Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake

Jun 6, 2013 Full story: Denver Post 16,361

Engaged gay couple Dave Mullins, second from left, and Charlie Craig, left, were joined by a small group of supporters in Lakewood on Aug. 4, 2012 to protest and boycott the Masterpiece Cakeshop at 3355 S. Wadsworth Blvd. The couple went to the cake shop, and the owner turned the couple away saying he would not make them a rainbow-themed wedding ... (more)

Full Story

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1772 May 13, 2014
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
And it is unconstitutional, you have offered no argument to the contrary.
<quoted text>
As opposed to your own dishonesty, which is anything but intellectual.
<quoted text>
He resigned, because it was in the best interest of the company. Of course, popular opinion has an impact upon corporate decisions. His remaining CEO would have had a negative impact upon the company. Are you against free speech?
<quoted text>
Sorry, kiddo, that depends upon jurisdiction. Some offer marriage between two people, without making the distinction you, unconstitutionally, draw.
<quoted text>
Interesting. You, apparently, see inequality under the law as funny. That certainly says something about you, and it isn't flattering.
<quoted text>
No, sweet pea. A commercial driver's license requires a test and a display of certain skills. Were I unable to demonstrate such ability, then I should be denied the license. No such test exists for marriage. Try again.
<quoted text>
I am not trying to change what people think or accept, I am trying to change the law in order to obtain equality under same.
You are free to remain the bigot you have always been.
<quoted text>
I respect your beliefs, however you may not use them to withhold equality under the law for others.
Don't like same sex marriage, don't marry someone of the same sex.
It's pretty simple, actually.
“Gay marriage” will because legal in this nation, and Americans obviously will have to watch out for people like you, who force your ideal upon Americans through laws and media whining. The Constitution is for ALL Americans not just gays.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#1773 May 13, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
LOL… all over the board… Wedding cakes mean something to others that apparently you don’t respect, but that doesn’t render them meaningless.
Cars and cheeseburgers mean something to some people too. That doesn't mean we can't regulate their sale.
Respect71 wrote:
Your claim is false.
How so? Who defines and maintains the civil institution of marriage if not the government?
Respect71 wrote:
I addressed you point. You didn’t like that I addressed your point with the truth. If you can make a better argument, then by all means.
The point was that religious belief does not overrule all laws. You did not address it - you make a statement about abortion.
Respect71 wrote:
I comprehend what your are TRYING to analogize but the two aren’t analogous. Owning a human being vs reserving a wedding cake for only husbands and wives.
The situations DON’T match.
You clearly don't comprehend the analogy. If you did, you would attack the portion being compared (religious beliefs VS law), not being trying to contrast what the particular beliefs are.

If I tell you that Peyton Manning is the Michael Jordan of football, then to defeat the analogy, you need to show why Peyton Manning isn't the best football player, like Michael Jordan was the best basketball player. Making statements that football and basketball are different is irrelevant.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#1774 May 13, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
“Gay marriage” will because legal in this nation, and Americans obviously will have to watch out for people like you, who force your ideal upon Americans through laws and media whining. The Constitution is for ALL Americans not just gays.
You mean that American's will have to look out for people who demand constitutionally guaranteed equality under the law?

No one said the constitution is just for gays, gays are the ones being denied equality under the law.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#1775 May 13, 2014
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean that American's will have to look out for.
That would be 'Americans.'

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#1776 May 13, 2014
Wondering wrote:
That would be 'Americans.'
Thank you for being the grammar police, it is nice to see that you are, occasionally, useful for something.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#1777 May 13, 2014
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for being the grammar police, it is nice to see that you are, occasionally, useful for something.
When will you be useful for something?
Never is my guess.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#1778 May 13, 2014
Wondering wrote:
When will you be useful for something?
Never is my guess.
Wondering, go away, the adults are having a serious conversation. It's a nice day, go play on the swings.

Spell check, please.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1779 May 15, 2014
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
Cars and cheeseburgers mean something to some people too. That doesn't mean we can't regulate their sale.
<quoted text>
How so? Who defines and maintains the civil institution of marriage if not the government?
<quoted text>
The point was that religious belief does not overrule all laws. You did not address it - you make a statement about abortion.
<quoted text>
You clearly don't comprehend the analogy. If you did, you would attack the portion being compared (religious beliefs VS law), not being trying to contrast what the particular beliefs are.
If I tell you that Peyton Manning is the Michael Jordan of football, then to defeat the analogy, you need to show why Peyton Manning isn't the best football player, like Michael Jordan was the best basketball player. Making statements that football and basketball are different is irrelevant.
“Cars and cheeseburgers mean something to some people too. That doesn't mean we can't regulate their sale.” Do you read what you type?

“How so? Who defines and maintains the civil institution of marriage if not the government?” Americans. The individual. You do know that Gays have been getting united and married for decades, WITHOUT government, don’t you? They go to a unity church for the ceremony and have a lawyer arrange their affairs and live together till they die.

The IRS is a government institution, marriage is not.

