ADVERTISEMENT

Wedding cake

TheFoyeEffect

TheFoyeEffect

Bleeds Villanova Blue
Sep 27, 2010
8,118
133
63
So this is the next frontier in the gay rights debate? Is there now an absolute right to have a private business bake you a wedding cake?

I'm a supporter of the gays, but privately held businesses should be allowed absolute discretion whether or not they serve certain groups. People also should have absolute discretion to not give those businesses any of their money.
 
i agree that any private company has the right to refuse service to anyone for whatever reason, but they need to be prepared for the backlash that follows.

speaking of the gays, Philly is painting streets in the gayborhood as rainbows. dead serious. the schools are closing, and the inner city youth are gunning each other down and attacking elderly folks on subway platforms. should we deal with that? Nah lets paint the streets for the gays.
 
Originally posted by novabball2:
i agree that any private company has the right to refuse service to anyone for whatever reason, but they need to be prepared for the backlash that follows.

speaking of the gays, Philly is painting streets in the gayborhood as rainbows. dead serious. the schools are closing, and the inner city youth are gunning each other down and attacking elderly folks on subway platforms. should we deal with that? Nah lets paint the streets for the gays.
Click to expand...
You want to improve a shithole? Bring in gays. Great move to show support and attract more of them, in my opinion.
 
Will there be a boutique somewhere in the gayborhood that a few years from now, they will find a bunch of buckets of fresh new paint stored in the basement?
 
Originally posted by YourBuddyRayhad:
You are cool with racial segregation?
Click to expand...
I'm not okay with it. I would never give my money to a business that refused service to a certain group of people.

That being said, just because I'm not okay with something doesn't mean that I think the government should force dumb private business owners to serve people rather than face the consequences of being dumb.

The biggest problem during segregation wasn't whites-only lunch counters and movie theaters, it was laws that were designed to render blacks poor, uneducated, and jobless, a horribly racially biased justice system with absolutely no overhead accountability by federal courts, and a series of very powerful groups with a stated mission to terrorize black people. None of those things are true now.
 
Foye - so what happens when every baker in town refuses to serve gay people? Are they just SOL? I'm not saying that's going to happen, just taking your argument to its logical extent.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
Originally posted by TheFoyeEffect:


Originally posted by YourBuddyRayhad:
You are cool with racial segregation?
Click to expand...
The biggest problem during segregation wasn't whites-only lunch counters and movie theaters,
Click to expand...
But it was still a problem, no? So why not eliminate it?
 
First off, because I think it's not exactly constitutional to do so.

Second, much of the racial separation in The South (even in business settings) was mandated by law. Plessy v. Ferguson was the result of a challenge to a Louisiana Law that explicitly banned whites and blacks from mixing in train cars. The company (which opposed the law for economic purposes) knew in advance of Homer Plessy's intentions to challenge the law and arranged in advance for him to be arrested by a private detective, so that he was charged for violating that specific law instead of vagrancy or something else, and thus would have an avenue in court to change the law. Obviously, the Supreme Court issued a terrible, terrible opinion in that case, but the forces of the market were not what was preventing people from being able to use public accommodations.
 
Originally posted by TheFoyeEffect:
So this is the next frontier in the gay rights debate? Is there now an absolute right to have a private business bake you a wedding cake?

I'm a supporter of the gays, but privately held businesses should be allowed absolute discretion whether or not they serve certain groups. People also should have absolute discretion to not give those businesses any of their money.
Click to expand...
Title 7. A private company has no right to deny service to people based on their membership in a protected class. It is illegal to refuse to hire, serve, etc. someone on the basis of race, religion, sex, ethnic origin . . . . Sexual orientation is not a protected classification under federal law. I believe some states have added it though.

If it was up to the private companies, we never would have gotten past segregation. There were plenty of businesses (restaurants, hotels, medical professionals, etc.) That refused minorities as customers. That is illegal.
 
Originally posted by YourBuddyRayhad:
So you think Whites only businesses should be permitted, correct?
Click to expand...
Yes, and I think nobody should give them any money.
 
You don't think that a company that had a "whites only" sign on their door would be avoided like the plague?
 
Originally posted by TheFoyeEffect:
You don't think that a company that had a "whites only" sign on their door would be avoided like the plague?
Click to expand...
maxresdefault.jpg
 
Originally posted by TheFoyeEffect:
You don't think that a company that had a "whites only" sign on their door would be avoided like the plague?


That depends where it is. The other issue is that change would happen too slowly if that were permitted. In the deep south in the late 60s that kind of activity would have been encouraged. The black citizens could have been denied the most basic necessities like access to groceries, housing, medical care, etc.
Click to expand...
 
I think they would be successful. Look at the lines at Chik-Fil-A a few years ago.

You honestly don't think a "Whites Only" movie theater would be successful? Not being a jerk, serious question.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
Originally posted by Fat Wanker:
Originally posted by TheFoyeEffect:
You don't think that a company that had a "whites only" sign on their door would be avoided like the plague?


That depends where it is. The other issue is that change would happen too slowly if that were permitted. In the deep south in the late 60s that kind of activity would have been encouraged. The black citizens could have been denied the most basic necessities like access to groceries, housing, medical care, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
If you're depriving someone of life, liberty, or property, you should be held to account. Refusing to sell someone a wedding cake does none of those things.
 
