I only follow the patriarchal aspects of Islam. Not the aspects that make you a cuck e.g. Abstaining from womanising, penetrating a sweet trap virgin ass and lowering your gaze.
The muslims make it with inferior rose water destroying plants and water in the process. We CHADs make it with the healthy and sweet honey, helping the bees and giving people necessary antioxidants
You mean to tell me that, in the city of Denver, which hasn't had a non-Democrat mayor since 1963, where half of the population is non-religious, the very first bakery they walked into just happened to object to gay marriage on religious grounds?
A fat white man with a beer gut demanding an Islamic halal bakery make him a Brandy infused cake with vanilla and bacon glaze under threat of lawsuit. yeehaw
Because they're going to him for attention and profit.
Even the first time, they were shopping around trying to find a bakery that would refuse.
You get paid when you're brought onto talk shows or interviewed, plus whatever patreon/gofundme dollars you can scam out of the woke for "legal costs" that won't get refunded.
Even the first time, they were shopping around trying to find a bakery that would refuse.
Is this true? Source? I'm not saying that I don't believe you -- I just didn't know that and my google-fu isn't strong enough to turn anything up, apparently.
Nope, there was a case of bakeries previously refusing to bake a cake that had a graphic of two men together when a red cross over them and a Bible passage. Apparently this example was the one the Supreme Court used to show that the Colorado Comission was discriminating against religion since they found nothing wrong with people denying anti- gay marriage cakes
IIRC the way this originally played out is some political activists went through a phone book fishing for businesses that would refuse to do business with gay people. Once they found one that bit they tried to sue it out of business.
I guess that since it didn't work the first time, it's time for round two.
I've fucked enough women and men to be somewhat of an expert on what is and isn't gay. Fucking a "woman" with a dick is like fucking a long haired twink with fake tits.
Sure. Who isn't? It doesn't matter though. The fun thing about identity politics is that you can put yourself into any number of groups to claim privilege/oppression. For example, I'm melungeon. I look white, but I am directly descended from escaped slaves, Cherokee Indians and European settlers. Despite being perceived as white, I have a legitimate claim on calling myself a BIPOC (doubly so since I'm also indigenous). On top of all of that I fall under the LGBT umbrella. If anyone actually believed that the bullshit idea of having this heritage arbitrarily somehow makes me more knowledgeable about the world because I'm looking at it from more than one viewpoint, or that my views should for some reason be taken more seriously because of it, then it totally shuts down anyone taking the left identitarian viewpoint who would otherwise tell me that I'm wrong. After all, I know more about it than most of them do, and am more qualified to speak on the issue because of it. Of course, that's all bullshit, as is the rest of the philosophies built around this stupid idea.
The fact of the matter is that there is competition between people, and there will always be people who are trying to benefit off of your loss, regardless of what groups you decide to claim membership in. Everyone is persecuted. Everyone is victimized.
what a weird coincidence, right? The same day he wins a pivotal court case against the Colorado Human Rights Commission, a degenerate tranny walks into his shop wanting a cake from him. Small world.
Phillips' shop refused to make a cake last year that was blue on the outside and pink on the inside after Scardina revealed she wanted it to celebrate her transition from male to female. She asked for the cake on the same day the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would consider Phillips' appeal of the previous commission ruling against him.
I remember being a woketard in the early 2000's when everyone was pushing for gay marriage. I remember laughing along with John Stewart while ridiculing the republicans for thinking that two monogamous people getting married would affect their christian lives at all. How retarded was I?
I remember laughing along with John Stewart while ridiculing the republicans for thinking that two monogamous people getting married would affect their christian lives at all. How retarded was I?
This just in, evil gays CRUELLY FORCE baker to bake cake that's BLUE ON THE OUTSIDE and PINK ON THE INSIDE. Republicans warned us this would happen, why didn't we listen!!!!!?????
And if he just baked the cake he wouldn't be dealing with this dumb shit, "Christian beliefs" I thought god said treat people how you'd treat yourself. Would have made more sense if he was a Muslim or something chirstcucks doing themselves dirty
Implying anyone outside of the upper clergy of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apolostic Church under the auspices of the Bishop of Rome understands Christain theology.
Jesus said that people who don't believe in him or follow his teachings all go to hell.
He also asked his dad to forgive the people who literally crucified him lol. I don't think he'd be as assblasted about this cake thing as conservatives are.
His argument for the gay wedding cake was that it’s essentially a work of art, and him creating a custom cake and participating in the wedding would violate both his right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression.
He had no problem baking the couple a standard cake or selling them pre-made cakes.
Actually no. If this guy didn't advertise and didn't open his business to the public he'd be exempt from serving protected classes. That's the deal with being protected economically by the state in a variety of manner.
That’s generally true, but what is being litigated now is whether “anti-discrimination laws” like the ones Colorado is trying to punish Phillips for violating can be constitutionally applied to him without violating his rights to freedom of expression or freedom of speech.
Business owners don’t automatically forfeit all of their constitutional rights by holding themselves out as a public accommodation.
That's not true, that line of reasoning (1A religious 'beliefs' as grounds for denial of public service) has been slapped down by the Supreme Court since the 70s. And state expansions of Federal classes has been upheld even before that. His argument, for better or worse, is the exact reason the protected class legislation exists in the first place for better or worse.
His argument is a little different because it involves sexual orientation rather than race, and because it involves artistic expression, not just the provision of services. The baker was fine with selling them a cake.
It might have been slapped down at various margins but it’s still upheld on some. In any case this is really about compelled speech, which is mostly a no-no even without the religious dimension but the religious dimension is just a factory that generates sympathy for the defendant.
Jfc no. When it comes to commerce there are a shit load of cases of compelled speech, and even then calling a cake decoration individual art when advertised to the public is spurious at best.
Yes and many of them protect against speech compulsions, which is my point.
Actually it's the opposite. Case law has roundly supported public interest over concerns of 1A rights of private business. Zoning, notices, disclosures, etc etc are either mandated or restricted speech.
Well let's see what they think when you replace Kennedy with Kavanaugh, then. I'm not saying that the case is a slam dunk for the defendant.
That may be true but the guy is using his personal prejudices based on his religious beliefs to discriminate. While he’s entitled to his religious beliefs and the freedom to practice it shouldn’t entitle him to discriminate against others as he practices.
He doesn’t have a right to refuse his normal services to someone for that reason but he can refuse to make a custom cake, which is protected under freedom of expression.
It should be self evident he's in the right and think religious people are retarded.
His business relies on custom creative works. Think of it like a graphic design company and a neo nazi walks in wanting fliers for some dumbshit nazi rally. The graphic designer and company have the first amendment protection to not be compelled to create and further views they don't agree with.
What you see as being pedantic is first amendment protections that even most retards can understand.
There's a second part of the argument; that custom cakes are his art and the government cannot force him to make a work of art as that would be compelled speech which violates his first amendment rights.
During oral arguments the baker's lawyer agreed that the baker had not right to refuse the selling of a cake that had already been made and was available for sale.
try finding a Muslim baker, ask them to personally decorate your cake with picture of the Prophet Mohammed - see if the baker, the media reporting the story, or the genuinely probable hate-crime investigation against you that follows might clear that up for you.
Selling a cake already made is different than making a custom decorated cake. Both lawsuits revolve around having the baker make them a custom cake, rather than just buying a regular one.
Kinda are, though. You're either a man pretending to be a woman who likes men, a man pretending to be a woman who likes women, a woman pretending to be a man who likes women, or a woman pretending to be a man who likes men. All of those are gay.
trans people just want to life their lives without being discriminated against!
I mean, the first fucking condition of your shitty roleplay is not met, you stupid faggot. By not baking a cake specifically because they're trans they are discriminating against them.
Take that out of the question, aka the baker bakes the fucking cake, and this wouldn't have been a problem. Why are americanoids so retarded? What's wrong with you, seriously.
Because, you have to inject your god damn bullshit into everything so that it gets "noticed". Same reason there was a post here yesterday where a black lady was complaining that there are no black people posting nudes on r/gonewild
Considering it's already been ruled that the state of Colorado specifically denied him his rights and used the lawsuit to harass him, then have done it again, it should be a federal matter immediately.
Yeah, exactly. I'm a lesbian, but I'm not for tormenting this guy. The first incident...ok, the gay couple probably had no idea they'd be turned down. This second incident...those folks HAD to know they were going to get turned down. Then, they tell the media about it like they are shocked and outraged? Shit, they're just looking for attention.
I don't like religious fucktards no more than the next person, but sheesh...let's leave this dude alone already.
IIRC in the first case the couple were shopping bakeries to get denied and sue. They supposedly arent even from that area. Also he offered to sell them a regular cake, just not a custom one. But i might be mixing those details up with that other gay cake lawsuit fiasco from around the same time.
I don't know all of the details of the first case either. If it's like you recall, why the hell didn't they simply either accept the generic cake or move along? How come they felt they needed to make a federal case out of it? Personally, I would have just moved along...especially if it wasn't even someone local that I may have to see on the regular.
Precedent has to be set somehow, so it's pretty common for lawyers and/or activists to shop around for people who are willing to challenge a law while also having a squeaky clean record.
This baker dude just had the unfortunate luck of being the one who the precedent was being set against. Twice.
A similar thing happened with the bus system and Rosa Parks: she didn't just happen to get arrested on her way home from work one day, the whole thing was set up so that the ACLU could have a good case against the discriminatory bus laws.
It's a system that sucks for the people directly involved, but it's just how things are done.
I see what you are saying, but let me challenge that just a little...
I don't see how getting a cake from a bakery is anything like...remotely similar to what Rosa Parks did. Here is why I think that...
Rosa Parks was using a public service (public transit). To my understanding this was not a privately owned bus line. I could be wrong? Please do correct me if I am.
Having a cake made by a specific bakery versus simply choosing another (and I'm sure there are plenty out there, but I'm not a bakery expert lol)...versus being made to sit separately on a bus that is probably the ONLY bus line to choose from...I just think that's different. ???
This cake thing just seems like a privilege sort of thing whereas what Rosa Parks endured was simply wanting to be treated like a human on something she didn't have much a choice whether to use?
Well, I wasn't trying to make a personal statement one way or the other, just trying to illustrate the situation with an example that most people are probably familiar with.
Personally, I agree with you and with the Supreme Court about the degree to which the baker is required to bake the cake: he isn't allowed to openly discriminate against someone just for being gay, but allowing them to purchase a pre-made cake, just not a custom cake, is fine and satisfies that requirement.
It depended on which state. In Georgia segregation was mandatory but in North Carolina the Woolworth's lunch counter where the sit in movement began was only beholden to its own management.
Dictating how and what customers he serves is more in line with Jim Crow.
You didn't need to go full retard. The civil rights act and jim crow laws are technically the same thing because they both involve the government imposing its will on private businesses.
It was in fact a private bus line contracted by the city, required by law to segregate by the state. They way government was using private business was part of the complications there, the bus line wasn't legally allowed to integrate, the bus driver could have actually faced criminal charges if he didn't pull the bus over and call the cops. Jim Crow was law, not optional.
You might look into The Negro Motorist Green Book to see some of the complications that get involved with this sort public facing private business stuff.
excuse me these two scenarios are not 100% identical so you can't compare them
Uh, no. That isn't how it works.
The point is that, in both bus law and private shop law, activists did not like the currently practiced legal reality, and felt that they deserved better under the letter of the law.
In an attempt to turn legal practice into something closer to what they want, they decided to challenge the current legal reality, in court, at as high a level as they can manage.
The objective of this form of activism, which applies and is comparable to busses AND cakes, is to win a federal court case that other people can point to in the future when they make you follow those newly defined/clarified legal rules.
To do that, you shop around for the shittiest defendant you can find, and a paradigm of virtue for a plaintiff, hoping to influence the verdict beyond the letter of the law.
And then you get shot down because fuck your cake.
Plessy v Furguson, enshrining separate but equal doctrine, was a giant backfire by an early civil rights group and liberal business interests doing this.
Boils down to making legal precedence for this kindof thing. Also so they could get some sort of lived fame and the law firm representing them would get a huge notch to put in their portfolio.
Furthermore, it serves their pathological ideology. Which at its core hates Christians and Males.
The gay community doesn't hate males. As far as I understand, the trans community does not hate males either. Matter of fact, it's dominated by males. Anyhow, I don't want to get into all of that.
Im gonna give you the benefit of the doubt. Most gays dont hate men or christians. But the Pathological Ideology running below the surface (or on the surface in some cases) of the Progressive Movement is totally opposition to The Juedeo-Christian Western Male Patriarchy. Which boils to the surface in court cases like this.
Progressive Movement is totally opposition to The Juedeo-Christian Western Male Patriarchy.
Well, I do have to agree with this bit. However, I wouldn't equate that with "hate" though. No one is dragging men into alleys and beating them death. To my knowledge, there have not been any hate crimes committed against men in the name of "progressive ideology".
