Post: #26

(03-30-2015 03:48 PM)Shrodax Wrote:  The Supreme Court found the law constitutional based on the Constitution's Commerce Clause, which gives Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce. I don't necessarily agree with this law, but I do understand how it is constitutional.

No it's definitely not constitutional. The supreme court can 'find' the earth to be flat if it so wishes, but that won't make it so. The clause grants the power to regulate (keep the commerce regular by dictating rules) not prohibit, and to regulate commerce (not any activity whatsoever), and to regulate it between states (not within a state). The most hilarious 'finding' of the court was in Gonzales v. Raich, where they ruled that growing weed in your own home for your own use, a non-commercial, non-interstate activity, could be prohibited by federal law. Truly unbelievable.

(03-30-2015 03:48 PM)Shrodax Wrote:  Of course, if you owned a bakery, would you really refuse to make a cake with two grooms? You know those gays are going to throw a fabulous wedding and will order an expensive cake. Discriminate and disapprove of the gays all you want in private, but ultimately, gay money spends the same as straight money.

Fuck that. Yes I would refuse. Money isn't everything. I'm pretty sure nobody here believes money adequately compensates for depravity, otherwise we'd be congratulating the girls in the 'Dubai Porta Potty' thread as 'successful freelancers of private entertainment services'.

(03-30-2015 03:56 PM)TheWastelander Wrote:  That's why Christian bakeries and wedding chapels in states where homos can sue them should troll them right back. Make them a cake with slurs and derogatory shit on it. You can't deny them service, but you don't have to give them exactly what they want either.

LOL great idea, perhaps we should send them some ideas, "Congratulations! May this 'marriage' mark the beginning of you not banging quite so many strange men up the ass as you both previously were".

Post: #27

Another case of symbiotic political mobilization over a symbolic non-economic cultural issue.

Everyone gets what they want out of this. The right gets people riled up over the huge, huge issue of wedding photography and tyranny! over religion! The left gets their base riled up over discrimination! and homophobia! and racism! in the very important wedding cake sector.

It's not a very good law. First, it does not give a private right of action to people to have religious freedom where it really counts: in the workplace. Some states do, so you can't be forced to work on Christmas and can wear a cross or hijab at work. Second, the definitions in the law do not account for all of the Constitutional and federal law nuances which have to be accommodated.

For example, if I'm a member of the Nation of Islam, of the Elijah Mohammed/ Farrakhan sect and sincerely believe that white people are devils, can I refuse to serve them pancakes? Or vice versa, if I'm a Christian Identity white nationalist and think black people are the unclean children of Ham can I keep black people out of my gun shop?

What the law is doing well is exciting anger and controversy, which is probably its real purpose.

Post: #28

You guys need to think of certain things regarding bakeries and places of religious worship when it comes to queers demanding service.

There are gay people who own bakeries and run the church and yet these gay couples sue people who discriminate against them because it is against their beliefs or they just dislike the notion of gays marrying.

These people who participate in this type of behaviour are no better than the race trolls who hold rallies in certain districts to wind the population up and cause trouble. They love the attention and if they get free money out of it then so be it. I agree with the idea of making it as horrible an experience for them as possible.

Post: #29

(03-30-2015 03:56 PM)TheWastelander Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 03:48 PM)Shrodax Wrote:  Of course, if you owned a bakery, would you really refuse to make a cake with two grooms? You know those gays are going to throw a fabulous wedding and will order an expensive cake. Discriminate and disapprove of the gays all you want in private, but ultimately, gay money spends the same as straight money.

That's why Christian bakeries and wedding chapels in states where homos can sue them should troll them right back. Make them a cake with slurs and derogatory shit on it. You can't deny them service, but you don't have to give them exactly what they want either. Piss them off and let them sue over that. You offered the service to them, but they were dissatisfied over how the end product turned out. Two completely different things.

Wedding chapels should perform the service but slip in fire and brimstone shit about them going to hell and dooming us all with their sodomy. Really lay it on thick to make the experience as fucking miserable as possible for them.

You might as well force the SJW crowd to openly push for censorship laws and get this goddamn charade over with.

One wouldn't need the cake to be covered with slurs and derogatory sayings. Just bake a cake so bad they would never think of coming back again.

Post: #30

"Just bake a cake so bad they would never think of coming back again."

If a bakery always sold the stale bread to black people at full price, do you think no one would notice? Do you really think the government wouldn't allow them to be sued?

Post: #31

(03-31-2015 09:21 AM)lemko Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 03:56 PM)TheWastelander Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 03:48 PM)Shrodax Wrote:  Of course, if you owned a bakery, would you really refuse to make a cake with two grooms? You know those gays are going to throw a fabulous wedding and will order an expensive cake. Discriminate and disapprove of the gays all you want in private, but ultimately, gay money spends the same as straight money.