“The point was that religious belief does not overrule all laws. You did not address it - you make a statement about abortion.” I can’t help how you feel about how I addressed it… Murder is legal in our nation despite religious belief, and you’re complaint is about the reservation of a cake for a husband and wife. Seems as though your priorities are a little skewed.

“You clearly don't comprehend the analogy. If you did, you would attack the portion being compared (religious beliefs VS law), not being trying to contrast what the particular beliefs are.” You are grasping for straws…

“If I tell you that Peyton Manning is the Michael Jordan of football, then to defeat the analogy, you need to show why Peyton Manning isn't the best football player, like Michael Jordan was the best basketball player. Making statements that football and basketball are different is irrelevant.” They are both ball games… shall we sew the NBA “ball playing equality” foir not allowing Manning to play?

You are very unfocused and seemingly uneducated.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1780 May 15, 2014
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean that American's will have to look out for people who demand constitutionally guaranteed equality under the law?
No one said the constitution is just for gays, gays are the ones being denied equality under the law.
Again, I am for “gay marriage” but I am honest about it, and I choose to respect those, like a baker of photographer, who hold to their beliefs of what marriage is, because they have the right to do so.
When you can explain how the gay relationship is the SAME or EQUAL to that of a husband and wife, I will concede to you… You can’t which is why you haven’t.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#1781 May 15, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, I am for “gay marriage” but I am honest about it, and I choose to respect those, like a baker of photographer, who hold to their beliefs of what marriage is, because they have the right to do so.
When you can explain how the gay relationship is the SAME or EQUAL to that of a husband and wife, I will concede to you… You can’t which is why you haven’t.
But we have blanche.

The laws in those States clearly explained why those two were charged BY THE GOVERNMENT with a crime.

And marriage is and always has been LEGALLY defined by the government, not deeply held religious beliefs.

This wasn't a civil lawsuit over rights it was a criminal action over someone's behavior.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#1782 May 15, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
“How so? Who defines and maintains the civil institution of marriage if not the government?” Americans. The individual. You do know that Gays have been getting united and married for decades, WITHOUT government, don’t you? They go to a unity church for the ceremony and have a lawyer arrange their affairs and live together till they die.
Except since SSM bans were passed it's a crime in some states for the people you mentioned (the minister and lawyer) to do what you say is so simple.
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>The IRS is a government institution, marriage is not
Marriage is defined by the Govt.

For crying out loud look at the number of times thew "institution of marriage" has been voted on by people and ruled on by the courts.

I can't even believe this thread is still active.

The baker and florist each lost. These were criminal cases and there are no appeals left.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#1783 May 15, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
“How so? Who defines and maintains the civil institution of marriage if not the government?” Americans. The individual. You do know that Gays have been getting united and married for decades, WITHOUT government, don’t you? They go to a unity church for the ceremony and have a lawyer arrange their affairs and live together till they die.
That's not a civil marriage. I can declare myself to be President too. That doesn't make it true to anyone other than me.
Respect71 wrote:
Murder is legal in our nation despite religious belief, and you’re complaint is about the reservation of a cake for a husband and wife. Seems as though your priorities are a little skewed.
Murder isn't legal in our nation. Murder can't be legal by definition.
Respect71 wrote:
You are very unfocused and seemingly uneducated.
Your lack of brain power to understand basic analogies in not a fault on my end.

“THERE IS NO GOD”

Since: Feb 09

Northern California

#1784 May 15, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text> Do you read what you [thebox] type? You are very unfocused and seemingly uneducated.
I doubt he reads what he types, but he can't edit it so he is stuck with it. And there is nothing "seemingly" about his lack of education. Most of the authoritarian gays get all their education about gay rights right here in topix. And should an educated gay come in here to help, he is viciously attacked by the gay Nazi's.

Not all gays are demented but the demented ones bully the normal ones and they don't wish to engage in the petty bickering and they leave. We have lost a lot of really intelligent, informed logical gays who use reason in their posts.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#1785 May 15, 2014
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
I doubt he reads what he types, but he can't edit it so he is stuck with it. And there is nothing "seemingly" about his lack of education. Most of the authoritarian gays get all their education about gay rights right here in topix. And should an educated gay come in here to help, he is viciously attacked by the gay Nazi's.
Not all gays are demented but the demented ones bully the normal ones and they don't wish to engage in the petty bickering and they leave. We have lost a lot of really intelligent, informed logical gays who use reason in their posts.
I was trying to find a graceful way to leave.

My thanks

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#1786 May 15, 2014
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
I doubt he reads what he types, but he can't edit it so he is stuck with it. And there is nothing "seemingly" about his lack of education.
Alan, go back to the other thread and tell people more about how the immune system is based on good bacteria fighting bad bacteria, vaccines don't prevent disease, and antibiotics don't really work.
Reverend Alan wrote:
Most of the authoritarian gays get all their education about gay rights right here in topix.
I'm neither authoritarian nor gay. The fact that you view anti-discrimination laws as authoritarian just shows how demented you are.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1787 May 16, 2014
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>But we have blanche.
The laws in those States clearly explained why those two were charged BY THE GOVERNMENT with a crime.
And marriage is and always has been LEGALLY defined by the government, not deeply held religious beliefs.
This wasn't a civil lawsuit over rights it was a criminal action over someone's behavior.
If the government existed or not marriage would remain. Such criminal behavior to reserve a cake for husband and wife, and your goal should be to weed out all these evil cooks!