Western male patriarchy does need to go away, but it isn't. I'm tempted to go into why I think the male to female trans movement has taken off like it has, but this isn't the subreddit for that or else I'll be featured. lol
Western male patriarchy does need to go away, but it isn't.
Are you being serious? You think the entire enlightened Western culture needs to go away? The society then ended slavery, gave women the right to vote, and gays the right the marry? And since its a "male patriarchy", then women had no hand in these accomplishments? What would you replace it with?
Well which is it? Either Western Men have subjugated women and minorities for its benefit since its inception or there is no male patriarchy and Western ism is a product of men and women struggling together to create Western Culture?
Well, I do have to agree with this bit. However, I wouldn't equate that with "hate" though. No one is dragging men into alleys and beating them death.
Well, I do not think that is because they don't want to. I would agree that the vast majority do not want to. But there certainly is a very vocal subset that would really like to. They just haven't figured out a way to do it safely, effectively and free of legal consequences.
The Chicago Tribune reports that the man, David Wilcox, said he voted for Trump but no one in the crowd would have known.
From the second:
The suspects are all black and shouted "F*** Donald Trump" and "F*** white people" repeatedly during a 30 minute video that showed them harassing and tormenting the victim
Non-tabloid link for the second case, which was widely covered and really how have you not heard of it:
the people running it seem anti-male. they seem to loathe that guys on there might not be into femme dudes or have racial preferences. and they shit on masculinity a lot
Oh, I don't know about all of that as I'm not a gay guy, so I don't use Grindr. But yeah, most apps start as one thing and evolve into something slightly different than the founder and/or developer intended. That's just how it is.
All American cultural shifts (e.g. legalization of abortion) have been the result of judges deciding for everyone else what is acceptable and the government shoving propaganda down to the next generations to accept these changes. Amerimutts are totally incapable of critical thinking
Yes as a gay black lesbian jew I think we should leave this poor man alone. You cannot question me on this as my gay black lesbian jewiness prevents such things
Yeah, I'm of two minds on this one. On the one hand, I generally support anti-discrimination laws, to an extent. On the other, given that it's an artistic endeavor it feels way too much like the govt compelling speech to me. He's free to refuse to put bible verses on cakes because he doesn't agree with the message, but he's not free to refuse to make a gay or tranny cake? Some mozzie who wants a "death to infidels" cake isn't gonna have luck forcing someone to make it. If he's generally free to decide which custom cakes he makes, this shit seems pretty retarded.
The religionfags also make a good point that anti-discrimination laws are intended to make sure people won't have undue difficulty finding service, which is clearly not an issue here.
He offered them any other existing cake or pre-existing wedding cake design. He never even refused to put their names on a normal wedding cake. What he refused was their design for a rainbow flag gay wedding cake.
Particular styles of cakes are not a protected class.
As he didn't violate the law in any remote way, the only way the case went forward was due to rampant illegal targeting by the state.
Which is what the supreme court ruled on. That he was flagrantly denied a fair trial knowingly by the state, who were attempting to cement their laws in SCOTUS precedent.
They never had a case to begin with, even under their own state law, as he never refused service, tried to accommodate them by helping them find another gay wedding cake store and gay cakes aren't a protected class (only refusing service to someone because they are gay, which he didn't do).
Same shit here but now even more retarded, as not only are state officials telling the activist judge not to go forward (as they will lose again and this time he can sue them for insane amounts as it shows direct state harassment) but gender transitioning is not even a protected class, let alone a cake for it.
Eh, where it gets hinky is that a gay couple couldn't be reasonably expected to use a cake with, say, straight-specific decorations on it, which a lot of wedding cakes have. Reminds me a little of the "gays can get married to someone of the opposite sex just like anyone else!" argument from before obergefell. Like, yeah, but that doesn't serve their actual needs at all.
The Colorado Civil Rights Commission said Phillips discriminated against Denver attorney Autumn Scardina
She asked for the cake on the same day the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would consider Phillips' appeal of the previous commission ruling against him. In that 2012 case, he refused to make a wedding cake for same-sex couple Charlie Craig and Dave Mullins.
what's confusing about professional litigation trolls engaging in blatant litigation trolling?
is it going to be another case where it's found out the dude was like "I don't want to make that cake, but you can have any other of my cakes. Also, here is the number of a bakery who will make your cake for you if you want."?
Yeah it's just freedom of speech/religion vs anti discrimination. Both sides are severely retarded and very motivated, so this is a good situation. This baker thinks he's Jesus on the cross and the attorney expects to be considered a 21st century rosa parks.
Pretty sure bakers are just going to make the cake with "extra special" ingredients included if this trend keeps up. It's retarded because non-retards now can't trust cakes anymore.
How would you know in a mom and pop bakery? Butchers selling human meat is very occasionally a thing, but a baker throwing some disgusting shit in a cake for fags that they hate because they took away their business? Hmmm 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔
Go smoke some more weed behind your Burger King, and drop the foot lettuce from my Whopper.
The people that sued them originally were fishing for businesses that wouldn't do business with gay people. They called a bunch of different bakeries until they found someone who took the bait. That's why this seems so retarded.
Why would you want a cake from a place that clearly doesn't hold your ideals? It's going to be a shitty 'malicious compliance' cake at best. There's other places that would gladly make your cake.
I find this argument retarded. Laws should be in place to protect minorities from oppressive majorities. Your argument could and was stated pre-civil rights as to why would a colored want to go to a business where they aren't wanted!?!? a hyuck hyuck *banjo music plays in background
Putting aside the fact that trannies aren't mentioned anywhere in the Good Book, the dude was asked to bake a multi-coloured cake. Nothing overly political like the last time with the gay marriage.
This entire thing is just some fragile Christcuck swallowing bait.
Thats exactly what a request for specific things is, a commission. It doesnt matter that this bitch asked for 2 colors. I 100% guarantee the reason she asked for something so basic was so her lawyer could try making the same dumbass argument you just did.
Not really, they just like to bitch about businesses not accommodating views they don't agree with because then, they can play a victim. But they don't necessarily think that businesses should be FORCED to accommodate views they don't agree with. At least I think they don't.
I’ve heard several conservatives call for applying the protections of the first amendment in their entirety to websites that host user-uploaded content. Ironically, socialists/Chapocels tend to strongly disagree with this despite supporting the nationalization of large websites, which would of course severely curtail their ability to censor speech.
I’ve heard several conservatives call for applying the protections of the first amendment in their entirety to websites that host user-uploaded content.
I can agree to this, either you act as a platform and only remove illegal content and enjoy the protections that offers or you act as a publisher by curating content and are punished for anything you host.
The alternative is a spiral into corporatocracy, where corporations control what you see and think, which leftists should be fighting against tooth and nail but are instead fighting for tooth and nail.
I'd be happy to limit it to public corporations. If a private company wants to do that shit I'm fine with it, but when you're a public corporation who can potentially be part owned by anyone I think that changes things.
This is the real solution to the problem. If they want to curate legal content from their site they are a publisher and should lose their protections given for hosting third party content.
i actually called my senator to bring up an idea, which is a first for me. i think each time a conservative is banned they should have a law where it opensa n investigation on hillary clinton and soros. if a liberal is banned they donate money to israel
The conservatives just want websites to either identify as a "publisher" (Which allows them to pick and choose stuff on their platform, but comes with some legal responsibilities) or a "Platform" (which allows everyone to be on there, but comes with legal protections). You cant have both.
So is any private establishment where people come to socialize responsible for everything people say and do there unless it identifies as a “platform” and loses its ability to stop people from saying things it doesn’t like?
Yes, its a mix of FCC and other regulatory agencies rulings. But, basically, if youre choosing the content (regardless on the reason), then youre a "Publisher" and you are subject to FCC regulation. But if youre a "Platform" youre covered from being sued for the content being hosted since youre subject to the 1st amendment. Google, Youtube, etc want to pick and choose the content but still be considered a "platform". The right just wants them to get off the fence.
Publisher vs Platform is similar to common carrier status or not in the telecom world. If you don't want to be liable for the content your users send, you don't get to censor any of it.
Fuck you for coming in here with your open mind and your willingness to consider opposing views. This isn't /r/civildiscussion, asshole, it's /r/drama.
Two different things, with two different bodies of caselaw behind them. The baker in question “accomodates the view” of the customer by not telling them to gtfo of the store.
No, since user-generated content on that platform is not considered to be the platform's speech. If you want to get back to the platform/publisher stuff discussed elsewhere and say that the website is being forced to publish content it disagrees with, then this ends up invoking a new legal framework that likely has a lot of unintended ramifications.
The whole selective "we can ban this as our own speech/expression rights, but oh we also can't be held accountable for the speech/expression of our users" stance is bullshit though.
I think the issue that a lot of conservatives have is the liberals are given carte blanche to have it both ways, and rightoids are at the point of feeling that trying to stick by a moral principal that the left has no interest in entertaining is useless.
If your enemy uses guns, it's of no benefit to you to keep using a knife out of moral principal.
Yah im not advocating for that guy's crazy environmentalism. but its funny that a figurative high priest of leftist thought is being protested because he dared read outloud the Queer theory Founding document.
To me, i think its pretty complex. I think its an admixture of edge-lord-ism, young men who have been over-stimulated by the internet age, and a dedicated (but very small) group purposefully pushing trans-identity to subvert impressionable men. /b/ uncovered a discord server a few years ago of dozens of people who were coordinating sissy/trap postings to lure in young men and kids in the hope to push them to transitioning.
I'd be interested in more information on that. My point I guess is that the edgelordism (transgression) is the driving force behind it all and that that edgelordism thrives in /b/ particularly because in /b/ there is very little knowlge/power in the Foucault sense to enforce social norms. on face it appears ironic that /b/ can both love and hate freedom of expression so much but I think it speaks to a deeper libertine fascist connection that appears in De Sade but which I can never quite put my finger on. I don't really know what I mean to say.
Wow, that's fucked up. I've literally got no problems if your trans gay or whatever, but when your identity and or sexuality starts to negatively impact others lives, you can fuck right off. He didn't really bring ups trans people but they think he hates them for some reason. What's happening?
I don't get it. Just because you're born a pedo doesn't mean we should accept it. People are born psychopaths, but that doesn't mean we should support them either. We have these societal norms for a reason.
They're out of institutional discrimination to fight against in the courts, so LGBT-focused lawyers are now going after private citizens to keep their profile up.
In this case, it's because the plaintiff was so triggered by the Supreme Court telling the state of Colorado "look, you have to at least pretend to respect this guy's religious beliefs when prosecuting him" that she called and tried to order the tranny cake that same day.
If a gay guy walks in and asks for a chocolate cake and the baker tells him to get lost, that's illegal and wrong.
If a gay guy walks in and asks for a custom cake that says "I love cock" on it, he's within his rights to refuse. Just like he could refuse a cake that says "I hate Jews"
In this situation, it's not clear exactly what kind of cake the trans gender lawyer asked for. If it's just a blue cake with pink insides, he might be in trouble. If it says something about transitioning he might have a case.
I want a cake with a huge chocolate dick on it, and when you drizzle it with warm syrup, the dick melts open and reveals a fresh pink vagina. You're a bigot if you don't make this for me.
The Colorado Civil Rights Commission said Phillips discriminated against Denver attorney Autumn Scardina because she's transgender. Phillips' shop refused to make a cake last year that was blue on the outside and pink on the inside after Scardina revealed she wanted it to celebrate her transition from male to female.
Masterpiece Cakeshop will happily create custom cakes for anyone. But like many cake artists, Jack cannot create all custom cakes. He cannot create custom cakes that express messages or celebrate events that conflict with his religious beliefs.
So he does do customs, he just doesn't want to use his talent to celebrate gay shit. Which should be his right.
Still waiting for someone to ask an islamic baker to make a mohammed cake.
While I agree, this comparison keeps getting brought up. Where are all these islamic bakeries? I'm pretty sure I've never encountered one. I get the point, liberals wouldn't jump to force them to make some shit against their religion. It's just a lazy comparison cause it's like "well what if we made a gay baker celebrate heterosexuality". Sounds good on paper but kinda retarded when you think about it.
Not necessarily in disagreement, but it's not really a realistic comparison since Christianity is like the major religion in the US, where this is taking place and all.
That's a reasonable response, I just see a lot of pro-islam and unironic "religion of peace" statements coming from gays who feel that they have solidarity with Muslims in being persecuted when in reality Muslims feel just as much, if not more disgust towards them than Christians do.
Yeah I get that, and a lot of it is reddit. I'll give you that even IRL they keep their mutual hatred under wraps since both groups are generally hated by the right and vice versa, so that would exain some of it.
It's an ally of convenience thing. If Muslims didn't catch as much flak from generally right wing people, they'd be on the same side of nearly every issue. Same with super Catholic Mexicans, tbh.