That's why Christian bakeries and wedding chapels in states where homos can sue them should troll them right back. Make them a cake with slurs and derogatory shit on it. You can't deny them service, but you don't have to give them exactly what they want either. Piss them off and let them sue over that. You offered the service to them, but they were dissatisfied over how the end product turned out. Two completely different things.

Wedding chapels should perform the service but slip in fire and brimstone shit about them going to hell and dooming us all with their sodomy. Really lay it on thick to make the experience as fucking miserable as possible for them.

You might as well force the SJW crowd to openly push for censorship laws and get this goddamn charade over with.

One wouldn't need the cake to be covered with slurs and derogatory sayings. Just bake a cake so bad they would never think of coming back again.

A wedding cake is expensive.
One creative thing to do is adjust the majority of the price to the two little cake toppers (bride/groom figurines), but only sell them as bride/groom packages. Cake for gays would be almost double the price as normal, due to the cost of having to open another set of cake toppers for a single cake.

Post: #32

You can always spit in the cake. Or start a rumor on social media about cake spitting, which would give people second thoughts. My guess is that most gays would rather go to a gay bakery. This is an example of SJWs forming a test case to push their agenda onto society.

Post: #33

(03-31-2015 01:03 PM)Sherman Wrote:  You can always spit in the cake. Or start a rumor on social media about cake spitting, which would give people second thoughts. My guess is that most gays would rather go to a gay bakery. This is an example of SJWs forming a test case to push their agenda onto society.

Post: #34

The Wastelander's solution has yet to be topped. Some creative icing artistry like in this NSFW birthday cake for NFL player Brent Grimes (except, well, gayer) would go a long way in cutting these witch hunts from the Homo community...

Post: #35

"Apple's Gay CEO Tim Cook Wants to Boycott Indiana for Its Allegedly Anti-Gay RFRA, But Will Gladly Sell You an iPhone At Its Boutique in Riyadh, Where They'll Stone You to Death For Being Gay"


http://ace.mu.nu/archives/355854.php

   

Post: #36

Yep, Tim Cook, in addition to other govt leaders and CEOs, think nothing of selling iPhones in Saudi Arabia, where homosexuality is punishable by death.

Post: #37

(03-31-2015 02:02 PM)AFspecOps Wrote:  Yep, Tim Cook, in addition to other govt leaders and CEOs, think nothing of selling iPhones in Saudi Arabia, where homosexuality is punishable by death.

I hope SJWs really hold Tim Cook's feet to the fire on this Saudi thing.

Post: #38

Aside from the Middle East, Apple is also no stranger to controversy with the labour practices of its subcontractors.

That's not the point though. Tim Cook doesn't actually care about any oppressed people. Just as the people running human trafficking rings or sweatshops are inevitably of the same ethnicity as those they exploit, Tim Cook throws gays in Saudi Arabia under the bus in order to expand his own wealth and power.

This is about breaking opposition to the emerging fascist state where at the top end, there is a revolving door between government and big business, and for everyone else, identity is bound up in being a mindless and obedient consumer (and for some, also being a mindless and obedient producer, though not for all) and nothing more. Any other identity (including religious) stands as an obstruction to the realisation of such plans, and so must be vehemently opposed.

This is always the way though. Whether it's Communism, Nazism or any other form of totalitarianism, there is always an inner circle who seek to expand and maintain their power over the populace. Sometimes, as in the case of Tim Cook, those people are true believers. Sometimes, they hold their noses and go along with it so they don't lose their privileges, though inevitably they get ousted from such positions for not being true believers.

Tim Cook is simply signalling that he is one of the true believers of the inner circle.

Post: #39

SJW Fire Team Delivers the Pain...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/trending/indiana-...-1.3018298

Quote:A pizza parlour that said it will use Indiana's heavily criticized new religious freedom law to deny services to same-sex couples provoked a massive backlash across the internet on Tuesday and Wednesday.

Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, a Republican, responded Tuesday to national outrage over the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, by saying he'll "fix" the bill to ensure businesses cannot use the law to deny services to the LGBTQ community.

But, not before Memories Pizza in Walkerton, Ind., chimed in.

"If a gay couple came in and wanted us to provide pizzas for their wedding, we would have to say no," owner Crystal O'Connor told ABC 57 News on Tuesday.

Quote:Someone also registered the domain name memoriespizza.com, which the owners of the establishment had not done yet, and filled it with some graphic, and phallic, visual criticism.

http://memoriespizza.com/



Komatiite's Konclusion:
I hope nobody ever finds out I find the whole gay thing irritating. Or else my life will be destroyed by these fire teams!

EDIT: DO NOT CLICK THE LINK FOR COMMERCIAL, VIDEO IS REALLY FUCKING GAY! I NEED EYE BLEACH!