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1788 May 16, 2014
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>Except since SSM bans were passed it's a crime in some states for the people you mentioned (the minister and lawyer) to do what you say is so simple.
<quoted text>Marriage is defined by the Govt.
For crying out loud look at the number of times thew "institution of marriage" has been voted on by people and ruled on by the courts.
I can't even believe this thread is still active.
The baker and florist each lost. These were criminal cases and there are no appeals left.
“Except since SSM bans were passed it's a crime in some states for the people you mentioned (the minister and lawyer) to do what you say is so simple.” Please post the laws where “SSM bans were passed it's a crime”.

“Marriage is defined by the Govt.” I’m sure you mean the government is redefining marriage, and yes, that is true.

“For crying out loud look at the number of times thew "institution of marriage" has been voted on by people” You mean like in Colorado or Prop 8 in California?

“The baker and florist each lost. These were criminal cases and there are no appeals left.” Lol, which is what you stand for, right? Punishing those who don’t believe in SSM and the way that you believe.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1789 May 16, 2014
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not a civil marriage. I can declare myself to be President too. That doesn't make it true to anyone other than me.
<quoted text>
Murder isn't legal in our nation. Murder can't be legal by definition.
<quoted text>
Your lack of brain power to understand basic analogies in not a fault on my end.
“That's not a civil marriage. I can declare myself to be President too. That doesn't make it true to anyone other than me.” So it’s only valid if government recognizes them as united? Sad. The point is your claim that “marriage is a government institution” is false.

“Murder isn't legal in our nation. Murder can't be legal by definition.” When the government REDEFINES “murder” as “abortion” it’s absolutely legal.

“Your lack of brain power to understand basic analogies in not a fault on my end.” The point is:“gay marriage” will eventually become legal in al 50 states, and the question is will you be willing to allow those who don’t believe in “gay marriage” to exists and be without criminal punishment?

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#1790 May 16, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
Again, I am for “gay marriage” but I am honest about it, and I choose to respect those, like a baker of photographer, who hold to their beliefs of what marriage is, because they have the right to do so.
When you can explain how the gay relationship is the SAME or EQUAL to that of a husband and wife, I will concede to you… You can’t which is why you haven’t.
Two people = two people. Get over it, kiddo.

The reality is that you are not for same sex marriage, which you prove in your second sentence.

The reality is that the rights of the baker and photographed were not violated. Don't believe me, read the court cases, the photographer lost their case all the way to the US Supreme Court.

Simply put, allowing same sex marriage does not violate the rights of these business owners, nor does providing service to same sex couples.

That you claim to support same sex marriage is a laughable assertion, proven untrue by each and every [post you make, where you argue against it, and claim that same sex couples are somehow lesser to heterosexual couples.

Your hypocrisy would be hysterical if it weren't so pathetic.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#1791 May 16, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
So it’s only valid if government recognizes them as united? Sad.
Yes. It's a civil government institution. Anyone can say they're married. That doesn't make it so.
Respect71 wrote:
When the government REDEFINES “murder” as “abortion” it’s absolutely legal.
Murder is always illegal by definition. You can say that abortion SHOULD be murder, but you cannot say that it IS murder.
Respect71 wrote:
“Your lack of brain power to understand basic analogies in not a fault on my end.” The point is:“gay marriage” will eventually become legal in al 50 states, and the question is will you be willing to allow those who don’t believe in “gay marriage” to exists and be without criminal punishment?
Of course. You can always believe whatever you want. People can think interracial marriage is phony too. Or marriage between non-virgins. Or anything else.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Sheridan Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Republicans the party of LIARS (Dec '11) 1 hr tbird19482 16,411
Message Me , Single Woman 2 hr Horny4CoxBae 1
last post wins! (Feb '11) 6 hr Concerned_American 25,076
annette MARION, CPMS IS HOLDING YVETTE HANDFIEL... 6 hr NETTY CRAZY 1
106.7 kbpi is the worst morning show ever! 19 hr Eat me you low life 537
Students hack into school system, change grades (Apr '07) 23 hr Awssome 624
annette marion delusions "marry off world alien... Thu PSYCO ANNETTE 1
Sheridan Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Sheridan People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 4:49 am PST

Bleacher Report 4:49AM
Pre-Free Agency Salary Cap Update for Chiefs
ESPN11:41 AM
Source: Chiefs, LB Mauga agree to new deal
NFL12:41 PM
Chiefs to re-sign LB Josh Mauga, per report
Bleacher Report 2:16 PM
Report: Chiefs Re-Sign LB Mauga
Yahoo! Sports 4:05 PM
Brandon Marshall, is that the linebacker or the receiver?