Do you see this moral and societal degeneration happening in your average Muslim country? I'll answer that for you: fuck no, because they don't let this degeneracy slide, like fucking liberal CUCKS in the West. There's only one solution, and that is for everyone to convert to Islam.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) didn't tolerate degeneracy like gay marriage or gender bending—nay! He mandated the ostracization and execution of gays, and made sure they would not become commonplace or accepted by the rest of the community. He made sure to establish clear gender roles and didn't tolerate this "gender identity" trash.
In the meantime, you have Western society accepting gays, slut pride, gender-mixing, new genders, no genders, LGBT, and who knows what else?! Western society is truly degenerating without guidance, and I fear that as time passes, these degenerate groups only gain more and more power.
Muslims and conservatives might think they're enemies, but in reality, they're closer to each other than they think! An alliance would prove very fruitful for both sides.
Just repeat the declaration of faith after me:
أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وحده لا شريك له وأشهد أن محمدا عبده ورسوله
and you'll be right on your way to becoming a great Muslim!
"Custom" as in "here's a list of 3 things that I can change about any fucking cake ever because its so goddamn simple even a drama poster could figure it out" sure.
The way I understand it, he offered the gay customer an ordinary cake, just not a custom one.
Technically the gay person wasn't being denied for purchasing a cake, simply being denied of a custom made one because the baker does not want to make a custom cake for a same-sex occasion due to religious reasons.
They asked for a blue on the outside, pink on the inside cake, to celebrate going from one gender to the other. Obviously the baker holds beliefs which this goes against and refused. Weird how the trender had to explicitly mention the gender transition aspect, and not just ask for the cake.
I'm not religious, at all, but I don't think I can go into a Muslim bakery and ask them to bake me a bacon flavored cake, just like I don't think I can force a Christian baker to make me a gay themed cake.
It's quite a stretch to turn "I'll bake you a cake, but my religious views are such that it won't mention your sexuality on it" into "reeeeeeeeeeeeeee! He wouldn't serve them and hates the gays!"
"She" asked for the cake then told him it was to celebrate "her" transition. "She" is blatantly targeting him because he won the previous lawsuit, and iirc has gone on the record as saying so.
What if that same trans person wanted the same custom cake from a Jewish baker for the purposes of celebrating Hitler's birthday?
It is just the cake itself which can be considered expression or does that expression extend to the use the cake is for? I don't know if the law is clear on this just yet.
It's painfully obvious for everyone to see that this dude was trying to deliberately bait the baker. If they don't want to promote your message they shouldn't havce to.
I did some elite hacking skills with an azure fork and got that NSA transcripts from the bakery:
"Gimmie da sexless battenberg you fucking fundo retard lolol"
"the power of christ compels me to put some icing on your chromozones feggit"
"listen to me Brother Brownfinger, if you dont bake my shemale cake I will fuck you up in court"
"In the name of Allah, I will never accept your way of life....unless you become a priest and fuck kids for decades and get the pope to cover it up, then I will bake you a nice big cake"
"see you in court. Do you validate parking?"
More stories if I can survive this opioid fuelled breakdown.
I hope the right wing fights back by commissioning liberal cake-makers to bake cakes celebrating their daughter's arranged marriage, or like, their gun-naming ceremony or their son's de-gayification conversion.
Only with actual White House staff, which I’d say isn’t the same as someone with just wrong beliefs. But alright, fair enough. I was mostly thinking liberal business owners tend to be more moderate liberals, and probably wouldn’t be mind making things for a republican event
This is honestly hilarious. Its like the collective conscioueness of all the woke retards in Colorado decided as one to fuck this one particular baker into submission.
Like, how awesome does your life have to be for you to expend serious time and money to end the oppression caused by the random neighborhood cake guy.
I'm with the baker on this. Not because I'm particularly caring about compelled speech or any of the legal minutiae. It's because I think we have a god given right to tell assholes to fuck off. No reason to tell your fucking life story just to get a pink and blue cake.
This will have the same result, as it's clear he would have made the cake if this trans-activist hadn't volunteered the purpose of the cake.
You have no right to commission a piece. I don't know why on earth progressives get off on making people do what they don't want to do (probably the concentration of male feminists in the movement), but the court is only going to be more hostile to their arguments now that Kennedy is gone.
If he's declining service for you being gay/trans, then I can see why that's legally problematic. But baking a specific type of cake? Let the people decide whether they wanna give him business or not.
If you decline a customer for no reason other than they are black (ignoring the type of cake), then that would be illegal. I feel it's only natural to extend it to this.
And people wonder why nobody takes the left seriously. Let the dude be trans-phobic or whatever. Maybe even try BUYING CAKES FROM SOMEONE ELSE. This is just a bid to get attention, sympathy, and money. Undermines the real lgbt movement by acting like they are.
The Colorado Civil Rights Commission said Phillips discriminated against Denver attorney Autumn Scardina because she's transgender. Phillips' shop refused to make a cake last year that was blue on the outside and pink on the inside after Scardina revealed she wanted it to celebrate her transition from male to female.
These attorneys are harassing this guy and trying to ruin his life. This is beyond horrible.
I bet he looooves queers now. We all know they asked for the trans cake from this guy just to get attention and shit. Leave him alone, unless every baker can be forced to bake pedo/bestiality/Nazi cakes
This guy must make the best fucking cakes in the world for people who know they're not going to get survive to continuously walk in and bother him.
Like the nerve of these fuckers.
You don't walk into a Jewish bakery and ask for a cake that depicts Hitler skullfucking the severed head of Anne Frank or for the less offensively inclined, A rainbow Swatika cake.
You don't walk into a Muslim bakery and ask for a cake that depicts Mohammad sitting on a giant cartoon round bomb.
So why do people keep walking into this bakery, knowing he won't serve them and starting shit? At least he's not petty.
A petty person would make the cake, but then indirectly contaminate it. You know, mix a little laxative into the buttercream, some itching powder mixed in with the powdered sugar. Something that's harder to detect than bodily fluids.
Simple solution: he bakes the cake, it puts the removed sex-organ slurry in the cake. That way we know the trancel is serious, and the baker gets total redemption.
512 comments
1 SnapshillBot 2018-12-20
I only follow the patriarchal aspects of Islam. Not the aspects that make you a cuck e.g. Abstaining from womanising, penetrating a sweet trap virgin ass and lowering your gaze.
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
1 alpr5tis 2018-12-20
pls woketards. Leave this poor man alone.
1 Inceltiers 2018-12-20
Peak drama would be making him bankrupt from legal fees then to be found guilty
1 Papasmurf345 2018-12-20
I’m pretty sure he has advocacy groups like the Alliance Defending Freedom that do all of his legal work for free.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
You never see the woketards suing a muslim bakery, i wonder why?
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-12-20
Because its hard to decorate baklava?
1 Seattle_Bussy_Lmao 2018-12-20
Yum, tbh
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-12-20
Yeah I should make some tonight honestly, gotta be somewhat useful for the family party.
1 EarnestNoMeta 2018-12-20
hey man you should invite the subreddit
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-12-20
Like I'd want to expose mentally unstable, petty, catty, vulgarians to you guys.
1 Mat_The_49th 2018-12-20
baklava is greek reeee
1 Assy-McGee 2018-12-20
implying “greeks” aren’t descendents of Ottoman rape-babies
1 MarcoMidget 2018-12-20
I liked your old flair 😭
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
relevant
1 Megazor 2018-12-20
Subhuman filth
1 Inceltiers 2018-12-20
RIP iki
1 LaptopEnforcer 2018-12-20
The muslims make it with inferior rose water destroying plants and water in the process. We CHADs make it with the healthy and sweet honey, helping the bees and giving people necessary antioxidants
1 mcslibbin 2018-12-20
Arent all the bees dying
Non vegans btfo
1 Chapocel 2018-12-20
Don't forget the Monarchs tbh
1 totalrandomperson 2018-12-20
Don't you fucking dare.
1 Chapocel 2018-12-20
Balaclava are easier to decorate tbh
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2018-12-20
I guess they don’t want to be murdered.
1 siempreloco31 2018-12-20
Baking is haram
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
inshallah habibi
1 rnjbond 2018-12-20
Because they're scared
1 Thisisepicstein 2018-12-20
Because aren't cowards and will hopefully beat the shit out of the idiot that tries
1 Hatredstyle 2018-12-20
cringes into eternity
1 imstartingtogetangry 2018-12-20
Because they like their heads attached to their necks.
1 Megazor 2018-12-20
Steven Crowder visited a few and went as you might expect
1 Will0saurus 2018-12-20
Muslims, Christians, Crowder and the gays are all retarded honestly
1 Lindseyisagirlsname 2018-12-20
Crowder just proved religious right christians are the same as religious right muslims! American leftists BTFO'd!!!
1 khalcutta 2018-12-20
Is there any case where a Muslim bakery refused to bake a cake?
1 VicisSubsisto 2018-12-20
Is there any case where someone specifically sought a Muslim bakery to bake a cake which opposes Muslim religious beliefs?
1 backltrack 2018-12-20
No cause that would not be woke, y'all
1 khalcutta 2018-12-20
This whole thing didn't start with someone specifically seeking out a christian owned bakery who opposed homosexuality.
1 NiceGuyNationalism 2018-12-20
It literally did.
It’s like the tranny who went around salons in Canada purposely looking for women who refused to wax around his cock.
These people aren’t exactly mentally stable and love to do this sort of shit.
1 xu85 2018-12-20
Trannies also love redirecting conversation on reddit towards anything tranny-related.
1 NiceGuyNationalism 2018-12-20
Everything on reddit is tranny related, it’s fucking reddit.
1 MG87 2018-12-20
Gonna need a source
1 NiceGuyNationalism 2018-12-20
https://www.google.com/amp/s/nationalpost.com/news/canada/b-c-transgender-woman-who-was-denied-brazilian-wax-job-withdraws-human-rights-complaint/amp
1 MG87 2018-12-20
I was talking about the gay baker thing, but I get it, you're conservative, you're gay for Telrabny cock
1 NiceGuyNationalism 2018-12-20
Oh, sorry, you wanted evidence of the mentally ill faggots, not that mentally ill faggot. It’s hard to keep up.
1 MG87 2018-12-20
So many men can you service at once?
1 NiceGuyNationalism 2018-12-20
How many? Is that what you were going for?
Is that your take here? Throw out shitty homoerotic shit and think it will trigger me?
Im not sure what’s funnier, you, or 45% of trannys actually having the balls(lol) to eat those 60 Valium in one sitting.
1 MG87 2018-12-20
Well my work here is done
1 NiceGuyNationalism 2018-12-20
You could of done so, so much better.
1 Alicesnakebae 2018-12-20
I don't think he asked for a Republican Senator
1 NiceGuyNationalism 2018-12-20
I didn’t say he did? Man whenever it comes to defending attention seeking faggots it really seems to tilt some people off their game
1 VicisSubsisto 2018-12-20
You mean to tell me that, in the city of Denver, which hasn't had a non-Democrat mayor since 1963, where half of the population is non-religious, the very first bakery they walked into just happened to object to gay marriage on religious grounds?
1 EarnestNoMeta 2018-12-20
I can see it now.
A fat white man with a beer gut demanding an Islamic halal bakery make him a Brandy infused cake with vanilla and bacon glaze under threat of lawsuit. yeehaw
1 VicisSubsisto 2018-12-20
Beautiful.
1 Hemingwavy 2018-12-20
1 McFluffTheCrimeCat 2018-12-20
Nah. Keep suing until he necks himself.
1 feminist-arent-smart 2018-12-20
Is he the only cake factory in Colorado or what?
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2018-12-20
He’s the only one they think will refuse them service.
1 UrMumsMyPassword 2018-12-20
Weird. Why would they go out of their way to try and use this guy when so many other, closer bakeries would gladly help them?
1 CG28 2018-12-20
Because then they get to play the oppression card and win sympathy points.
1 autistitron 2018-12-20
Because they're going to him for attention and profit.
Even the first time, they were shopping around trying to find a bakery that would refuse.
You get paid when you're brought onto talk shows or interviewed, plus whatever patreon/gofundme dollars you can scam out of the woke for "legal costs" that won't get refunded.
1 TobyTheRobot 2018-12-20
Is this true? Source? I'm not saying that I don't believe you -- I just didn't know that and my google-fu isn't strong enough to turn anything up, apparently.
1 hypergol 2018-12-20
1 MG87 2018-12-20
Ot course it isn't true
1 Lindseyisagirlsname 2018-12-20
It's true if you think straight white males are the actual victims of oppression!
1 senord25 2018-12-20
I also would like a source for this claim
1 spookyguy109 2018-12-20
They're trying to set court precedents. Notice how the it was an Attorney that wanted the gender transition cake.