Post: #40

Heaven forbid a gay couple can't get their wedding catered by a pizza joint. I'm sure that's quite a popular option. But of course that doesn't matter, we need to get on with destroying people's lives for their belief system.

Post: #41

Whatever happened to the right to refuse service to anyone?

Post: #42

(04-02-2015 08:41 AM)infowarrior1 Wrote:  Whatever happened to the right to refuse service to anyone?

Oh its OK you still can, as long as that person is white, male, of normal sexuality, and christian.

Post: #43

Per the Federal Civil Rights Act, you cannot discriminate services on the grounds of race, color, religion, or national origin. So you cannot just refuse service to anyone if one of the above is your reason. Maybe a lawyer in the forum can comment, but it seems that there is a movement to add sexual orientation to that list (not with this law of course)?

Post: #44

Whoever registered that domain name and made that website is about to get their ass sued off.

Post: #45

(04-02-2015 08:56 AM)Repo Wrote:  Per the Federal Civil Rights Act, you cannot discriminate services on the grounds of race, color, religion, or national origin. So you cannot just refuse service to anyone if one of the above is your reason. Maybe a lawyer in the forum can comment, but it seems that there is a movement to add sexual orientation to that list (not with this law of course)?

Some states have their own CRAs they've added sexual orientation and transbullshit to.

Post: #46

It's been sad watching that pizzeria go down in flames. The price of one bad sentence in 2015 is steep.

It's strange how this crowd will hem and haw over Anita Sarkeesian or whoever canceling their aimless ramblings talks because of death threats, but when it's "an ideological opponent" like a pizza shop getting deluged in threats, there is no outrage. You disagree with the social fashion of the day? You're fair game and fresh meat. Drive them into financial ruin; smear their names and reputation; harass them with threatening calls and e-mails, flush them from their hiding places; burn the witch.

I'm sick of this cycle. It's always:

1. Someone sees something they don't like.
2. They share it.
3. People get mad.
4. Public apology.
5. Someone gets fired or something gets shut down.
6. Everyone forgets, except when they bring it up now and then about how oppressive the world is towards homosexuals/etc.

Aside from their utter humorlessness, it's this hypocritical coziness with fighting dirty that ultimately drove me away from progressivism. When I was in my teens and early twenties, I used to argue quite strongly for gay rights. I was no activist, but whenever the subject came up, I'd be on what I thought was the right side. It cost me some friends; raised tensions with my family. But I really believed I was standing up for people who just wanted to be in love and have that love recognized as "legitimate." I recall this language with a rueful smile on my face. This is what equating the internet to the real world does to Millennials like me.

Now I look at the way "the right side" conducts its affairs and feel ashamed. I spent all that time convinced I was lending my voice to a good cause, and now the cause has seen fit to shame and damn its opponents with the ruthlessness of a pack of wolves. I'm ashamed that I never saw it coming; that I was ever naive enough to think a good cause equaled good people; that I may be culpable in the ruin of people who were guilty only of the crime of "being on the wrong side of history." (I hear that phrase a lot from progressive types, and it never fails to raise the hairs on the back of my neck.) Had I really put aside the forum-goggles and gone into the outside world a little more often, maybe I would have understood that it was never about "legitimacy", about "acceptance", about "love." (Considering the rates of STDs and polyamory among gays, it was sure as fuck never about love.)

As so many things are, it was about power. Power that acknowledges no authority higher than its own. And I helped it happen. Like a good little soldier.

I really do hope the owner pulls through the SJW crusade and is able to get by somewhere. It's a strange feeling to feel held at rhetorical gunpoint by the cause I once believed in so passionately. If I were running a pizzeria and had been asked this question, I might have said I wouldn't have a problem catering to a gay wedding...before this went down. Now I'd have to question the question. "Shucks, ABC, can I even say anything but yes? If I don't, it's only my business, my livelihood, my reputation, my good name, maybe even my safety or my life..."

Post: #47

This was copied from a case in Northern Ireland which is probably the most Catholic and Protestant place of Europe.

A cake maker with a Bible reference to his business' name was spotted by the local roaming LGB-whatever ABCDEF commissar and a cake order was duly placed...

Libertarians are wrong however. Capitalism has never supported traditional values of trade.

Post: #48

I can't work in this state any more! Help!

Quote:"I just got an email on the way to studio from another employee who said, 'look I don't feel comfortable living in this state anymore, you have to move me out,' and I gave him a $50,000 relocation package and said, 'great, you're clear to go.' "

I wonder if I could trump up some abstract reason for outrage and get a sweet relocation package!

Post: #49

Gays spread, and continue to spread HIV. Kind of like filthy, diseased rodents spread the plague. How many deaths has faggotry caused by now? This is never mentioned.

Post: #50

Apple has stores in Iran and Saudi Arabia but they're offended by how Indiana treats gay people?