Texas Bakers Receive Death Threats for Offering Referral Rather Than Making Cake...

[ok doser]

the bolded are (usually) governmental organizations and as such, should be forced to comply

the rest are not and should not

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/12181

(7) Public accommodation--The following private entities are considered public accommodations for purposes of this subchapter, if the operations of such entities affect commerce—

(A) an inn, hotel, motel, or other place of lodging, except for an establishment located within a building that contains not more than five rooms for rent or hire and that is actually occupied by the proprietor of such establishment as the residence of such proprietor;
(B) a restaurant, bar, or other establishment serving food or drink;
(C) a motion picture house, theater, concert hall, stadium, or other place of exhibition or entertainment;
(D) an auditorium, convention center, lecture hall, or other place of public gathering;
(E) a bakery, grocery store, clothing store, hardware store, shopping center, or other sales or rental establishment;
(F) a laundromat, dry-cleaner, bank, barber shop, beauty shop, travel service, shoe repair service, funeral parlor, gas station, office of an accountant or lawyer, pharmacy, insurance office, professional office of a health care provider, hospital, or other service establishment;
(G) a terminal, depot, or other station used for specified public transportation;
(H) a museum, library, gallery, or other place of public display or collection;
(I) a park, zoo, amusement park, or other place of recreation;
(J) a nursery, elementary, secondary, undergraduate, or postgraduate private school, or other place of education;
(K) a day care center, senior citizen center, homeless shelter, food bank, adoption agency, or other social service center establishment; and
(L) a gymnasium, health spa, bowling alley, golf course, or other place of exercise or recreation.​

 

[genuineoriginal]

Wait...you were serious? You actually think the criterion for a public accommodation is whether you get your order to go or not? Kinda makes you wonder where doggie bags fit in. :chuckle:

Or with clothing stores, does it matter whether you put the clothes on in the store, or if you just take them out in a bag? :chuckle:

And what about rental stores, where you take the item out, but bring it back later? :think:

Honestly...your response was so ridiculous, I didn't think you were serious. Apparently I really, really overestimated you. But, rather than get more laughs at your expense, I'll once again see if you can be educated.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/12181

(7) Public accommodation--The following private entities are considered public accommodations for purposes of this subchapter, if the operations of such entities affect commerce—

(A) an inn, hotel, motel, or other place of lodging, except for an establishment located within a building that contains not more than five rooms for rent or hire and that is actually occupied by the proprietor of such establishment as the residence of such proprietor;
(B) a restaurant, bar, or other establishment serving food or drink;
(C) a motion picture house, theater, concert hall, stadium, or other place of exhibition or entertainment;
(D) an auditorium, convention center, lecture hall, or other place of public gathering;
(E) a bakery, grocery store, clothing store, hardware store, shopping center, or other sales or rental establishment;
(F) a laundromat, dry-cleaner, bank, barber shop, beauty shop, travel service, shoe repair service, funeral parlor, gas station, office of an accountant or lawyer, pharmacy, insurance office, professional office of a health care provider, hospital, or other service establishment;
(G) a terminal, depot, or other station used for specified public transportation;
(H) a museum, library, gallery, or other place of public display or collection;
(I) a park, zoo, amusement park, or other place of recreation;
(J) a nursery, elementary, secondary, undergraduate, or postgraduate private school, or other place of education;
(K) a day care center, senior citizen center, homeless shelter, food bank, adoption agency, or other social service center establishment; and
(L) a gymnasium, health spa, bowling alley, golf course, or other place of exercise or recreation.​

Well look at that....bakeries are specifically mentioned in the law as an example of "public accommodation". Huh. :think:

I see you are quoting the Americans with Disability Act of 1990 (ADA).
You have two things to prove in order for this to be relevant.
First, you must prove that the bakery affects Commerce in a manner that requires the Federal government to regulate it.
Second, you must prove that homosexuality is a disability under the definitions of the ADA.

_____

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/12102

(1) DisabilityThe term “disability” means, with respect to an individual—

(A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of such individual;
(B) a record of such an impairment; or
(C) being regarded as having such an impairment (as described in paragraph (3)).​

(2) Major life activities

(A) In general
For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, communicating, and working.

