Excellent point.I did however tat up a few brests
Nobody forces me to do nuthin. I support the bakery.
Religious freedom is protected under the law. Why is it okay for the legality of gay marriage to circumvent that?I support religious freedom but it cannot be used to circumvent the law.
I would crucify youImagine the outrage if I went into a Jewish bakery and ordered a nazi cake.
OhhhhhhhhhhReligious freedom is protected under the law. Why is it okay for the legality of gay marriage to circumvent that?
I would make you a prolapsed anus cake for your wedding to GuillaumeI would crucify you
Now I'm hubgryI would make you a prolapsed anus cake for your wedding to Guillaume
Reynolds v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the Morrill Act, stating: "Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinion, they may with practices."Religious freedom is protected under the law. Why is it okay for the legality of gay marriage to circumvent that?
The fuck's all this Merlot about, twatley?Ohhhhhhhhhh
Hhhjjjjjhhgghjhsd
Did you just try to equate a business choosing what services it chooses to provide with laws about polygamy and then notalong a cake with child sacrifice? Really?Reynolds v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the Morrill Act, stating: "Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinion, they may with practices."
Law overrides religious practices, as it should. Your unproven superstition does not permit you to break the law. As I previously stated, you cannot sacrifice children under religious freedom, either.
Logically, yes. Religious freedom does not over ride law.Did you just try to equate a business choosing what services it chooses to provide with laws about polygamy and then notalong a cake with child sacrifice? Really?
Different context. A public service isn't a private business.Logically, yes. Religious freedom does not over ride law.
You didn't seem to care so much about religious freedom on the Burka ban thread.
You didn't seem to care so much about religious freedom on the Burka ban thread.
Different context. A public service isn't a private business.
No I'm not. You're free to worship whatever magic man you want. You cannot break the law to do it.Different context. A public service isn't a private business.
When you say "religious freedom does not override law" what you're actually saying is that religious freedom does not exist.
This is what it comes down to.I should add that to me this has little to do with religious convictions and more to do with personal freedom.
Good point. I would argue that the Burka has nothing to do with religion, as it is not mandated in any of the major holy scriptures. It's more likely to be a cultural garment more than anything.You didn't seem to care so much about religious freedom on the Burka ban thread.
Agreed. We have decided that religion and the state are seperate, so this is a consequense to be accepted.You're free to worship whatever magic man you want. You cannot break the law to do it.
So cake maker makes wedding cakes but not gay wedding cakes.No I'm not. You're free to worship whatever magic man you want. You cannot break the law to do it.
Private citizen, private business. The only difference is the actual religion. At least be consistent.
Cake maker makes wedding cakes with people's names on. There's no need to do anything specific to make it gay, they're simply refusing to put their names on it.So cake maker makes wedding cakes but not gay wedding cakes.
Mosques hold Islamic weddings.
Should I be able to go to one and demand a Christian wedding?
Just change the names allah and Mohammed with Jesus and the Holy Spirit during the service. Doesn’t seem any more difficult than writing a name on a cake.Cake maker makes wedding cakes with people's names on. There's no need to do anything specific to make it gay, they're simply refusing to put their names on it.
In your counter example, a Mosque that offers Islamic weddings should, IMHO, be prepared to offer an Islamic wedding to Christians. Again, nothing specific needs to be changed.
Refusing to put a cock and balls on the cake is justified, as is a Mosque refusing to include Christian elements in their wedding ceremony. But refusing to serve people simply because they are gay or Christian is bigotry and illegal.
No, that's like the cake makers decorating the cake with cock and balls, which I've agreed is acceptable to refuse.Just change the names allah and Mohammed with Jesus and the Holy Spirit during the service. Doesn’t seem any more difficult than writing a name on a cake.