1 Sasukefan99 2018-12-20
Nope, there was a case of bakeries previously refusing to bake a cake that had a graphic of two men together when a red cross over them and a Bible passage. Apparently this example was the one the Supreme Court used to show that the Colorado Comission was discriminating against religion since they found nothing wrong with people denying anti- gay marriage cakes
1 soupvsjonez 2018-12-20
IIRC the way this originally played out is some political activists went through a phone book fishing for businesses that would refuse to do business with gay people. Once they found one that bit they tried to sue it out of business.
I guess that since it didn't work the first time, it's time for round two.
1 Chapocel 2018-12-20
Transies arent gay tho.
1 soupvsjonez 2018-12-20
Transexuals are pretty fucking gay.
1 Chapocel 2018-12-20
How so? When the government issued ID says its a woman, then its a woman. Its over for straightcels
1 soupvsjonez 2018-12-20
I've fucked enough women and men to be somewhat of an expert on what is and isn't gay. Fucking a "woman" with a dick is like fucking a long haired twink with fake tits.
1 Chapocel 2018-12-20
I need more details of your bisexual bigot life. Are you persecuted or considered a fellow victim?
1 soupvsjonez 2018-12-20
Sure. Who isn't? It doesn't matter though. The fun thing about identity politics is that you can put yourself into any number of groups to claim privilege/oppression. For example, I'm melungeon. I look white, but I am directly descended from escaped slaves, Cherokee Indians and European settlers. Despite being perceived as white, I have a legitimate claim on calling myself a BIPOC (doubly so since I'm also indigenous). On top of all of that I fall under the LGBT umbrella. If anyone actually believed that the bullshit idea of having this heritage arbitrarily somehow makes me more knowledgeable about the world because I'm looking at it from more than one viewpoint, or that my views should for some reason be taken more seriously because of it, then it totally shuts down anyone taking the left identitarian viewpoint who would otherwise tell me that I'm wrong. After all, I know more about it than most of them do, and am more qualified to speak on the issue because of it. Of course, that's all bullshit, as is the rest of the philosophies built around this stupid idea.
The fact of the matter is that there is competition between people, and there will always be people who are trying to benefit off of your loss, regardless of what groups you decide to claim membership in. Everyone is persecuted. Everyone is victimized.
1 GreatnessPersonified 2018-12-20
Finally a srs post that "gets it"
1 shallowm 2018-12-20
Are you telling me that fucking this person would be gay?
1 soupvsjonez 2018-12-20
I really like Buck Angel. I think he's a pretty cool dude. Fucking him would still be pretty gay (even though balls would never touch).
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
what a weird coincidence, right? The same day he wins a pivotal court case against the Colorado Human Rights Commission, a degenerate tranny walks into his shop wanting a cake from him. Small world.
1 YummyCummies 2018-12-20
Lmao they do this on purpose
1 EarnestNoMeta 2018-12-20
he is a convenient scapegoat
1 froibo 2018-12-20
Satanists are on deck.
1 2Potemkin2Village 2018-12-20
Lol are you kidding? This is hilarious.
1 tron_funkin_blow 2018-12-20
He must have the most delicious of cakes if all these people are going through all this bother to get the cakes from him.
1 Osterion 2018-12-20
Looking at the google reviews, it seems almost went there until he started btfoing gays. Maybe that has been the plan all along
1 nanonan 2018-12-20
Back in my day faggots and trannies could bake a delicious cake without anybodys help.
1 Lindseyisagirlsname 2018-12-20
then why does this christcuck even have a business?
1 Sc0tty2hotty 2018-12-20
Not sure why he has to grandstand and try to make headlines all the time tbh
just make a some god damn cakes
1 Burnnoticelover 2018-12-20
Guy must feel like he’s in a time loop.
1 shallowm 2018-12-20
think of how much publicity his little cakeshop is getting from all of this though
1 seshfan2 2018-12-20
I assumed that it was gonna be some
1 SAC-Lawn_Gnome 2018-12-20
Here's the full quote
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
I remember being a woketard in the early 2000's when everyone was pushing for gay marriage. I remember laughing along with John Stewart while ridiculing the republicans for thinking that two monogamous people getting married would affect their christian lives at all. How retarded was I?
1 _grammer-nazi_ 2018-12-20
* there.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
bad bot
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2018-12-20
He used the correct word you moron.
1 garythegoatsghost 2018-12-20
*moran
1 Ls777 2018-12-20
This just in, evil gays CRUELLY FORCE baker to bake cake that's BLUE ON THE OUTSIDE and PINK ON THE INSIDE. Republicans warned us this would happen, why didn't we listen!!!!!?????
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
1 Ls777 2018-12-20
U dum lol
1 Karmaisforsuckers 2018-12-20
Christians are such fucking faggot pussies
1 RevolutionarySpread9 2018-12-20
I wouldn’t bake shit for people who are hitting me with frivolous lawsuits to make a point.
1 seshfan2 2018-12-20
conservatives get bussy blasted so easily lmfao
1 RevolutionarySpread9 2018-12-20
It seems like the turbo libs obsessed with harassing an old man in court cause he won’t bake faggy cakes are the bussy blasted ones.
1 unrulyfarmhand 2018-12-20
”Make my faggot pedophile cake or I’ll sue you, bigot! Lol look, he’s mad!!”
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
t. reddit poster
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-12-20
You mean adhere to State laws?
Dear lord.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
its state law to force a person to celebrate mental illness?
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-12-20
No just serve protected classes the same you would anyone else in the public.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
t. reddit poster
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-12-20
Pedophilia is a protected class in CO? It's not Alabama ffs
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
Mental illness is a protected class in CO?
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-12-20
From talking to you the only CO you should worry about seems to be coming from your furnace.
1 Darkhan112 2018-12-20
State laws that violate constitution sweaty.
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-12-20
How? The Supreme Court upheld the protected class designation, only chastised the CO department that handled the case on procedural grounds.
1 Darkhan112 2018-12-20
Sorry, I wasn't clear enough:
It is MY OPINION that this law violates the constitution.
1 mtg_liebestod 2018-12-20
Don’t you have some “It’s okay to be white” posters to do tear down somewhere?
1 Karmaisforsuckers 2018-12-20
Lol the DDF is having a no good very bad week so thry brigading this thread fucking HARD
1 seshfan2 2018-12-20
it's fucking hilarious lmao. they get so triggered over a cake
1 Jas0nJewnova 2018-12-20
imagine being awake for the last two years and thinking anything else
1 seshfan2 2018-12-20
which one is the party that screams and cries if you say "happy holidays" instead of "merry christmas"?
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
m8 no one cares but you
1 seshfan2 2018-12-20
nigga what
1 Zizara42 2018-12-20
if you can't handle FACTS and L O G I C then you need to get outta here soyboy
1 Gilly_The_Ghillie 2018-12-20
Nobody except a tiny majority?
1 mtg_liebestod 2018-12-20
How many people have gotten fired for this again?
1 Alicesnakebae 2018-12-20
And if he just baked the cake he wouldn't be dealing with this dumb shit, "Christian beliefs" I thought god said treat people how you'd treat yourself. Would have made more sense if he was a Muslim or something chirstcucks doing themselves dirty
1 KingNothing305 2018-12-20
The Christian thing to do is to ruin your business
1 Alicesnakebae 2018-12-20
He did say it was hard for a rich man to get into heaven
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
Christians are supposed to love everyone right, why would they do this?
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-12-20
The victimhood is strong here.
> claims to be a dick and demand special exemption from law based on religion
> get mad when actual theology is used to mock when said religion is referenced
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-12-20
Implying anyone outside of the upper clergy of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apolostic Church under the auspices of the Bishop of Rome understands Christain theology.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
1 RestoreFear 2018-12-20
Non-Christian Catholics?
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-12-20
They're the only non-heretics.
Checkmate Calvinists.
1 The_Reason_Trump_Won 2018-12-20
This but unirioncally
1 pepperouchau 2018-12-20
Shouldn't you be nailing your comments to a door somewhere instead of posting them online?
1 Ls777 2018-12-20
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
r/im14andthisisdeep
1 Ls777 2018-12-20
r/imchristianandbuttblasted
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
no u
1 Alicesnakebae 2018-12-20
I doubt Christians themselves understand Christianity they just follow what the local church peso says
1 r4chan-cancer 2018-12-20
Christfag
1 LemonScore_ 2018-12-20
That's because you're a stupid liberal whose only knowledge of Christianity comes from liberal talking points used to attack Conservatives.
Jesus said that people who don't believe in him or follow his teachings all go to hell.
1 RestoreFear 2018-12-20
He also asked his dad to forgive the people who literally crucified him lol. I don't think he'd be as assblasted about this cake thing as conservatives are.
1 telandrias 2018-12-20
He got assblasted about jews changing money in the temple though.
1 Ls777 2018-12-20
Yes, jesus being pissed off at the religious people is a very common theme in the gospels, lmao
1 Alicesnakebae 2018-12-20
It must be awkward going to heaven and seeing all those pedos and end up going to hell for making a cake
1 King_Drumpf 2018-12-20
"My business does not want any of that trans revenue."
1 Gilly_The_Ghillie 2018-12-20
Less than 0.3% of the country isn't a massive revenue source.
1 notcyberpope 2018-12-20
Just remember there are more midgets than trannies in America. You dont hear about needing to put step stools everywhere though. Stay woke.
1 Alicesnakebae 2018-12-20
Its OK to make fun of shortlets
1 shallowm 2018-12-20
Wouldn't a "shortlet" be a tall person, since they're lacking shortness?
1 chunk_o 2018-12-20
like $20
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
it's all so tiresome
1 MzCherryBlossom 2018-12-20
I really cannot work out how the hell baking a cake goes against your religion. He isn’t personally celebrating jackshit.
1 Papasmurf345 2018-12-20
His argument for the gay wedding cake was that it’s essentially a work of art, and him creating a custom cake and participating in the wedding would violate both his right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression.
He had no problem baking the couple a standard cake or selling them pre-made cakes.
1 MzCherryBlossom 2018-12-20
So he’s a pedantic twat then.
1 Papasmurf345 2018-12-20
If that’s how you see it, but in the US we have the constitutional right to be a pedantic twat.
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-12-20
Actually no. If this guy didn't advertise and didn't open his business to the public he'd be exempt from serving protected classes. That's the deal with being protected economically by the state in a variety of manner.
1 Papasmurf345 2018-12-20
That’s generally true, but what is being litigated now is whether “anti-discrimination laws” like the ones Colorado is trying to punish Phillips for violating can be constitutionally applied to him without violating his rights to freedom of expression or freedom of speech.
Business owners don’t automatically forfeit all of their constitutional rights by holding themselves out as a public accommodation.
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-12-20
That's not true, that line of reasoning (1A religious 'beliefs' as grounds for denial of public service) has been slapped down by the Supreme Court since the 70s. And state expansions of Federal classes has been upheld even before that. His argument, for better or worse, is the exact reason the protected class legislation exists in the first place for better or worse.
1 Papasmurf345 2018-12-20
His argument is a little different because it involves sexual orientation rather than race, and because it involves artistic expression, not just the provision of services. The baker was fine with selling them a cake.
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-12-20
I'm aware of the argument and its barely novel. Even the SC pretty much said as much. Itd take a lot of ignoring stare decisis to prove it in court.
1 mtg_liebestod 2018-12-20
It might have been slapped down at various margins but it’s still upheld on some. In any case this is really about compelled speech, which is mostly a no-no even without the religious dimension but the religious dimension is just a factory that generates sympathy for the defendant.
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-12-20
Jfc no. When it comes to commerce there are a shit load of cases of compelled speech, and even then calling a cake decoration individual art when advertised to the public is spurious at best.
As for sympathy for the defendant? Yeah no.
1 mtg_liebestod 2018-12-20
Yes and many of them protect against speech compulsions, which is my point.
Well let's see what they think when you replace Kennedy with Kavanaugh, then. I'm not saying that the case is a slam dunk for the defendant.
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-12-20
Actually it's the opposite. Case law has roundly supported public interest over concerns of 1A rights of private business. Zoning, notices, disclosures, etc etc are either mandated or restricted speech.
Its a reach argument at best.
1 MzCherryBlossom 2018-12-20
Apparently so. Religious fruit loops strike again.
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2018-12-20
This case has major implications that go far beyond religion.
1 MzCherryBlossom 2018-12-20
That may be true but the guy is using his personal prejudices based on his religious beliefs to discriminate. While he’s entitled to his religious beliefs and the freedom to practice it shouldn’t entitle him to discriminate against others as he practices.
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2018-12-20
He doesn’t have a right to refuse his normal services to someone for that reason but he can refuse to make a custom cake, which is protected under freedom of expression.
1 wwaalleess 2018-12-20
Yes, the many, many religious fanatics posting on /r/drama are the ones downvoting you 😂😂😂
1 MzCherryBlossom 2018-12-20
😢😢😢😢😢
have a cake
1 LemonScore_ 2018-12-20
Found the tranny.
1 MzCherryBlossom 2018-12-20
Keep searching
1 Nyctor 2018-12-20
It should be self evident he's in the right and think religious people are retarded.
