Newest "racially insensitive" word.

[togor]

Being "in my cake shop" isn't the issue with the owner, as you well know, who is undoubtedly happy to sell them all the regular junk food they desire; it's the request for a WEDDING CAKE that would, by implication, be an endorsement by the owner of the noxious absurdity of a homo "marriage." That the noxious homos in question don't simply go to another cake shop run by someone who doesn't care, but instead file a law-suit, proves that it isn't the cake they REALLY want, but rather the public endorsement of their perversity.

CH it is nonetheless a feelings thing. It's just cake, frosting and icing, yes? Exchanged for money with a member of the public? You're not disputing my point in the slightest--quite the opposite in fact. This liberal feelings crap has infected conservatives too. In other words I'll see you an offended Baltimore resident and raise you one cake shop owner.

[lyman]

I doubt we hang either for feelings. But the longer answer is that some people are better positioned to act on their prejudices than others, to the harm of people who are the targets of the negative bias. If a landlord privately has negative feelings towards people of dark skin, but doesn't let that interfere with how he conducts business, who he rents to, how apartments are kept up, etc., then most of us really can't think of anything more to ask of the guy, and his private feelings towards blacks are his own business. People are getting away from that, BTW, the idea that feelings have their place, but that it isn't in the public sphere. A bad liberal habit that has infected conservatives too (as in the icky gay people are in my cake shop which is otherwise open to the public).

racist is a racist, rich, poor, young, old, , matters not,

and it is a name that is tossed about way too much now adays

[clintonhater]

CH it is nonetheless a feelings thing. It's just cake, frosting and icing, yes?

NO, it is not--it is a STATEMENT which mocks the maker's personal values! You CAN'T be too stupid not to see that! Should a Jewish owner (or just a good liberal) be required to make a Hitler's Birthday cake, with swasticas & deaths-heads?

[blackhawknj]

Since when did engaging in criminal activity become "work' ?

[dryheat]

"Is Appalachian American a race or a dental condition?"

Typical left-wing bigotry.

There is no such thing. Leftists/liberals(the same thing) are loving,fair,diverse,accepting,concerned.

[Vern Humphrey]

There is no such thing. Leftists/liberals(the same thing) are loving,fair,diverse,accepting,concerned.

And hate and despise Southerners and people from Appalachia.

[Allen]

And hate and despise Southerners and people from Appalachia.

As his own people would say "that's being racist". It's also a violation of the rules of this forum.

[togor]

NO, it is not--it is a STATEMENT which mocks the maker's personal values! You CAN'T be too stupid not to see that! Should a Jewish owner (or just a good liberal) be required to make a Hitler's Birthday cake, with swasticas & deaths-heads?

Are you really going to argue ridiculously false equivalencies? Because if you are, how about saying that you swatting a fly is equivalent to the entire holocaust, because after all, killing is killing. As far as the cake goes, the Jewish cake shop is free to charge whatever price they want, and put far too much (kosher) salt and eggshells in the batter if they like, to see if they can't choke a few Nazis. And as for mocking, that implies a deliberate intent on the part of the couple, to insult the beliefs of the shop owner. Possibly there if Nazis have reason to know it is a Jewish cake shop, but highly unlikely to be the case for some people looking for wedding cake. No, my reasoning remains sound. It's cake, frosting, and icing, and the shopmaker has to understand that lots of people like to buy that for lots of reasons. Making a cake is not a paid endorsement.

[S.A. Boggs]

Since when did engaging in criminal activity become "work' ?

When the demoncrats took it up.
Sam

[barretcreek]

Okay folks. How 'bout every body (re)read Hillbilly Elegy and put this one to rest?

[clintonhater]

[I]
Making a cake is not a paid endorsement.

But it IS to the baker; otherwise, why would he expose himself not merely to a loss of business, but a lawsuit? Actually, as you suggest, if I were the baker, I'd say "always happy to oblige Sodomites," & fill my batter with ground glass.

[togor]

Okay folks. How 'bout every body (re)read Hillbilly Elegy and put this one to rest?

Tongue-in-cheek?

[togor]

But it IS to the baker; otherwise, why would he expose himself not merely to a loss of business, but a lawsuit? Actually, as you suggest, if I were the baker, I'd say "always happy to oblige Sodomites," & fill my batter with ground glass.

Protecting the public sphere from excessive influences of religion is a legitimate governmental function. Say the only dentist in town was a Hindu, and he refused on grounds of his religion to work on the teeth of people who eat meat. Protected or no? The sheer arbitrariness of religion mandates its protection by the Constitution, but also by necessity limits its reach. Most people understand the first part of that but not the second.

[clintonhater]

Protecting the public sphere from excessive influences of religion is a legitimate governmental function. Say the only dentist in town was a Hindu, and he refused on grounds of his religion to work on the teeth of people who eat meat. Protected or no?

Protected; and if he's FORCED by the gov't to accept patients he doesn't want, I'd hate to be one of them. However, a private business is NOT the "public sphere."

[dryheat]

Protecting the public sphere from excessive influences of religion is a legitimate governmental function. Say the only dentist in town was a Hindu, and he refused on grounds of his religion to work on the teeth of people who eat meat. Protected or no? The sheer arbitrariness of religion mandates its protection by the Constitution, but also by necessity limits its reach. Most people understand the first part of that but not the second.

Well, the Hindu is going to go out of business as will the white dentist who only works on incisors. Arbitrary foolishness should not be protected, but of course it is, because were are weird at times. But, it's the lawsuit that p***** me off. Should the queers be taken aback because someone was offended by their request? They like being offended, "some of them want to be abused"(whats her name)but now here comes the lawsuit. Yeah, you could put laxative in the cake, but that's small potatoes. It's better to fight fire with fire and take it to court. Not that your going to win, because we have to like everyone. It will cost ten grand but you can say, I said no(I don't have that kind of time or money either).