive and prosper - and in ages when infant mortality was high, life was cheap and the shadow of death (from a variety of causes) forever lay over the proletariat, social codes enforced that getting together of men and women to ensure the society grew.

It's only in relatively wealthy societies where infant mortality has improved, there are plenty of people and everyone has the luxury of pursuing their own path to self-actualisation that you find a more permissive attitude toward gay folk.

You can see that even today where the less prosperous societies in today's world are relatively conservative in their view on homosexuality.

The natural instinct of course is for Leftists to lecture them about how primitive they are - ironically demonstrating the primitive nature of their own understanding.

Human psychology has us all in a grip of iron. Social codes are an emergent behaviour of that psychology - and that psychology remains, as ever, malleable and heavily influenced by environment.



_____________________________

Ever notice how fucking annoying most signatures are? - Yes, I do appreciate the irony.

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 254
[Awaiting Approval]
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
[Awaiting Approval]
Profile   Post #: 255
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 6:29:12 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
The Freedom of Speech, and Freedom of Association arguments should be equally dismissed. Public businesses must treat all customers equally. So the choice for them is all or nothing. Don't sell wedding cakes at all if you can't bake them for people of a protected class. Don't professionally photograph weddings at all, if you aren't available for people of all religions, races, and sexual orientations. Don't provide any sort of service for anyone that you cannot, in good faith, do for every customer that comes along.

This argument is interesting, especially in light of:
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
There are two aspects of the baker's job. One is simply to make generic pastries. The other is to custom decorate cakes.
https://youtu.be/SFuDukk_A30
Skip to 6:17 for this guy's opinion on the matter (it's a <2 minute segment that makes an awful lot of sense to me). His argument is that it isn't really a religious liberty issue. He thinks it comes down to "public accommodation" vs. "contracted work for hire." The public accommodation part is the walk-in business. The contracted work for hire is the cake decorating, and he should have the right to decide to accept the work or not.

I work on guitars, on the side, for friends. I wouldn't call it a "business", but word gets around ...
I work on maybe ten guitars a month, mostly, it's simple things, but I just had a guy contact me, wanting me to do some custom work on a guitar. He wants me to strip it, sand it, paint it and re-finish it.
In light of the second quote I re-posted, I started thinking: What if this guy had asked me to paint "Satan is Lord" on his guitar? I'll do his set up, adjust his Floyd Rose, do all the customizing work, but I'm not painting that.
I realize it's a bit of a stretch, but it isn't that far removed from a cake decorator who believes homosexuality is a sin, putting two little men cake toppers on top of a cake. It's that decorator saying/being forced to say: "Same-sex marriage is okay/acceptable/not a sin"
So, neither one of us should be allowed to earn a little extra cash? That seems like a rather extreme punishment for not spouting the party line.
I wonder ... if a Christian couple came to a gay cake decorator and wanted a Leviticus quote (you know which one) put on their cake, should the decorator be forced to do it?
I wouldn't want him forced to do it. I can imagine how hurtful/stressful it would be, asking that decorator to do something that makes their entire inner being scream out in disdain.
I guess that's the difference; one side wants to force their way of life on people with whom they disagree. The other side just wants to not be forced to listen to their inner being scream out in disdain.

In a lot of ways, I agree with you. Especially when it concerns forcing businesses to stock items that go against their beliefs, such as a cake topper in this case or ham for a Kosher deli. That's not who we are as a country, nor who we want to be.
And as you say, there may be artistic elements that in and of themselves go against the cake decorator's beliefs, which can be outright rejected.
But these are all things that can be discussed and negotiated. A couple usually does have ideas about what their cake should look like, and the decorator can then bring them back to reality with what they're willing and able to do.
And that's exactly what did not happen in this case. The couple was just flat out refused service, because of who they are.


Not necessarily true. The baker's side was that he wasn't willing to custom decorate a cake for a gay wedding. If that was his initial position that he isn't willing to budge from (it was, and he wasn't), then where can negotiations go from there?

This guy also doesn't custom decorate celebratory cakes for Halloween or Divorce.

It wasn't that they are homosexuals, exactly. If they had come into his shop and asked for him to custom decorate a cake for a birthday, would he have done it? I'm betting he would have. In the video linked in Michael's post (thanks, Michael for including it), it's pointed out that the baker has no problems selling his basic goods to whomever pays him for them, but the "contract work" (custom decorating) doesn't fall under the idea of "public accommodation."


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 256
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 6:31:22 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
Desi, in the video you posted, they misconstrue the facts of the case rather horribly.
The gay couple did not have the opportunity to describe what sort of cake they wanted, much less get into any design elements. The conversation was over before it began.
The gay couple did not pursue a civil suit against the bakery, but took the issue to the State agency that handled this sort of thing. From there, the State took over.
All of these facts are presented falsely in that video.


The cake was for a gay wedding. That was enough of a description for the baker to not enter into a contract to custom decorate the cake.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 257
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 6:34:06 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr
Reasonably? It is "rape" of a spiritual sort, as I explained.
It's Christians, being forced into participating in what they consider to be a sin at the point of a gun, not unlike forced sodomy.
When you can listen, reasonably, perhaps the nation can start to heal.

I think given today's environment, rape is a word that should not be used lightly, or wrongly.
If any part of baking a cake goes against a person's spiritual beliefs, then that person should not be own a bakery.
If there is a requested design that goes against a person's beliefs, then they should be free to refuse to do that, and then tell the customer what they are willing and able to do. And if the customer is really set on the particular design, then they are free to look for another bakery to do it.
No one has forced the bakery to create and design wedding cakes at all. But Colorado law does require that such services be provided equally to all customers.


Did the couple request a cake celebrating a gay wedding? If so, then there is your "design" that goes against the baker's beliefs.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 258
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 7:07:06 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
Being raped and being asked to bake a cake are the same thing..
wow who knew....

Fuck some of you are so blatantly bullshitting or delusional.

PS I havent the interest to go thru the entire rape fest, but did anyone see the interview with the two guys who asked for the cake?
just askin.



_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 259
RE: An American dialogue - 12/12/2017 7:27:54 PM   
stef


Posts: 10215
Joined: 1/26/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Being raped and being asked to bake a cake are the same thing..
wow who knew....

Members of the cannibal cult have some strange beliefs. You've no right to question those beliefs, but they don't have a problem trying to legislate them down everyone else's throats. The hypocrisy is strong with the followers of the Invisible Sky Wizard.

quote:

Fuck some of you are so blatantly bullshitting or delusional.

Or some "healthy" combination of the two.


_____________________________

Welcome to PoliticSpace! If you came here expecting meaningful BDSM discussions, boy are you in the wrong place.

"Hypocrisy has consequences"

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 260
Page:   <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: An American dialogue Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.063