His business relies on custom creative works. Think of it like a graphic design company and a neo nazi walks in wanting fliers for some dumbshit nazi rally. The graphic designer and company have the first amendment protection to not be compelled to create and further views they don't agree with.
What you see as being pedantic is first amendment protections that even most retards can understand.
1 retryer 2018-12-20
The only law I pray for is the one that publically executes anyone using excess emoji usage.
1 MzCherryBlossom 2018-12-20
Brilliant. Knock urself out... 😂🤢🤦♀️🤦♀️😱💤☃️😩🖕🏻😩🖕🏻🖕🏻😘😘😘😘😢😡😘💋🤮🤣😐😐🤔😴😤🖖🏻💃🏽⚔️🚬📿💈⚰️📈🗓📂📂📏📍💜❤️💔❣️❤️🧡🧡⛎☦️☦️☯️♊️🆑🅰️🚷🔞🈯️✳️Ⓜ️🆕🆗🆗🆗🆗🆗🆗🆗🆙🆙🆙🆙🆒🆓🆒🆒🆒🆕🆒🆕🆒🆕🆒🆕🆒🆓🆓🆓🆓🆒🆓🆒🆓🆒🆓🔜🔜✔️✔️✔️🔴🔴😂
1 MrFrode 2018-12-20
There's a second part of the argument; that custom cakes are his art and the government cannot force him to make a work of art as that would be compelled speech which violates his first amendment rights.
During oral arguments the baker's lawyer agreed that the baker had not right to refuse the selling of a cake that had already been made and was available for sale.
1 MayNotBeAPervert 2018-12-20
try finding a Muslim baker, ask them to personally decorate your cake with picture of the Prophet Mohammed - see if the baker, the media reporting the story, or the genuinely probable hate-crime investigation against you that follows might clear that up for you.
1 MzCherryBlossom 2018-12-20
I’d rather have one with Jesus and Mohammed fucking although what one should be the top.
1 Alicesnakebae 2018-12-20
Isn't Mohammed depicted as a twink or what that someone else
1 MzCherryBlossom 2018-12-20
Mohammed n lovin it.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
Selling a cake already made is different than making a custom decorated cake. Both lawsuits revolve around having the baker make them a custom cake, rather than just buying a regular one.
1 MetaFactoryFactory 2018-12-20
"As a sign painter, my conscience simply does not allow me to paint a sign advertising prices SO LOW THEY MUST BE CRAZY! It goes against my religion."
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
is it your job to make strawmans all day?
1 MetaFactoryFactory 2018-12-20
Does your religion compel you to seriouspost?
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
no u seriouspost
1 Alicesnakebae 2018-12-20
I unironically think they're just a Christcuck or the guy that didn't want to make the transcake they're super defensive its hilarious
1 UrMumsMyPassword 2018-12-20
like clockwork
1 MetaFactoryFactory 2018-12-20
"called out"
Jesus christ, do you hear yourself? Maybe you can DESTROY me with an EPIC OWN next time.
You should go bake a cake. I hear baking is relaxing.
1 tron_funkin_blow 2018-12-20
Can you not read?!? He clearly states his job is to paint strawmans all day. on signs.
1 2odastream 2018-12-20
Gay fragility lmao.
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
Well, trans people aren't necessarily gay though.
1 2odastream 2018-12-20
Traps are gay tho
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
lol yeah
1 OKResident93 2018-12-20
What about traps?
1 Gilly_The_Ghillie 2018-12-20
Kinda are, though. You're either a man pretending to be a woman who likes men, a man pretending to be a woman who likes women, a woman pretending to be a man who likes women, or a woman pretending to be a man who likes men. All of those are gay.
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
This is not gay. This is a predator.
1 Gilly_The_Ghillie 2018-12-20
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SGJDrVJzMI
1 dramasexual 2018-12-20
This but unironically.
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
I didn't mean it ironically. I'm serious. They are sexual predators.
1 2DDefenseForce 2018-12-20
Hi there GC, so nice of you to drop in.
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
https://media.giphy.com/media/3ohzdYwY2JhQ1dNTHi/giphy.gif
1 2DDefenseForce 2018-12-20
Cute
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
https://tenor.com/1kes.gif
1 MayoIsSpicy 2018-12-20
Even the broken GC clock is right twice a day when it isn't calling you a rapist
1 2DDefenseForce 2018-12-20
Oh i know. A cursory view of that posters history indicates they're a lesbian bodybuilder obsessed with triceps and information security.
And yet they are still right about trans. Crazy world we live in.
1 MayoIsSpicy 2018-12-20
That sounds pretty rad tbh, more GC posters need to be like her
1 Gilly_The_Ghillie 2018-12-20
What's GC? /r/GenderCritical?
1 dramasexual 2018-12-20
Oh I know. I'm just agreeing with you.
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
Ah, gotcha 👍
1 shallowm 2018-12-20
Why is it not predatory in the other cases? Because women be some pussy ass bitches.
1 electronicwizard 2018-12-20
and they're not really people either
1 Mat_The_49th 2018-12-20
trannies are str8
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
only the lesbian ones
1 dramasexual 2018-12-20
""""""""""""""""""""lesbian"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
1 John_Cenas_Beard 2018-12-20
Well, 50% of them do.
1 gaynazifurry4bernie 2018-12-20
Oof
1 Lukthar123 2018-12-20
I know, there's 50% more to go
1 DarthT15 2018-12-20
O O F
1 ceproastaimata 2018-12-20
I mean, the first fucking condition of your shitty roleplay is not met, you stupid faggot. By not baking a cake specifically because they're trans they are discriminating against them.
Take that out of the question, aka the baker bakes the fucking cake, and this wouldn't have been a problem. Why are americanoids so retarded? What's wrong with you, seriously.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
1 DivinePrince2 2018-12-20
This confuses me so much.
Company gets to decided their target audience and should be able to serve who they want.
1 tHeSiD 2018-12-20
Because, you have to inject your god damn bullshit into everything so that it gets "noticed". Same reason there was a post here yesterday where a black lady was complaining that there are no black people posting nudes on r/gonewild
1 jctoastpig 2018-12-20
That's on par with whites complaining about low participation levels in the crack epidemic.
1 backltrack 2018-12-20
Link?
1 tHeSiD 2018-12-20
https://www.reddit.com/r/Drama/comments/a7m0pp/not_exactly_drama_but_a_rblackladies_redditor_was/
1 grep_var_log 2018-12-20
The 'victims' are doing it for the drama. Be thankful.
1 2ndBestUsernameEver 2018-12-20
The customer is a lawyer, it's obvious she only ordered from this specific bakery because she wants to get in on the LGBT lawsuits too.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
stop with the facts, it interrupts the wokeness
1 Seattle_Bussy_Lmao 2018-12-20
She ordered the cake the DAY that the baker won the previous suit.
So clearly, baker man is transphobic.
1 infinitude 2018-12-20
how is this not targeted harassment against him?
1 coldfirerules 2018-12-20
Bigots arent a protected class retard.
1 Chapocel 2018-12-20
Lemme guess: YOU are a protected class through your "lived experience and cultural background" LMAO
1 coldfirerules 2018-12-20
Cool story I guess.
1 nahnotreallytho 2018-12-20
1 nanonan 2018-12-20
Funny how the people who want to abolish class differences go around putting everyone into a class.
1 coldfirerules 2018-12-20
Nah mate, you obviously have on class.
1 nanonan 2018-12-20
Bigots are a protected class you moron because there is only one class in the eyes of the law. Rights and laws apply equally to everybody.
1 Lindseyisagirlsname 2018-12-20
Imagine unironically stating this in 2018
1 muffler_kek 2018-12-20
QUIT DOWNVOTING THE LOLCOWS YOU AUTISTS
1 GadolBoobies 2018-12-20
Considering it's already been ruled that the state of Colorado specifically denied him his rights and used the lawsuit to harass him, then have done it again, it should be a federal matter immediately.
1 Chapocel 2018-12-20
SLAP suits aren't about what is right.
1 shallowm 2018-12-20
Do you mean you think this should carry a criminal charge of harassment?
1 infinitude 2018-12-20
No but a judge can put a stop to this and should. It's obviously targeted.
1 shallowm 2018-12-20
Is it illegal?
1 infinitude 2018-12-20
It's obvious misuse of the legal process at best. I'm sure it's legal in some form.
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
Yeah, exactly. I'm a lesbian, but I'm not for tormenting this guy. The first incident...ok, the gay couple probably had no idea they'd be turned down. This second incident...those folks HAD to know they were going to get turned down. Then, they tell the media about it like they are shocked and outraged? Shit, they're just looking for attention.
I don't like religious fucktards no more than the next person, but sheesh...let's leave this dude alone already.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
IIRC in the first case the couple were shopping bakeries to get denied and sue. They supposedly arent even from that area. Also he offered to sell them a regular cake, just not a custom one. But i might be mixing those details up with that other gay cake lawsuit fiasco from around the same time.
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
I don't know all of the details of the first case either. If it's like you recall, why the hell didn't they simply either accept the generic cake or move along? How come they felt they needed to make a federal case out of it? Personally, I would have just moved along...especially if it wasn't even someone local that I may have to see on the regular.
1 e-guy 2018-12-20
the purpose was to make a federal case out of it.
Precedent has to be set somehow, so it's pretty common for lawyers and/or activists to shop around for people who are willing to challenge a law while also having a squeaky clean record.
This baker dude just had the unfortunate luck of being the one who the precedent was being set against. Twice.
A similar thing happened with the bus system and Rosa Parks: she didn't just happen to get arrested on her way home from work one day, the whole thing was set up so that the ACLU could have a good case against the discriminatory bus laws.
It's a system that sucks for the people directly involved, but it's just how things are done.
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
I see what you are saying, but let me challenge that just a little...
I don't see how getting a cake from a bakery is anything like...remotely similar to what Rosa Parks did. Here is why I think that...
Rosa Parks was using a public service (public transit). To my understanding this was not a privately owned bus line. I could be wrong? Please do correct me if I am.
Having a cake made by a specific bakery versus simply choosing another (and I'm sure there are plenty out there, but I'm not a bakery expert lol)...versus being made to sit separately on a bus that is probably the ONLY bus line to choose from...I just think that's different. ???
This cake thing just seems like a privilege sort of thing whereas what Rosa Parks endured was simply wanting to be treated like a human on something she didn't have much a choice whether to use?
1 e-guy 2018-12-20
Well, I wasn't trying to make a personal statement one way or the other, just trying to illustrate the situation with an example that most people are probably familiar with.
Personally, I agree with you and with the Supreme Court about the degree to which the baker is required to bake the cake: he isn't allowed to openly discriminate against someone just for being gay, but allowing them to purchase a pre-made cake, just not a custom cake, is fine and satisfies that requirement.
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
I see. Yes, I agree that the offer to give them a generic cake satisfies the basic requirement set by law about open discrimination.
1 llapingachos 2018-12-20
A closer example would be the sit ins at segregated lunch counters.
1 degorius 2018-12-20
Not really, segregation was mandatory most places. Dictating how and what customers he serves is more in line with Jim Crow.
1 llapingachos 2018-12-20
It depended on which state. In Georgia segregation was mandatory but in North Carolina the Woolworth's lunch counter where the sit in movement began was only beholden to its own management.
You didn't need to go full retard. The civil rights act and jim crow laws are technically the same thing because they both involve the government imposing its will on private businesses.
1 degorius 2018-12-20
How the fuck are you going to restate what I said and call me a retard?
1 llapingachos 2018-12-20
We're all retards, no hard feelings.
1 degorius 2018-12-20
It was in fact a private bus line contracted by the city, required by law to segregate by the state. They way government was using private business was part of the complications there, the bus line wasn't legally allowed to integrate, the bus driver could have actually faced criminal charges if he didn't pull the bus over and call the cops. Jim Crow was law, not optional.
You might look into The Negro Motorist Green Book to see some of the complications that get involved with this sort public facing private business stuff.
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
TIL. Good stuff!
1 nahnotreallytho 2018-12-20
Uh, no. That isn't how it works.
The point is that, in both bus law and private shop law, activists did not like the currently practiced legal reality, and felt that they deserved better under the letter of the law.
In an attempt to turn legal practice into something closer to what they want, they decided to challenge the current legal reality, in court, at as high a level as they can manage.
The objective of this form of activism, which applies and is comparable to busses AND cakes, is to win a federal court case that other people can point to in the future when they make you follow those newly defined/clarified legal rules.
To do that, you shop around for the shittiest defendant you can find, and a paradigm of virtue for a plaintiff, hoping to influence the verdict beyond the letter of the law.
And then you get shot down because fuck your cake.
1 degorius 2018-12-20
Plessy v Furguson, enshrining separate but equal doctrine, was a giant backfire by an early civil rights group and liberal business interests doing this.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
Boils down to making legal precedence for this kindof thing. Also so they could get some sort of lived fame and the law firm representing them would get a huge notch to put in their portfolio.
