Nope, you don't have a goddamn clue what discrimination is and you are making that obvious to everybody. What the fuck is a "gay wedding cake" anyway? How is baking a cake being "forced to participate in pagan ritual practices". It's ridiculous and would get thrown out of court. It's a friggin' cake. More phony examples. People would refuse because child porn is illegal. Nothing illegal about making a wedding cake. It is discrimination to refuse to serve anyone on the basis of their sexual preference. You can refuse to participate in a crime. I've said all along that the wedding cake scenario is just phony grandstanding. First of all, no gay couple is going to ask a vendor to make food for them if he has obviously shown his hate. Who would want to eat it? What do you think he stirred the batter with? There are bakers everywhere happy to do the job. Moreover, any baker with sense can get out of any job that he doesn't want to do by saying we don't know how to make a cake like that. Or quote a price that will make them go elsewhere. Or just make a bad cake and let them decline it. They can say we don't make cakes with a giant penis on it because of federal laws against unwanted sexual environments in the workplace. But they can't run a public business and say we refuse to make a cake for you that says "Bob and Richard" because we disagree with your sexual preferences. You can't say we can make a cake with bride and groom dolls on top but we can't take two dolls out of the same box and put it on the cake because it is forcing you to "participate in a pagan ritual." It's discrimination. About time you look it up and stop acting foolish.
Once again your thinking is so "inside the box" that you fail to grasp the difference between true discrimination and a legitimate right to not perform work when the work itself is outside the pale of one's moral code. While a gay cake is not against the law, a cake topped with plastic figures of naked children is probably not against the law either. I don't think it would legally be the same as images of actual children. Hanging people and burning crosses is against the law. Plastic or pastry images of a black guy hanging from a tree with a burning cross in the background is not against the law, but it is offensive to most people. Lasalle said he would bake the cake with such images as well as one with a swastika. He would just want the money to buy weed but he would be within his rights to refuse to do it.
the homoerotic cake really took the cake for me. lol, Bengal as my grandfather use to say to me, if you arent anything else in life, you have your humor.
I think I grasp it just fine. What exactly is this "legitimate right" to discriminate if it is outside your personal "moral code"? Where is that written down? How is the public or a judge supposed to consider the personal moral codes of everybody doing business?
If a judge rules something isn't discrimination it isn't discrimination unless an appeals judge reverses the decision.
I'm sorry but you are trying to compare things that are very different. First drop the idea that by making a wedding cake for a gay wedding or the like is participating in the ceremony. IT'S NOT!!!! Nor is it giving approval or signaling your acceptance. IT'S BAKING A CAKE NOTHING MORE. It doesn't matter if it is for a gay wedding or Jewish wedding or Hindu wedding, satanic wedding or even a athiest's wedding. It's just like a catholic baker making a baptist's wedding cake. What he can refuse is to bring the cake down the isle in a tutu during the ceremony. That's participation my friend. Now he can also refuse to put an image of an obscene act on it. Bob loves Larry isn't obscene whether you agree with gay marriage or not. An image of Bob going down on Larry is obscene. Get the difference?
