Mango kid Posted June 4, 2018 Report Share Posted June 4, 2018 If he constantly sells homosexuals cakes...then what the *Censored* is this story even about? I don't have time for this shit... Because he refused to make them there wedding cake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generations Posted June 4, 2018 Report Share Posted June 4, 2018 If he constantly sells homosexuals cakes...then what the *Censored* is this story even about? I don't have time for this shit... Because he refused to make them there wedding cake Which is still intolerance. Was he attending the wedding? Was he officiating their vows? It's a cake. He could have just made a cake and completely ignored what it was for. At the roots, it's a cake. It doesn't tie him to a gay marriage. It's a goddamn cake. Again...he's entitled to make that call. But it's a personal intolerance for gay marriage on his end. His religion would consider it a sin for he himself to be married to another man. But, he could easily make a cake for some homosexuals and sleep well at night. Making a cake doesn't make him party to homosexuality or gay marriage. It's just food. For like the fifth time, I want to make it clear...I agree that he's entitled to reject anyone he wants. My argument now is that a few of you really fail to wrap your heads around the definition of intolerance... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango kid Posted June 4, 2018 Report Share Posted June 4, 2018 If he constantly sells homosexuals cakes...then what the *Censored* is this story even about? I don't have time for this shit... Because he refused to make them there wedding cake Which is still intolerance. Was he attending the wedding? Was he officiating their vows? It's a cake. He could have just made a cake and completely ignored what it was for. At the roots, it's a cake. It doesn't tie him to a gay marriage. It's a goddamn cake. Again...he's entitled to make that call. But it's a personal intolerance for gay marriage on his end. His religion would consider it a sin for he himself to be married to another man. But, he could easily make a cake for some homosexuals and sleep well at night. Making a cake doesn't make him party to homosexuality or gay marriage. It's just food. Actually it does tie it to him because he made the cake and depending on what they had him write on it or say on it connection to it that's why the Supreme Court ruled in favor which wasn't an narrow decision no matter what they keep saying in the news Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generations Posted June 4, 2018 Report Share Posted June 4, 2018 At no point in human history...has a wedding cake had any power to pronounce anyone as a married couple. People eat that shit AFTER they have become married. It's just a *censored*ing cake. If that dude can't make a cake for people to stuff in their fat faces, just because they are gay people who are getting married...then he is an intolerant buttplug. He's not marrying a gay dude himself. He's not officiating their marriage. He's not enabling homosexuality in any way. He can reject every single person who comes to his shop for one reason or another (it's his shop, he has that right)...but his excuses are piss poor. And that's my final word on that shit...because I'm not sitting on the floor with Austin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bdon Posted June 4, 2018 Report Share Posted June 4, 2018 You don't have to compromise your own convictions as a person to please everyone. It's not his place to judge people for being gay or stop them from getting married and he wasn't doing so. But he didn't want to attribute to a ceremony that is religious in origin (before the state got their greedy mitts into it) and he wasn't compromising that. You wanna think he's an asshole? fine. Doesn't make him one. That is your whole argument here because you sound ignorant otherwise. You just want others to agree with you that he's an asshole. Ok sure, then the gay couple are huge assholes for suing him and not going somewhere else. They weren't being very tolerant of his point of view as a person or as a business owner either. You're twisting Christianity your own way here to you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango kid Posted June 4, 2018 Report Share Posted June 4, 2018 No matter how you say it is still him taking part of something he doesn't believe There should be more rulings like this because I'm kind of tired of people having to give up people's beliefs just for other people's beliefs the government cannot force people to give up their beliefs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generations Posted June 4, 2018 Report Share Posted June 4, 2018 Wrong. My argument is that he's intolerant of gay people. Which he factually is. It doesn't matter what his alleged reasoning is. Really, guys...this is elementary shit. Look up the word intolerance and get back to me. Was the gay couple being intolerant of his intolerance? Sure. I never argued that they weren't. Two wrongs don't make a right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango kid Posted June 4, 2018 Report Share Posted June 4, 2018 You never said they were either you automatically place blame on the baker's saying he was intolerant But let's go with you or what you said you automatically placed the blame saying he's using his religious insecurities 4 excuse you also claim that they were treated subhuman or terribly where there's no evidence of that at all From what I gather you're nothing but an intolerant person who can't accept other people's Bash anyone who doesn't agree with you I've seen it constantly in the politics red you're pretty much Trump When comes to someone that don't have the same point of view is you I don't think you realize it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generations Posted June 4, 2018 Report Share Posted June 4, 2018 Jesus H Christ. I'm not even arguing what you people think I am... