|
|
Post by muffin on Jun 7, 2013 10:34:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by muffin on Jun 7, 2013 10:44:53 GMT -5
......and Jews at the ACLU would be the first one's to complain if someone stepped on their religious beliefs.  |
|
|
|
Post by rule62 on Jun 7, 2013 11:34:40 GMT -5
Civil rights law indicates that service can't be denied for discriminatory reasons. The owner of the bakery has a right to his or her religious or moral beliefs. But he or she can't deny service to a customer whose moral or religious beliefs are at odds with theirs. A Catholic shop owner can't deny service to a Protestant or a Jew, just because they aren't Catholic. There's no difference here.
|
|
|
|
Post by muffin on Jun 7, 2013 11:53:41 GMT -5
Civil rights law indicates that service can't be denied for discriminatory reasons. The owner of the bakery has a right to his or her religious or moral beliefs. But he or she can't deny service to a customer whose moral or religious beliefs are at odds with theirs. A Catholic shop owner can't deny service to a Protestant or a Jew, just because they aren't Catholic. There's no difference here. .....maybe we should have government brown shirt agents go in knock heads and shut them down!  |
|
|
|
Post by rule62 on Jun 7, 2013 12:14:35 GMT -5
Civil rights law indicates that service can't be denied for discriminatory reasons. The owner of the bakery has a right to his or her religious or moral beliefs. But he or she can't deny service to a customer whose moral or religious beliefs are at odds with theirs. A Catholic shop owner can't deny service to a Protestant or a Jew, just because they aren't Catholic. There's no difference here. .....maybe we should have government brown shirt agents go in knock heads and shut them down! Maybe the bakery owner should have used his head, and given a better reason. |
|
|
|
Post by jamie on Jun 7, 2013 12:30:43 GMT -5
.....maybe we should have government brown shirt agents go in knock heads and shut them down! Maybe the bakery owner should have used his head, and given a better reason. yep u is right, Content on cake would have been a valid reason. Content of relationship was not a valid reason under the law. |
|
|
|
Post by DaveyJones on Jun 7, 2013 17:31:07 GMT -5
Why dont they just go to another bakery ?
Cant have your cake and eat it too....oh wait a sec that doesnt sound right.
|
|
|
|
Post by jamie on Jun 8, 2013 8:01:39 GMT -5
Why dont they just go to another bakery ? Cant have your cake and eat it too....oh wait a sec that doesnt sound right. A question that also crossed my mind. Why not go to someone who wanted to do an extra special good job on the cake. |
|