Originally posted by novabball2:
gays dont eat pastries. they watch their weight.
Click to expand...
This is actually a fair point. I've heard a typical meal for them might consist of nothing more than a tossed salad. But they do sometimes splurge on dessert, maybe a cream pie or something.
 
I think it comes down to encouraging hateful behavior and backwards thinking.

While I agree in most cases that we should let the market decide if a business will be successful (hanging a "whites only sign"), this one is a bit different. A gay guy should be able to get a slice of pizza in peace and not have to worry about not being served because he plays for the other team.

I don't understand why there is even a law about it. Can't business owners just say they are too busy to fulfill an order?
 
Nothing encourages hateful behavior and backwards thinking more than forcing them to engage in commerce with people they hate. Unless we are talking about basic human rights, which do not include pizza and wedding cake, we should not force people to do these things.
 
Originally posted by YourBuddyRayhad:
Ok. Food is not a human right.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Click to expand...
Food in the abstract is. Wedding cake is not. A seat at a restaurant is not. Wedding flowers are not.

If you want food, go to a place that isn't privately-owned.

Again, let the stupid people go out of business.
 
Originally posted by Greg Woodward:

Originally posted by novabball2:
gays dont eat pastries. they watch their weight.
Click to expand...
This is actually a fair point. I've heard a typical meal for them might consist of nothing more than a tossed salad. But they do sometimes splurge on dessert, maybe a cream pie or something.
Click to expand...
Andrew-Dice-Clay-focuses-on-fatherhood-9UATQGT-x-large.jpg
 
I think as long as an individual's constitutionally guaranteed rights aren't being denied (which certainly doesn't extend to pizza, wedding cake, etc.) then I agree with TFE to let the marketplace determine the outcome rather than have an already too intrusive government further dictate what people decide to do in their lives. Using this discussion, if TFE chooses to run his business in a way Rayhad decides is objectionable, Rayhad can/will go elsewhere to engage in commerce. It's that simple!
 
There's a big difference between saying that stupid people should be allowed to run their businesses in a stupid manner and calling for the return for segregation.

Any company that's going to categorically deny accepting money from a segment of the population isn't going to last very long. Again, the problem during segregation wasn't businesses denying service to blacks, it was laws that forced businesses to deny services to blacks. Also, the problem wasn't fixed with the passage of the Civil Rights Act. Businesses were still openly flouting those laws well into the 80s. What has changed it is that the generation that wasn't alive and aware from 1954-1968 is much more racially tolerant than the previous one.
 
So lets say I am planning a wedding for my dog to marry another dog. And I ask a bakery to make me a cake with two dogs on it. They say no because its f-ing dumb, they don't want to waste their time, and they don't believe dogs have the right to marry other dogs.

Is that ok to refuse? I am a member of the group of people who think dogs should be able to marry. So am i being discriminated against?
 
You dont think a whites only movie theater would be successful?

I'm amused at whom the right-wing compares gays. "Can two dogs get married?" "Should a Jewish baker have to make a swastika cake?" "Should a black baker have to make a KKK cake?"

So two gay people who wished to be married are compared to dogs Nazis, and Klansmen, all for the right wing to maintain their psychotic persecution complex
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
No, its a simple question of: "Should a business be forced to do something they don't want to do?" If they decide to turn away business, let the laws of economics take over. People will boycott, and they will lose business, and things will naturally work out. Letting laws decide everything just opens the door to stupid crap like the comparisons people are drawing to dogs and nazis.

Who decides what is right and wrong?
 
You should be able to refuse business to anyone you want if you are a privately owned restaurant, business, etc.

You should also be ready to be (fairly) criticized for being so narrow-minded. And you WILL eventually lose business by doing so.
 
I don't think a whites only movie theater would be successful because Get Hard made $36 million last weekend alone and terrible movies where Tyler Perry dresses up as a grandmother are guaranteed to gross $50 million.

The arguments about dogs and swastika cakes are really stupid. The better comparison would be should a gay business owner be forced to serve the Westboro Baptist Church, even if they're being totally polite and not carrying around the "God Hates ____" signs or wearing shirts that say the same. The answer to me is that they absolutely should not be forced to serve them.

Now, I think the gay business owner is on much higher moral (and economic) ground than the person who flatly refuses to serve gays, but I think they both hit at precisely the same issue.
 
Originally posted by YourBuddyRayhad:
You dont think a whites only movie theater would be successful?

I'm amused at whom the right-wing compares gays. "Can two dogs get married?" "Should a Jewish baker have to make a swastika cake?" "Should a black baker have to make a KKK cake?"

So two gay people who wished to be married are compared to dogs Nazis, and Klansmen, all for the right wing to maintain their psychotic persecution complex
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Click to expand...
Is not being compared to dogs, Nazi's, and Klansmen its being compared to other situations where people don't agree with another group's perspective. You're simplifying it in a way to appease your agenda.

What about a gay bar that doesn't want to serve straight men? Does anyone have a problem with that?
 
Are you saying the Nazi/dogs/klansman comparisons haven't been bandied about, in this thread even?

I'm not the one who made the comparisons, I'm simply responding to them.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J

Randy Foye, Ashley Howard Head Nova NIL Collective

Replies
0
Views
300
'Nova Nation
JoshNaso
J
ONIN2TO

UNC Recap / The Draft & Josh

Replies
63
Views
2K
'Nova Nation
Perminator
P
V

We will go as far as Ochefu's ankle allows us

Replies
3
Views
297
'Nova Nation
DC_DRE
D
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back