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bdon Posted June 4, 2018 Report Share Posted June 4, 2018 Yep that's it Gen, it's black and white, and he's an asshole. All because you say so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generations Posted June 4, 2018 Report Share Posted June 4, 2018 You seem to once again be missing the entire problem I have here...which is that you and Austin said it wasn't intolerance for him to deny them. That is factually incorrect. That's the entire basis of my argument with you here. I said he had the right to deny them since it was his shop. But, yes...he was still intolerant of gay people. How is that even open for debate? You and Austin are posting a bunch of round-about nonsense to pretend like I said some crazy shit. I definitely didn't. Intolerance is indeed black and white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King RyderFan Posted June 4, 2018 Report Share Posted June 4, 2018 Let me see if I can get this last page or so straight: An intolerant baker refuses to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple The gay couple is intolerant of the bakers right to intolerance and sues him Bdon is intolerant of the gay couples intolerance of the bakers intolerance Gen is intolerant of Bdons intolerance of the gay couples intolerance of the bakers intolerance Austin is intolerant of Gens intolerance of Bdons intolerance of the gay couples intolerance to the bakers intolerance That right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bdon Posted June 4, 2018 Report Share Posted June 4, 2018 No you come in and do what most do. You bring up some bare bones one sided argument and want people to agree with you. What the hell is the point of you coming in to discuss the definition of tolerance or intolerance? I never said he was intolerant nor did i say he wasn't. I just agreed that most are failing to see the intolerance of the couple. To be honest they show a far greater level of it in this case but then you had to go and say a bunch of assumptions when you don't know or have any evidence. You think the dude is an asshole and is intolerant of gay people in general when he was just showing intolerance over a ceremony he didn't agree with. Doesn't mean he thinks they are some sort of sub human, lol. That's nonsense. He didn't even refuse them service in other scenarios. Maybe you think it's silly but its his beliefs. Not good enough for you though. You have to come in and make a bunch of ignorant statements about the bible and such to get your opinion across. I can't speak for Austin but I will speak for me. I think you're entitled to your opinion but you're way off on this one. Besides, intolerant or not by definition, he had the right, and they shouldn't have sued. But as you said, you're just beating a dead horse. We're all intolerant of something and to come into a debate over a situation that is a little more detailed and just talk about an obvious is pretty retarded. I mean, anybody can pick the obvious out of a situation and turn into a one sided argument. Doesn't really show much on your behalf but if you want a pat on the back then we can give you one. @RyderFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generations Posted June 4, 2018 Report Share Posted June 4, 2018 Ffs...intolerance is intolerance. I don't have a "bare bones one sided argument"...all I did was state *censored*ing facts. And whether it was his right or not was never part of a single damn thing that I said. I really don't know where you think you're coming from on this. How many times do I really need to say that he was entitled to do that? Our opinions on the subject really aren't that much different...you're just acting like intolerance means something completely foreign. I agree with you on almost every aspect of this discussion...right up to the point where you seem to think that religious freedom somehow makes intolerance a non-factor. It doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M3J Posted June 4, 2018 Report Share Posted June 4, 2018 I mean...the baker is still an asshole for being petty and intolerant. But, there was never any reason why he should have been forced to make a cake for a client he didn't want. That much is true. Either way, dead horse is dead; Has been beaten for far too long. Putting it like that, honestly, I can agree. The baker iss intolerant and a prime example of why religion is bad, but he had every right, unfortunately. I just hope religious people will acknowledge that if someone refuses to bake them cake on account of their religion. One thing I've noticed is that most people blame immigrants for stealing their jobs (which is bullshit in the first place), but very few have blamed technology for actually stealing jobs. Wonder why that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AONO. Posted June 5, 2018 Report Share Posted June 5, 2018 I missed a couple of days looking to respond to earlier comments and came to this... Whatever this is I really don't see how Gens point is that hard to understand. He actually took both sides in consideration. Both sides showed intolerance. Why is that hard to accept? Nobody even argued that the baker is evil, a terrible person or whatever... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango kid Posted June 6, 2018 Report Share Posted June 6, 2018 So the doj temping to repeal the judge's order for Twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maskedmaniac Posted June 6, 2018 Author Report Share Posted June 6, 2018 I can't believe the president of the United States is going to court over the right to block people on twitter. That's some shit a girl in middle school would probably be doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M3J Posted June 6, 2018 Report Share Posted June 6, 2018 Obama gave us back some dignity that Bush lost, while Trump is losing whatever respect and dignity we have left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nWo_Kevin Posted June 6, 2018 Report Share Posted June 6, 2018 I can't believe the president of the United States is going to court over the right to block people on twitter. That's some shit a girl in middle school would probably be doing. The whole thing is a joke honestly. Much like the baker controversy of the last few pages. There never should of been a lawsuit in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango kid Posted June 6, 2018 Report Share Posted June 6, 2018 I can't believe the president of the United States is going to court over the right to block people on twitter. That's some shit a girl in middle school would probably be doing. The whole thing is a joke honestly. Much like the baker controversy of the last few pages. There never should of been a lawsuit in the first place. But America won't be America if there wasn't a frivolous lawsuit a day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maskedmaniac Posted June 6, 2018 Author Report Share Posted June 6, 2018 Tax dollars being spent wisely, on a grown man trying to block people on Twitter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generations Posted June 7, 2018 Report Share Posted June 7, 2018 So, not only is Trump trying to force a portion of energy to come from coal and nuclear to boost production of those forms of energy...but now he's going to cost the US billions in solar tariffs. There's "fighting for jobs"...and then there's "destroying established jobs to make other jobs". Trump is dead-set on doing the latter. Every time I think I couldn't possibly hate this clown any more...he finds new ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AONO. Posted June 7, 2018 Report Share Posted June 7, 2018 Hopefully people won't vote for him again just for spite... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bdon Posted June 7, 2018 Report Share Posted June 7, 2018 I guarantee that will happen again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.