Furthermore, it serves their pathological ideology. Which at its core hates Christians and Males.
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
The gay community doesn't hate males. As far as I understand, the trans community does not hate males either. Matter of fact, it's dominated by males. Anyhow, I don't want to get into all of that.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
Im gonna give you the benefit of the doubt. Most gays dont hate men or christians. But the Pathological Ideology running below the surface (or on the surface in some cases) of the Progressive Movement is totally opposition to The Juedeo-Christian Western Male Patriarchy. Which boils to the surface in court cases like this.
1 Mat_The_49th 2018-12-20
Are you LARPing rn or saying this stuff unironically?
1 Ls777 2018-12-20
No worse, it's a lobster
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
Well, I do have to agree with this bit. However, I wouldn't equate that with "hate" though. No one is dragging men into alleys and beating them death. To my knowledge, there have not been any hate crimes committed against men in the name of "progressive ideology".
Western male patriarchy does need to go away, but it isn't. I'm tempted to go into why I think the male to female trans movement has taken off like it has, but this isn't the subreddit for that or else I'll be featured. lol
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
Are you being serious? You think the entire enlightened Western culture needs to go away? The society then ended slavery, gave women the right to vote, and gays the right the marry? And since its a "male patriarchy", then women had no hand in these accomplishments? What would you replace it with?
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
I would ask you if you are being serious, because you are saying western culture revolves around male patriarchy...which is ridiculous.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
Well which is it? Either Western Men have subjugated women and minorities for its benefit since its inception or there is no male patriarchy and Western ism is a product of men and women struggling together to create Western Culture?
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
lol I'm not the one claiming western culture is synonymous with male patriarchy...you are. I don't have jack shit to prove.
1 trilateral1 2018-12-20
so you agree with option 2.
that's the one that makes more sense.
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
This was not BECAUSE of male patriarchy, this was DESPITE it.
1 Warbring3r 2018-12-20
lmao 😂
1 CirqueDuFuder 2018-12-20
Oh women ended slavery eh?
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
If you are going to credit men for that you need to also credit them with creating the problem in the first place.
Also, crediting the groups in charge is only...crediting the groups in charge. There wasn't an option for women to hold seats of power at that time.
1 CirqueDuFuder 2018-12-20
Well what do you mean "in spite of" exactly? Women certainly were in charge as well unless you think royalty was only one sex?
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
Weren't we talking about "western culture" aka the United States?
1 CirqueDuFuder 2018-12-20
You think slavery only existed in one country?
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
lol no, dear. We were talking about western culture, dear. Go take a nap, your brain is being strained.
1 CirqueDuFuder 2018-12-20
Honey, the words are in writing right above you.
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
https://i.imgur.com/cZ3Ysyd.gifv
1 trilateral1 2018-12-20
No. It was white men, who put morality and universalist principles above their own benefit.
This is almost unique in the history of the world.
1 Karmaisforsuckers 2018-12-20
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
1 trilateral1 2018-12-20
that's what lefties actually believe?
Trump won because millions of voters who voted for Obama preferred Trump over Clinton.
1 Karmaisforsuckers 2018-12-20
1 trilateral1 2018-12-20
who passed those laws (end slavery, voting rights, civil rights,...)?
white men.
1 stiverino 2018-12-20
I got cheeto dust in my eyes from reading this
1 trilateral1 2018-12-20
sounds like you need to clean your room.
1 Barton_Foley 2018-12-20
Well, I do not think that is because they don't want to. I would agree that the vast majority do not want to. But there certainly is a very vocal subset that would really like to. They just haven't figured out a way to do it safely, effectively and free of legal consequences.
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
https://imgur.com/gallery/hfS4XWk
1 VicisSubsisto 2018-12-20
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/you-voted-donald-trump-yelled-man-beaten-chicago-streets/
https://www.tmz.com/2017/01/04/chicago-kidnapping-torture-facebook-live-arrests/
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
lol your proof is a #magatard getting a beat down (gender is not a focus there), and a TMZ article? You do know TMZ is a tabloid, right?
Either way, the focus is Trump hate in those crimes.
1 VicisSubsisto 2018-12-20
Quote from the first:
From the second:
Non-tabloid link for the second case, which was widely covered and really how have you not heard of it:
1 nomad1c 2018-12-20
meh, grindr the company seems pretty anti-male. which is weird as 99% of their customers are men
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
LOL! Grindr is an exclusively male hook-up app. How is that anti male?
1 nomad1c 2018-12-20
the people running it seem anti-male. they seem to loathe that guys on there might not be into femme dudes or have racial preferences. and they shit on masculinity a lot
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
Oh, I don't know about all of that as I'm not a gay guy, so I don't use Grindr. But yeah, most apps start as one thing and evolve into something slightly different than the founder and/or developer intended. That's just how it is.
1 heavenlytoaster 2018-12-20
You sure seem to not know a lot about the retards representing your political sphere.
1 Mat_The_49th 2018-12-20
You seem oddly familiar with that service...
1 nomad1c 2018-12-20
i’m bi so ofc
1 trilateral1 2018-12-20
what's odd about that, you fucking homophobic fag?
1 skyrimporn64 2018-12-20
that's just bottoms being bottoms. STOP TOP SHAMING TODAY!
1 Mat_The_49th 2018-12-20
Just how much fentanyl-derived brain damage do you have?
1 afclu13 2018-12-20
It's not hate. It's pure attention seeking behaviour with a record level of self importance that comes with being too woke.
1 QuestionC 2018-12-20
You are giving lawyers way too much moral credit.
1 spookyguy109 2018-12-20
They wanted to set a court precedent.
1 kaczynskireborn 2018-12-20
All American cultural shifts (e.g. legalization of abortion) have been the result of judges deciding for everyone else what is acceptable and the government shoving propaganda down to the next generations to accept these changes. Amerimutts are totally incapable of critical thinking
1 backltrack 2018-12-20
Oh my fucking God. Make gay marriage illegal for just them.
1 Sc0tty2hotty 2018-12-20
Yes as a gay black lesbian jew I think we should leave this poor man alone. You cannot question me on this as my gay black lesbian jewiness prevents such things
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
Here's your Platinum Minority card.
1 KingNothing305 2018-12-20
Lesbians in r/Drama?
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
Believe
1 imguralbumbot 2018-12-20
Hi, I'm a bot for linking direct images of albums with only 1 image
https://i.imgur.com/0fXmwjY.jpg
Source | Why? | Creator | ignoreme | deletthis
1 KingNothing305 2018-12-20
Your X files meme isnt enough I'm going to need video proof of you having sex with another woman.
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
I bet you would...lol
1 KingNothing305 2018-12-20
So no?
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
sorry
1 KingNothing305 2018-12-20
You're no fun
1 dramasexual 2018-12-20
Yeah, I'm of two minds on this one. On the one hand, I generally support anti-discrimination laws, to an extent. On the other, given that it's an artistic endeavor it feels way too much like the govt compelling speech to me. He's free to refuse to put bible verses on cakes because he doesn't agree with the message, but he's not free to refuse to make a gay or tranny cake? Some mozzie who wants a "death to infidels" cake isn't gonna have luck forcing someone to make it. If he's generally free to decide which custom cakes he makes, this shit seems pretty retarded.
The religionfags also make a good point that anti-discrimination laws are intended to make sure people won't have undue difficulty finding service, which is clearly not an issue here.
Leave cakeboi alone tbh
1 GadolBoobies 2018-12-20
It's not a complicated case.
He never refused service to a protected class.
He offered them any other existing cake or pre-existing wedding cake design. He never even refused to put their names on a normal wedding cake. What he refused was their design for a rainbow flag gay wedding cake.
Particular styles of cakes are not a protected class.
As he didn't violate the law in any remote way, the only way the case went forward was due to rampant illegal targeting by the state.
Which is what the supreme court ruled on. That he was flagrantly denied a fair trial knowingly by the state, who were attempting to cement their laws in SCOTUS precedent.
They never had a case to begin with, even under their own state law, as he never refused service, tried to accommodate them by helping them find another gay wedding cake store and gay cakes aren't a protected class (only refusing service to someone because they are gay, which he didn't do).
Same shit here but now even more retarded, as not only are state officials telling the activist judge not to go forward (as they will lose again and this time he can sue them for insane amounts as it shows direct state harassment) but gender transitioning is not even a protected class, let alone a cake for it.
1 dramasexual 2018-12-20
Eh, where it gets hinky is that a gay couple couldn't be reasonably expected to use a cake with, say, straight-specific decorations on it, which a lot of wedding cakes have. Reminds me a little of the "gays can get married to someone of the opposite sex just like anyone else!" argument from before obergefell. Like, yeah, but that doesn't serve their actual needs at all.
1 24HER032 2018-12-20
that's gay
1 zombiegirl2010 2018-12-20
in the best way too
1 24HER032 2018-12-20
amen to that 🙏
1 MayNotBeAPervert 2018-12-20
what's confusing about professional litigation trolls engaging in blatant litigation trolling?
1 d-amazo 2018-12-20
is it going to be another case where it's found out the dude was like "I don't want to make that cake, but you can have any other of my cakes. Also, here is the number of a bakery who will make your cake for you if you want."?
1 jctoastpig 2018-12-20
Yeah it's just freedom of speech/religion vs anti discrimination. Both sides are severely retarded and very motivated, so this is a good situation. This baker thinks he's Jesus on the cross and the attorney expects to be considered a 21st century rosa parks.
1 coldfirerules 2018-12-20
Pretty solid drama IMO.
1 nanonan 2018-12-20
Why not throw slavery in there, seeing the state wants to force his labour against his will.
1 GadolBoobies 2018-12-20
Same guy.
1 SuperiorExcess 2018-12-20
Pretty sure bakers are just going to make the cake with "extra special" ingredients included if this trend keeps up. It's retarded because non-retards now can't trust cakes anymore.
1 Alicesnakebae 2018-12-20
Unless they wanna get sued by everyone they should keep it to custom cakes for special people
1 d-amazo 2018-12-20
you realize that this literally never happens, anywhere, right? in any kind of food service situation?
1 SuperiorExcess 2018-12-20
How would you know in a mom and pop bakery? Butchers selling human meat is very occasionally a thing, but a baker throwing some disgusting shit in a cake for fags that they hate because they took away their business? Hmmm 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔
Go smoke some more weed behind your Burger King, and drop the foot lettuce from my Whopper.
1 d-amazo 2018-12-20
because i've had jobs before. you know, working in places like this?
food workers don't give even a fraction of a shit about you. definitely not enough to risk a lawsuit just to put a booger in your salad.
1 SuperiorExcess 2018-12-20
Opposed to risking a lawsuit to not make a fagcake?
1 coldfirerules 2018-12-20
Dude you sound 12.
I knew cooks who would fuck with the food just to get at the fucking servers they didnt like, never mind pissy customers.
1 The_Reason_Trump_Won 2018-12-20
Dude what
You think the average pissed off Mickey D's worker even thinks of a the possibility of a lawsuit when they think about fucki g with your food?
1 shallowm 2018-12-20
https://www.reddit.com/r/Drama/comments/7oetrz/this_is_why_we_need_mayocide_nsfw/
1 jaredschaffer27 2018-12-20
lol, that would be hilarious
"I'd like a cake for my gender transition coming out."
"Sure, no thing. What gender are you changing to?"
"A man."
"One cake sneakily full of estrogen coming right up."
1 soupvsjonez 2018-12-20
The people that sued them originally were fishing for businesses that wouldn't do business with gay people. They called a bunch of different bakeries until they found someone who took the bait. That's why this seems so retarded.
1 IllustriousQuail 2018-12-20
It's not just about winning on some culture-war issue. It's also about rubbing the loser's face in it.
1 NoChickswithDicks 2018-12-20
Progressive are really rapey and love making people do things they don't want to do. And then giving them lectures on consent.
1 imstartingtogetangry 2018-12-20
To make an example of him.
1 VicisSubsisto 2018-12-20
Why not?
1 Wegwerf540 2018-12-20
what are Jim Crow laws
1 nanonan 2018-12-20
If only he was a faceless multinational corporation, he could refuse business to whomsoever they pleased.
1 Lindseyisagirlsname 2018-12-20
I find this argument retarded. Laws should be in place to protect minorities from oppressive majorities. Your argument could and was stated pre-civil rights as to why would a colored want to go to a business where they aren't wanted!?!? a hyuck hyuck *banjo music plays in background
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2018-12-20
I thought conservatives wanted private businesses to be forced to accommodate views they don’t necessarily agree with?
1 LemonScore_ 2018-12-20
And it isn't legal for them to because of anti-discrimination laws.
I thought that liberals wanted freedom of religion?
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2018-12-20
For the record, I support the baker in this case.
1 Mat_The_49th 2018-12-20
This whole thing is retarded but nowhere was this man's freedom to practice his religion impacted.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
how far will the tranny posters go?