(B) Major bodily functions
For purposes of paragraph (1), a major life activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, including but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and reproductive functions.​

(3) Regarded as having such an impairmentFor purposes of paragraph (1)(C):

(A) An individual meets the requirement of “being regarded as having such an impairment” if the individual establishes that he or she has been subjected to an action prohibited under this chapter because of an actual or perceived physical or mental impairment whether or not the impairment limits or is perceived to limit a major life activity.
(B) Paragraph (1)(C) shall not apply to impairments that are transitory and minor. A transitory impairment is an impairment with an actual or expected duration of 6 months or less.​

_____​

Well, you could make the point that homosexuality is a "mental impairment" that affects the "reproductive functions", which could classify it as a disability.

 

[Jose Fly]

I see you are quoting the Americans with Disability Act of 1990 (ADA).

Only as it provides a legal definition for "public accommodation", which clearly includes bakeries.

You have two things to prove in order for this to be relevant.
First, you must prove that the bakery affects Commerce in a manner that requires the Federal government to regulate it.
Second, you must prove that homosexuality is a disability under the definitions of the ADA.

I've not claimed either of those things. Again, the legal definition of "public accommodation" includes bakeries that are open to the public.

If you can find a legal source that actually argues otherwise, then post it. Otherwise, the point stands.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Only as it provides a legal definition for "public accommodation", which clearly includes bakeries.

The first problem with that is that the definitions only apply to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, not to whatever you want to make it apply to.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/12181

(7) Public accommodation--The following private entities are considered public accommodations for purposes of this subchapter, if the operations of such entities affect commerce—​

The second problem with that is that the definition has a clause in it you are completely ignoring, which is the commerce clause.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/12181

(7) Public accommodation--The following private entities are considered public accommodations for purposes of this subchapter, if the operations of such entities affect commerce—​

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/12181

(1) Commerce The term “commerce” means travel, trade, traffic, commerce, transportation, or communication—

(A) among the several States;
(B) between any foreign country or any territory or possession and any State; or
(C) between points in the same State but through another State or foreign country.​

 

[Jose Fly]

The first problem with that is that the definitions only apply to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, not to whatever you want to make it apply to.

Like I said, if you have a legal source that defines "public accommodation" in a way that excludes bakeries that are open to the public, then post it. Anything less and the point stands.

The second problem with that is that the definition has a clause in it you are completely ignoring, which is the commerce clause.

Irrelevant to the question at hand, i.e., whether a bakery that is open to the public considered "public accommodation". It is.

"Within U.S. law, public accommodations are generally defined as facilities, both public and private, that are used by the public. Examples include retail stores, rental establishments and service establishments, as well as educational institutions, recreational facilities and service centers."

 

[genuineoriginal]

Like I said, if you have a legal source that defines "public accommodation" in a way that excludes bakeries that are open to the public, then post it. Anything less and the point stands.

The wording of the law you quoted excludes the use in the manner you want to use it.
Find a different law and make sure it applies.
So far, you have provided no legal reason to prohibit discrimination against people because of their perverted sexual practices.

Irrelevant to the question at hand, i.e., whether a bakery that is open to the public considered "public accommodation". It is.

You cannot cite wikipedia as law.

So far you only have a couple of sexual perverts that are offended by a couple of bakers freely exercising their religion and denying them from entering into a contract for a custom cake for an event that violates their religious beliefs.

Which means all you have are a couple of whiny losers causing trouble, much like yourself.

 

[Jose Fly]

Thanks for your time.

 

[Crucible]

Just as I thought.

As soon as this this thread began, there was an immediate comparison of being denied a gay wedding cake to Jim Crow laws, the claim of perceived fascism along with, ironically, a happy sentiment that Christians are being forced out of their expression and contract.


What these retards don't understand is that they've already exhausted all their resources and they made everyone sick of it in the process. They don't expect a 'tit' for their 'tat', because that's how delusional they've become.
They're going to get a wake up call that this is not the UK, no matter how much they've imagined or presumed it to be for a while now

Exhibit A:

 

[Angel4Truth]

Just as I thought.

As soon as this this thread began, there was an immediate comparison of being denied a gay wedding cake to Jim Crow laws, the claim of perceived fascism along with, ironically, a happy sentiment that Christians are being forced out of their expression and contract.


