Discussion about hot topics trending today

[Coco Pops]

Just a suggestion, but maybe not all things are about money? Maybe sometimes it's the principle of the thing?

What principle is that?

[jelgate]

What motivates you besides money?

[Womble]

What principle is that?

Due process.

If you can force one person to go against their beliefs, you can force everyone to do the same.

[Gatefan1976]

Due process.

If you can force one person to go against their beliefs, you can force everyone to do the same.

And who's beliefs have power here?
Better question, what does belief have to do with Due process?
Due process is an arbitrary system affecting all equally, Belief only affects the believer.

[Gatefan1976]

This sounds a lot like the "Masterpiece Cake Shop" case here, where a gay couple wanted the govt. to force a Christian bakery to make a cake for a gay wedding in defiance of the baker's religious tenets. Our SCOTUS blocked it, too, but on a technicality in that case. I'm sure it will be before the court again at some point.

Bakeries are not religious, you might as well call a mill religious, and flour and eggs are religious.
You think the chicken babies you murdered to get eggs care about what you do with their corpses?
Life begins at conception, right?

How about just going to a bakery that wants to make the cake in the first place? Everybody wins.

How about, business is about making money, and all business wants to make money.

People just don't think these things through. Suppose the decision goes the other way, and the govt. forces the bakery to make the cake in spite of the shopowner's objections, which was the goal here.

Actually, in this specific case, you are right with your tinfoil hat. The complainant was actually LOOKING for a fight.

Does someone now have the right to walk into a Jewish-owned bakery and demand that he make a cake with a Nazi swastika on it that says "Heil Hitler" ? The legal theory would be the same; the govt. forcing a businessowner to make a product which offends him.

To a degree, yes it does because it is the role of the government to represent all.
If someone walked into a bakery demanding a MAGA cake, can the owner refuse?
Nope.
Businesses are not political organs.

[Annoyed]

To a degree, yes it does because it is the role of the government to represent all.
If someone walked into a bakery demanding a MAGA cake, can the owner refuse?
Nope.
Businesses are not political organs.

Err... Yes.

Judge rules bar was allowed to kick out Trump supporter

A Manhattan judge on Wednesday threw out a case alleging that a New York City bar illegally discriminated against a customer who wore a "Make America Great Again" hat.

Manhattan Supreme Court Justice David Cohen ruled that the law doesn’t protect people from political discrimination, meaning the West Village bar did not overstep its bounds in kicking out the customer, The New York Post reported.

I guess it depends upon who is being denied service, doesn't it?

It is well established that bars and restaurants can pick and chose whom they admit or serve. This clearly establishes that businesses can indeed choose whom they serve. But of course, in your eyes, that depends on whom is being allowed or denied.

[Annoyed]

And who's beliefs have power here?
Better question, what does belief have to do with Due process?
Due process is an arbitrary system affecting all equally, Belief only affects the believer.

Aren't you really asking whose rights are more important here?

This has always been my chief objection to the whole cake thing; people want to elevate the rights of the gay couple over those of the business owner. And that is wrong. Equal rights under the law and all that rot.

[Gatefan1976]

Aren't you really asking whose rights are more important here?

No, that's not what I am saying.

[SoulReaver]

Judge rules bar was allowed to kick out Trump supporter

that bar's a private entity isn't it? and it's not like they have a coercive monopoly on a vital service they provide is it?
so they can decide who enters their private property

[Annoyed]

that bar's a private entity isn't it? and it's not like they have a coercive monopoly on a vital service they provide is it?
so they can decide who enters their private property

That's my point exactly. A bakery, bar, or any other privately owned business can decide whom they wish to server and whom they don't. Why should there be special exemptions for one group or another?

[jelgate]

Agreed. Which is why at Jelgate's House of Bacon we refuse service to anyone over 55

[Annoyed]

Agreed. Which is why at Jelgate's House of Bacon we refuse service to anyone over 55

C'mon now, admit it. You just can't find anyone over the age of maturity who would want to eat there.

[Gatefan1976]

that bar's a private entity isn't it? and it's not like they have a coercive monopoly on a vital service they provide is it?
so they can decide who enters their private property

That's my point exactly. A bakery, bar, or any other privately owned business can decide whom they wish to server and whom they don't. Why should there be special exemptions for one group or another?

Philadelphia accountant Greg Piatek had said he went to the bar in January 2017, shortly after Trump entered office, and was told to leave after he complained about the staff’s service.

The bar's lawyer pointed out in court that only religious beliefs, not political ones, were protected under state and local discrimination laws.

[Ian-S]

So here this happened and they won their case

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-45789759

500,000 pounds spent on a 36 pound cake

All so that they could prove a point. What a waste why couldn't they just hand the customer one of those pipinng things and let them write on the cake? Problem solved.

A pair of donkey's rear ends.

Actually the ones doing the suing to prove a point was the gay couple, not the shop owners, they were just defending themselves.

So you could say the ones being donkeys rear ends were the ones who decided to sue they shop for discrimination instead of walking down the high street to the next cake shop and getting it made there, and thank **** the Supreme Court had the common sense to come to the conclusion they did, unlike the lower courts who seemed to be more interested in public opinion than they were anything else.

This will probably go to the European Court of Human Rights next, all because a person cannot accept no as an answer to a question.

I mean, the first thing they teach kids in school nowdays is nobody can tell you what to think, do or say, yet, here's another case of someone not likening the answer they get and suing to change it, how very liberal of them.

[Coco Pops]

Actually the ones doing the suing to prove a point was the gay couple, not the shop owners, they were just defending themselves.

So you could say the ones being donkeys rear ends were the ones who decided to sue they shop for discrimination instead of walking down the high street to the next cake shop and getting it made there, and thank **** the Supreme Court had the common sense to come to the conclusion they did, unlike the lower courts who seemed to be more interested in public opinion than they were anything else.

This will probably go to the European Court of Human Rights next, all because a person cannot accept no as an answer to a question.

I mean, the first thing they teach kids in school nowdays is nobody can tell you what to think, do or say, yet, here's another case of someone not likening the answer they get and suing to change it, how very liberal of them.

Oh still if it was the couple suing to make a point what a huge waste of money and the couple in question are also a donkey's rear end for not moving on