1 RestoreFear 2018-12-20
Christian's draw the line at the foreskin. Anything more and it's mental illness.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
thats a quality bantz, ill give you that
1 I_DRINK_TO_FORGET 2018-12-20
Forcing a man to make commissioned artwork against his personal beliefs or values indeed infringes his right to practice his religion.
1 Mat_The_49th 2018-12-20
Putting aside the fact that trannies aren't mentioned anywhere in the Good Book, the dude was asked to bake a multi-coloured cake. Nothing overly political like the last time with the gay marriage.
This entire thing is just some fragile Christcuck swallowing bait.
1 mtg_liebestod 2018-12-20
You could easily say that marriages aren’t inherently political too - iirc the cake in question wasn’t an actual policy endorsement of any sort.
And the courts take a pretty strong stance towards not telling people that their supposed religious convictions are not really religious in nature.
1 Mat_The_49th 2018-12-20
A secular marriage conducted by state authorities is definitely more political compared to some rando, in-house gender reveal party.
And, again, all he was asked to do was bake a multi-colored cake. Not write some pro-trap manifesto. He could just not be a retard and take the bait.
1 mtg_liebestod 2018-12-20
But those facts probably aren't material to his objection, since it would've been the same even if it were a private ceremony.
1 MetaFactoryFactory 2018-12-20
Does it though? What faith is he? Holy Non-Cakebaking Baptist?
1 Ls777 2018-12-20
Lol
1 I_DRINK_TO_FORGET 2018-12-20
Thats exactly what a request for specific things is, a commission. It doesnt matter that this bitch asked for 2 colors. I 100% guarantee the reason she asked for something so basic was so her lawyer could try making the same dumbass argument you just did.
1 Ls777 2018-12-20
Mfw literally every customer request for anything is an artistic commission
We are all beautiful creative artists on this day
1 Metatron58 2018-12-20
freedom of religion only applies if you're not Christian according to liberals.
1 LemonScore_ 2018-12-20
Pretty much.
1 Darkhan112 2018-12-20
Not really, they just like to bitch about businesses not accommodating views they don't agree with because then, they can play a victim. But they don't necessarily think that businesses should be FORCED to accommodate views they don't agree with. At least I think they don't.
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2018-12-20
I’ve heard several conservatives call for applying the protections of the first amendment in their entirety to websites that host user-uploaded content. Ironically, socialists/Chapocels tend to strongly disagree with this despite supporting the nationalization of large websites, which would of course severely curtail their ability to censor speech.
1 Gilly_The_Ghillie 2018-12-20
I can agree to this, either you act as a platform and only remove illegal content and enjoy the protections that offers or you act as a publisher by curating content and are punished for anything you host.
The alternative is a spiral into corporatocracy, where corporations control what you see and think, which leftists should be fighting against tooth and nail but are instead fighting for tooth and nail.
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2018-12-20
I actually do agree with applying those regulations to large monopolies.
1 Gilly_The_Ghillie 2018-12-20
I'd be happy to limit it to public corporations. If a private company wants to do that shit I'm fine with it, but when you're a public corporation who can potentially be part owned by anyone I think that changes things.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
Also for companies like google, alot of their tech has been financed by the federal government for data collection.
1 I_DRINK_TO_FORGET 2018-12-20
This is the real solution to the problem. If they want to curate legal content from their site they are a publisher and should lose their protections given for hosting third party content.
1 2Potemkin2Village 2018-12-20
Wow this is super arbitrary
1 RandolphCox 2018-12-20
i actually called my senator to bring up an idea, which is a first for me. i think each time a conservative is banned they should have a law where it opensa n investigation on hillary clinton and soros. if a liberal is banned they donate money to israel
1 VicisSubsisto 2018-12-20
Leftists hate Israel though.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
The conservatives just want websites to either identify as a "publisher" (Which allows them to pick and choose stuff on their platform, but comes with some legal responsibilities) or a "Platform" (which allows everyone to be on there, but comes with legal protections). You cant have both.
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2018-12-20
So is any private establishment where people come to socialize responsible for everything people say and do there unless it identifies as a “platform” and loses its ability to stop people from saying things it doesn’t like?
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
Yes, its a mix of FCC and other regulatory agencies rulings. But, basically, if youre choosing the content (regardless on the reason), then youre a "Publisher" and you are subject to FCC regulation. But if youre a "Platform" youre covered from being sued for the content being hosted since youre subject to the 1st amendment. Google, Youtube, etc want to pick and choose the content but still be considered a "platform". The right just wants them to get off the fence.
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2018-12-20
Huh. I did not realize that this applied to physical establishments. I’ll have to look into this more. Thank you for the information.
1 SlowFatHusky 2018-12-20
Publisher vs Platform is similar to common carrier status or not in the telecom world. If you don't want to be liable for the content your users send, you don't get to censor any of it.
1 VicisSubsisto 2018-12-20
Fuck you for coming in here with your open mind and your willingness to consider opposing views. This isn't /r/civildiscussion, asshole, it's /r/drama.
1 MetaFactoryFactory 2018-12-20
This sounds almost reasonable. I'm sure congress and lawyers will find some way to fuck it up.
1 Karmaisforsuckers 2018-12-20
That is all entirely bullshit on par with sovereign citizens.
Twitter HAS to host republitards because it uses an ADMIRALITY FLAG which makes its legally a Navy Ship!!!
1 mtg_liebestod 2018-12-20
Two different things, with two different bodies of caselaw behind them. The baker in question “accomodates the view” of the customer by not telling them to gtfo of the store.
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2018-12-20
Couldn’t you argue that forcing a website to host user-created content is compelled speech?
1 mtg_liebestod 2018-12-20
No, since user-generated content on that platform is not considered to be the platform's speech. If you want to get back to the platform/publisher stuff discussed elsewhere and say that the website is being forced to publish content it disagrees with, then this ends up invoking a new legal framework that likely has a lot of unintended ramifications.
The whole selective "we can ban this as our own speech/expression rights, but oh we also can't be held accountable for the speech/expression of our users" stance is bullshit though.
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2018-12-20
Fair enough.
1 snow_bono 2018-12-20
I think the issue that a lot of conservatives have is the liberals are given carte blanche to have it both ways, and rightoids are at the point of feeling that trying to stick by a moral principal that the left has no interest in entertaining is useless.
If your enemy uses guns, it's of no benefit to you to keep using a knife out of moral principal.
1 Karmaisforsuckers 2018-12-20
🤣🤣🤣🤣
1 KingNothing305 2018-12-20
Like that time those turbo autists screamed at Starbucks cause they didnt have red cups for some dead jew.
1 meatpuppet79 2018-12-20
I don't think so, no. The opposite of that.
1 normalresponsibleman 2018-12-20
Talk to me when someone is telling me kind of cakes I'm not allowed to buy. Retard.
1 grep_var_log 2018-12-20
I hope someone comes in with a request for a cake about a pedo marrying a kid or something.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
Trans theory is rooted deeply in pedophilia
1 Gtyyler 2018-12-20
It is all over for John Moneycels
1 computerbone 2018-12-20
On a related note fuck DGR if they had there way most of the world would starve. Interesting video BTW.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
Yah im not advocating for that guy's crazy environmentalism. but its funny that a figurative high priest of leftist thought is being protested because he dared read outloud the Queer theory Founding document.
1 computerbone 2018-12-20
Honestly the drive towards transgression a la Foucault seems very relevant to r/Drama and to what /b/ used to be. any thoughts on that?
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
To me, i think its pretty complex. I think its an admixture of edge-lord-ism, young men who have been over-stimulated by the internet age, and a dedicated (but very small) group purposefully pushing trans-identity to subvert impressionable men. /b/ uncovered a discord server a few years ago of dozens of people who were coordinating sissy/trap postings to lure in young men and kids in the hope to push them to transitioning.
1 computerbone 2018-12-20
I'd be interested in more information on that. My point I guess is that the edgelordism (transgression) is the driving force behind it all and that that edgelordism thrives in /b/ particularly because in /b/ there is very little knowlge/power in the Foucault sense to enforce social norms. on face it appears ironic that /b/ can both love and hate freedom of expression so much but I think it speaks to a deeper libertine fascist connection that appears in De Sade but which I can never quite put my finger on. I don't really know what I mean to say.
1 shallowm 2018-12-20
If you're talking about the discord thing, here's the /r/drama thread about it. The whole thing was just a bunch of overblown screenshots though, imo.
1 Colonel_N_Sane 2018-12-20
Take the Linkola pill
1 totalrandomperson 2018-12-20
Is that supposed to be a bad thing?
1 computerbone 2018-12-20
I don't get to choose which ones starve so yeah.
1 Alicesnakebae 2018-12-20
So are trans people pastors or what
1 The_Long_Connor 2018-12-20
Wow, that's fucked up. I've literally got no problems if your trans gay or whatever, but when your identity and or sexuality starts to negatively impact others lives, you can fuck right off. He didn't really bring ups trans people but they think he hates them for some reason. What's happening?
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
queer theory is the basis of trans identity.
1 The_Long_Connor 2018-12-20
I don't get it. Just because you're born a pedo doesn't mean we should accept it. People are born psychopaths, but that doesn't mean we should support them either. We have these societal norms for a reason.
1 Mke_hunt 2018-12-20
What the fuck is it with cakes a lgbt people. Bake your own you dolts
1 RandolphCox 2018-12-20
short answer: lobsters
long answer: theyre literally satanic
1 EarnestNoMeta 2018-12-20
umm SPOILER ALERT PLEASE.
Some of us haven't seen that episode
1 UrMumsMyPassword 2018-12-20
Daily reminder that it's not about equality, it's about revenge.
1 THOT-AUDITOR 2018-12-20
They're out of institutional discrimination to fight against in the courts, so LGBT-focused lawyers are now going after private citizens to keep their profile up.
In this case, it's because the plaintiff was so triggered by the Supreme Court telling the state of Colorado "look, you have to at least pretend to respect this guy's religious beliefs when prosecuting him" that she called and tried to order the tranny cake that same day.
1 BIknkbtKitNwniS 2018-12-20
If a gay guy walks in and asks for a chocolate cake and the baker tells him to get lost, that's illegal and wrong.
If a gay guy walks in and asks for a custom cake that says "I love cock" on it, he's within his rights to refuse. Just like he could refuse a cake that says "I hate Jews"
In this situation, it's not clear exactly what kind of cake the trans gender lawyer asked for. If it's just a blue cake with pink insides, he might be in trouble. If it says something about transitioning he might have a case.
1 Aiwatcher 2018-12-20
I want a cake with a huge chocolate dick on it, and when you drizzle it with warm syrup, the dick melts open and reveals a fresh pink vagina. You're a bigot if you don't make this for me.
1 DonnysDiscountGas 2018-12-20
This, but unironically
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
there is a bunch of people in these comments arguing that i you dont, youre a conservetard snowflake bigot.
1 unrulyfarmhand 2018-12-20
I could have sworn this dude doesn’t do custom cakes in the first place.
1 trj820 2018-12-20
Sounds custom to me.
1 unrulyfarmhand 2018-12-20
You're right, from his website:
So he does do customs, he just doesn't want to use his talent to celebrate gay shit. Which should be his right.
Still waiting for someone to ask an islamic baker to make a mohammed cake.
1 HumongousGentleman 2018-12-20
While I agree, this comparison keeps getting brought up. Where are all these islamic bakeries? I'm pretty sure I've never encountered one. I get the point, liberals wouldn't jump to force them to make some shit against their religion. It's just a lazy comparison cause it's like "well what if we made a gay baker celebrate heterosexuality". Sounds good on paper but kinda retarded when you think about it.
1 unrulyfarmhand 2018-12-20
Yeah, I don't mean a literal islamic bakery, I just mean they would never attempt to impose their degeneracy on islamists.
Christianity has gone through major reformation, unfortunately, and gays seem to love kicking it while it's down.
Muslims still actively murder gays in their countries but the gay activists are too busy worrying about cakes to take up that cause.
1 HumongousGentleman 2018-12-20
Not necessarily in disagreement, but it's not really a realistic comparison since Christianity is like the major religion in the US, where this is taking place and all.
1 unrulyfarmhand 2018-12-20
That's a reasonable response, I just see a lot of pro-islam and unironic "religion of peace" statements coming from gays who feel that they have solidarity with Muslims in being persecuted when in reality Muslims feel just as much, if not more disgust towards them than Christians do.
1 HumongousGentleman 2018-12-20
Yeah I get that, and a lot of it is reddit. I'll give you that even IRL they keep their mutual hatred under wraps since both groups are generally hated by the right and vice versa, so that would exain some of it.
1 Sir_Green_Britches 2018-12-20
It's an ally of convenience thing. If Muslims didn't catch as much flak from generally right wing people, they'd be on the same side of nearly every issue. Same with super Catholic Mexicans, tbh.