What these retards don't understand is that they've already exhausted all their resources and they made everyone sick of it in the process. They don't expect a 'tit' for their 'tat', because that's how delusional they've become.
They're going to get a wake up call that this is not the UK, no matter how much they've imagined or presumed it to be for a while now

Exhibit A:

Check this out - http://louderwithcrowder.com/hidden-camera-gay-wedding-cake-at-muslim-bakery/

 

[Jose Fly]

As soon as this this thread began, there was an immediate comparison of being denied a gay wedding cake to Jim Crow laws, the claim of perceived fascism along with, ironically, a happy sentiment that Christians are being forced out of their expression and contract.

The comparison is apt, given how the central concept (discrimination in public accommodation) is the same in both situations.

What these retards don't understand is that they've already exhausted all their resources and they made everyone sick of it in the process. They don't expect a 'tit' for their 'tat', because that's how delusional they've become.
They're going to get a wake up call that this is not the UK, no matter how much they've imagined or presumed it to be for a while now

You're not making a bit of sense.

Exhibit A:

Since Muslims make up about 1% of the US population, and Christians make up about 70%, it's hardly surprising that all the bakery cases so far have involved Christians.

 

[Jose Fly]

Check this out - http://louderwithcrowder.com/hidden-camera-gay-wedding-cake-at-muslim-bakery/

What is it with conservatives and repeating stupid things like this, well after they've been debunked? Again, the video depicts a guy asking for a special cake with unique writing on it, whereas the cases involving Christian bakeries did not involve such special or unique products.

It's the difference between a person going into a t-shirt shop and trying to buy a plain white shirt, versus trying to get the shop to make a shirt that says "All Muslims are terrorists".

If you don't understand the difference, you probably shouldn't be in these sorts of threads.

 

[ok doser]

The comparison is apt, given how the central concept (discrimination in public accommodation) is the same in both situations.

well, let's see :think:

jim crow laws were governmental intrusions on individual freedoms

what we're talking about here (with the bakery situation) is governmental intrusions on individual freedoms

 

[Jose Fly]

jim crow laws were governmental intrusions on individual freedoms

what we're talking about here (with the bakery situation) is governmental intrusions on individual freedoms

By that logic, repealing Jim Crow was governmental intrusion on the racist business owners' individual freedoms.

 

[ok doser]

By that logic, repealing Jim Crow was governmental intrusion on the racist business owners' individual freedoms.

repealing jim crow laws - laws that were governmentally imposed - was just and correct

forcing racist business owners - owners of privately owned businesses - to change their business preferences was unjust and overreaching

 

[Jose Fly]

forcing racist business owners - owners of privately owned businesses - to change their business preferences was unjust and overreaching

Thanks for clarifying your views.

 

[Crucible]

"Nobody is attacking Christians"

Says the atheist on a Christian site

 

[Jose Fly]

So debating Christians in online debate forums = attacking Christians.

That's hilarious. :rotfl:

 

[Crucible]

So debating Christians in online debate forums = attacking Christians.

That's hilarious. :rotfl:

You are against Christianity, plain and simple. Instead of spending your time with like minded people, you choose to spread your unpopular opinions and complaints on a Christian board.

*That = 'Debating'

Just like how all the transgressing atheists have done against Christian families and establishments is about 'rights'.

You all are hilarious

 

[Jose Fly]

You are against Christianity, plain and simple. Instead of spending your time with like minded people, you choose to spread your unpopular opinions and complaints on a Christian board.

*That = 'Debating'

Um.....yeah....that's kinda how "debate" works. You have to engage people who disagree with you. Pretty hard to debate people who agree with you. :duh:

 

[Crucible]

Um.....yeah....that's kinda how "debate" works. You have to engage people who disagree with you. Pretty hard to debate people who agree with you. :duh:

'Debate' is not 'denying every little grain of anything theistic'. That's called 'being an atheist stirring the pot on a religious site'.

I looked at a lot of those atheist sites and their ban lists are all a mile long with theists who were basically trolled out of there or caved into losing their temper.

They were foolish for having gone to such sites, and it's irritating that, even still, you all have the nerve to come onto these sites.

You all only exist for one reason, and it's not to 'debate'.