1 unrulyfarmhand 2018-12-20
Except they would like Islam to be the controlling religion of our world, and most Christians would rather not let that happen.
1 Sir_Green_Britches 2018-12-20
Who is they? The gays?
1 unrulyfarmhand 2018-12-20
No, Muslims.
1 shallowm 2018-12-20
Do you see this moral and societal degeneration happening in your average Muslim country? I'll answer that for you: fuck no, because they don't let this degeneracy slide, like fucking liberal CUCKS in the West. There's only one solution, and that is for everyone to convert to Islam.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) didn't tolerate degeneracy like gay marriage or gender bending—nay! He mandated the ostracization and execution of gays, and made sure they would not become commonplace or accepted by the rest of the community. He made sure to establish clear gender roles and didn't tolerate this "gender identity" trash.
In the meantime, you have Western society accepting gays, slut pride, gender-mixing, new genders, no genders, LGBT, and who knows what else?! Western society is truly degenerating without guidance, and I fear that as time passes, these degenerate groups only gain more and more power.
Muslims and conservatives might think they're enemies, but in reality, they're closer to each other than they think! An alliance would prove very fruitful for both sides.
Just repeat the declaration of faith after me:
أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وحده لا شريك له وأشهد أن محمدا عبده ورسوله
and you'll be right on your way to becoming a great Muslim!
1 unrulyfarmhand 2018-12-20
Sounds great but the Prophet Muhammad, (peace be upon him), fucked a child, which I just can’t jive with.
Also I’d rather have Christian terrorism take off and another expulsion of a certain group be the catalyst to correcting our course.
1 shallowm 2018-12-20
The child consented though...
1 Megazor 2018-12-20
https://youtu.be/RgWIhYAtan4
1 saint2e 2018-12-20
Was looking for this.
1 coldfirerules 2018-12-20
"Custom" as in "here's a list of 3 things that I can change about any fucking cake ever because its so goddamn simple even a drama poster could figure it out" sure.
1 2Potemkin2Village 2018-12-20
Oh wow are you constitutional lawyer? This is a really informative comment.
1 BIknkbtKitNwniS 2018-12-20
I actually am.
1 2Potemkin2Village 2018-12-20
Astounding. Drama poster and a constitutional legal scholar. That's some high I shit right there.
1 BIknkbtKitNwniS 2018-12-20
Those are not even my most impressive accomplishments. You should see my body pillow collection.
1 NormanImmanuel 2018-12-20
Go work on your blog, Ken.
1 myaccountnamehere 2018-12-20
The way I understand it, he offered the gay customer an ordinary cake, just not a custom one.
Technically the gay person wasn't being denied for purchasing a cake, simply being denied of a custom made one because the baker does not want to make a custom cake for a same-sex occasion due to religious reasons.
1 warnerrr 2018-12-20
They asked for a blue on the outside, pink on the inside cake, to celebrate going from one gender to the other. Obviously the baker holds beliefs which this goes against and refused. Weird how the trender had to explicitly mention the gender transition aspect, and not just ask for the cake.
1 coldfirerules 2018-12-20
Kinda proves that this has nothing to do with the actual cake and the baker is just a retarded bigot tho.
1 warnerrr 2018-12-20
I'm not religious, at all, but I don't think I can go into a Muslim bakery and ask them to bake me a bacon flavored cake, just like I don't think I can force a Christian baker to make me a gay themed cake.
It's quite a stretch to turn "I'll bake you a cake, but my religious views are such that it won't mention your sexuality on it" into "reeeeeeeeeeeeeee! He wouldn't serve them and hates the gays!"
1 Alicesnakebae 2018-12-20
Tbh if you wanted a bacon flavored cake he has all rights to beat you with a shoe
1 mcantrell 2018-12-20
"She" asked for the cake then told him it was to celebrate "her" transition. "She" is blatantly targeting him because he won the previous lawsuit, and iirc has gone on the record as saying so.
1 MrFrode 2018-12-20
What if that same trans person wanted the same custom cake from a Jewish baker for the purposes of celebrating Hitler's birthday?
It is just the cake itself which can be considered expression or does that expression extend to the use the cake is for? I don't know if the law is clear on this just yet.
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-12-20
trannies are downvoting this
1 Seattle_Bussy_Lmao 2018-12-20
Heavily, lmao
1 Gilly_The_Ghillie 2018-12-20
It's painfully obvious for everyone to see that this dude was trying to deliberately bait the baker. If they don't want to promote your message they shouldn't havce to.
1 SkipperPauline 2018-12-20
I did some elite hacking skills with an azure fork and got that NSA transcripts from the bakery:
"Gimmie da sexless battenberg you fucking fundo retard lolol"
"the power of christ compels me to put some icing on your chromozones feggit"
"listen to me Brother Brownfinger, if you dont bake my shemale cake I will fuck you up in court"
"In the name of Allah, I will never accept your way of life....unless you become a priest and fuck kids for decades and get the pope to cover it up, then I will bake you a nice big cake"
"see you in court. Do you validate parking?"
More stories if I can survive this opioid fuelled breakdown.
1 Contourboar 2018-12-20
Radical centrist NSA.
1 MetaFactoryFactory 2018-12-20
I hope the right wing fights back by commissioning liberal cake-makers to bake cakes celebrating their daughter's arranged marriage, or like, their gun-naming ceremony or their son's de-gayification conversion.
1 SlackBabo 2018-12-20
They’d do any of those. Republicans are the only ones who do this type of thing.
1 Burnnoticelover 2018-12-20
Except, y’know, when they kick people out of their restaurant for having the wrong beliefs.
1 SlackBabo 2018-12-20
Only with actual White House staff, which I’d say isn’t the same as someone with just wrong beliefs. But alright, fair enough. I was mostly thinking liberal business owners tend to be more moderate liberals, and probably wouldn’t be mind making things for a republican event
1 TheColdTurtle 2018-12-20
😴😴😴
1 HeyHoneyHey 2018-12-20
I bet you could find a lot of New York bakers who wouldn’t make a trump cake
1 JaylenBGOAT 2018-12-20
I get the sentiment but the first and last don't seem like fair comparisons.
1 Rosaarch 2018-12-20
retards: "private companies gets to do whatever they want, they can serve you or don't" also retards: "bake that cake bigot"
1 Alicesnakebae 2018-12-20
Horse shoe real
1 Sc0tty2hotty 2018-12-20
the former is a right wing view and the latter is left wing, what are you even trying to say
1 Biohazard72 2018-12-20
r/enlightenedcentrism
1 Infidel6 2018-12-20
/r/bittertankies
1 Rosaarch 2018-12-20
This but unretarded
1 coldfirerules 2018-12-20
other retards: the exact opposite of both arguments with zero self awareness
1 Rosaarch 2018-12-20
retards: "private companies don't get to do whatever they want, they don't get to serve you or don't"
also retards: " don't bake that cake bigot"
1 coldfirerules 2018-12-20
ehh good enough for r/drama
1 Rosaarch 2018-12-20
good enough for reddit
1 newcomer_ts 2018-12-20
I want to know what GC has to say about this.
1 TheThirstyMayor 2018-12-20
This is honestly hilarious. Its like the collective conscioueness of all the woke retards in Colorado decided as one to fuck this one particular baker into submission.
Like, how awesome does your life have to be for you to expend serious time and money to end the oppression caused by the random neighborhood cake guy.
1 unrulyfarmhand 2018-12-20
Eventually the Supreme Court will have to rule on whether it’s ok to be disgusted by shit eaters.
1 Protista_of_Peace 2018-12-20
I'm with the baker on this. Not because I'm particularly caring about compelled speech or any of the legal minutiae. It's because I think we have a god given right to tell assholes to fuck off. No reason to tell your fucking life story just to get a pink and blue cake.
1 YummyCummies 2018-12-20
Do you think he would’ve still made it if the train hadn’t brought up trains?
1 Protista_of_Peace 2018-12-20
train = trans?
Yeah, make me a pink cake with blue frosting by Tuesday. Like a normal person orders a cake.
1 RagePong 2018-12-20
Or don’t. Who cares?
1 TotesMessenger 2018-12-20
I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:
If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)
1 bcat124 2018-12-20
Tbh that baker is dumb as fuck. I would just bake their cake and shit on it. Out icing on the whole thing and tadaaaa, give xer xer cake
1 NoChickswithDicks 2018-12-20
This will have the same result, as it's clear he would have made the cake if this trans-activist hadn't volunteered the purpose of the cake.
You have no right to commission a piece. I don't know why on earth progressives get off on making people do what they don't want to do (probably the concentration of male feminists in the movement), but the court is only going to be more hostile to their arguments now that Kennedy is gone.
1 HansCool 2018-12-20
That's probably the reason they're entertaining this case as it's the one thing that's different.
1 AtlasRust 2018-12-20
Any budding entrepreneurs out there should know that trannycakes.com is available.
The market is ready to go.
1 imstartingtogetangry 2018-12-20
lol wtf
1 shallowm 2018-12-20
edit: for all those dms telling me to kill myself, i don't think so sweaty
1 A663954512658449695 2018-12-20
Just go to a different fucking shop. He has a right to be a bigot, and you have the right to not give him your fucking money.
1 ncnotebook 2018-12-20
If he's declining service for you being gay/trans, then I can see why that's legally problematic. But baking a specific type of cake? Let the people decide whether they wanna give him business or not.
1 A663954512658449695 2018-12-20
Then go somewhere else. His loss. He's not getting the money.
1 ncnotebook 2018-12-20
If you decline a customer for no reason other than they are black (ignoring the type of cake), then that would be illegal. I feel it's only natural to extend it to this.
1 Hatredstyle 2018-12-20
And people wonder why nobody takes the left seriously. Let the dude be trans-phobic or whatever. Maybe even try BUYING CAKES FROM SOMEONE ELSE. This is just a bid to get attention, sympathy, and money. Undermines the real lgbt movement by acting like they are.
1 spookyguy109 2018-12-20
These attorneys are harassing this guy and trying to ruin his life. This is beyond horrible.
1 sadderreborn 2018-12-20
JEsus christ i thoight it was a different baker but its the same denver colorado one
People who do these trolls to get fame should be shot.
1 AFirInAspen 2018-12-20
Where in the Bible does it say you can't serve men who wear dresses?
1 ImJustaBagofHammers 2018-12-20
https://biblehub.com/kjv/deuteronomy/22-5.htm
1 FamousM1 2018-12-20
I'm surprised Colorado isn't more conservative given that it used to be part of Texas
1 Seattle_Bussy_Lmao 2018-12-20
A bunch of Californians moved there
1 mrubuto22 2018-12-20
Who the fuck even wants a cake made by a straight dude with a handle bar mustache?
1 tibo12 2018-12-20
Fucked up country. How can americans accept people and the state stomping on their religion?
1 backltrack 2018-12-20
I bet he looooves queers now. We all know they asked for the trans cake from this guy just to get attention and shit. Leave him alone, unless every baker can be forced to bake pedo/bestiality/Nazi cakes
1 Karmaisforsuckers 2018-12-20
HOW DARE HE DECAKEPLATFORM THEM!!!
1 barbadosslim 2018-12-20
a business owner and a transphobe getting screwed hell yeah
1 freedom2244 2018-12-20
You won't disregard your ideology to endorse mine? Then fuck you bigot!
1 DaveLeBarbarian 2018-12-20
We need gas chambers again
1 Krombopulos-Snake 2018-12-20
This guy must make the best fucking cakes in the world for people who know they're not going to get survive to continuously walk in and bother him.
Like the nerve of these fuckers.
You don't walk into a Jewish bakery and ask for a cake that depicts Hitler skullfucking the severed head of Anne Frank or for the less offensively inclined, A rainbow Swatika cake.
You don't walk into a Muslim bakery and ask for a cake that depicts Mohammad sitting on a giant cartoon round bomb.
So why do people keep walking into this bakery, knowing he won't serve them and starting shit? At least he's not petty.
A petty person would make the cake, but then indirectly contaminate it. You know, mix a little laxative into the buttercream, some itching powder mixed in with the powdered sugar. Something that's harder to detect than bodily fluids.
1 Chapocel 2018-12-20
Simple solution: he bakes the cake, it puts the removed sex-organ slurry in the cake. That way we know the trancel is serious, and the baker gets total redemption.
1 multiplesifl 2018-12-20
Alliance Defending Freedom
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/alliance-defending-freedom
LOL.
1 dankie_tankie 2018-12-20
One small baker against L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ crowd. Which letter he'll refuse to serve next?
1 PostDemocracyISNOW 2018-12-20
I wish these Gender Colorado Supremacists would fuck off and stop forcing their ciscolor structure on non-color conforming people.
WHEN WILL THE OPPRESSION END?
1 BussyShillBot 2018-12-20
Sorry man. This isn't halal. You're going to have to remove it.
Outlines:
I am a bot for posting Outline.com links. github / Contact for info or issues