Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Guilty! Guilty! Guilty!
Collapse
X
-
"I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
-
Originally posted by Darth Executor View PostThere is a point to having a constitution. But ultimately the constitution is a piece of paper and if people defy it the piece of paper can't do anything about it. It's up to the people disadvantaged by the violation to start slashing throats or degrade into obscurity.
-John AdamsSome may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by phank View PostIf you think wedding cakes have sexual orientations, you need to provide your research..
gay_1-1.jpg
Hetero wedding cake:
Tender-Moment-Wedding-Cake-Topper.jpg
Any other dumbass comments?
Also wedding cakes are not commodities like buying a hamburger or groceries. They are creative works of art done to specifications. They take a lot of time and the baker is an artist. You can't force someone to make a creative piece of art for you. Artists have the right to refuse commissions. If you are a portrait painter, you have the right to refuse to paint anything you want to, such as a portrait of Hitler, or a gay couple, or anything else you don't want to paint. Making a wedding cake is the same thing. If they were stock wedding cakes that were all just the same, then he would not be able to refuse to sell to a gay couple, but if asked to create a work of art, a customized creative cake, then the baker has the right to refuse.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostMaking a wedding cake is the same thing. If they were stock wedding cakes that were all just the same, then he would not be able to refuse to sell to a gay couple, but if asked to create a work of art, a customized creative cake, then the baker has the right to refuse.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostIf they were stock wedding cakes that were all just the same, then he would not be able to refuse to sell to a gay couple...
So the question is, which businesses should gay people be forced to patronize?Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostI disagree. I think a business owner has the inherent right to refuse service to anyone for any reason just as the customer has the inherent right to refuse to patronize any business for any reason. If we can legally force business owners to serve certain customers againt their will then logically we can force customers to patronize certain businesses against their will.
So the question is, which businesses should gay people be forced to patronize?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostArtists have a right to refuse to make creative pieces or goods to anyone.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
I tend to agree with Darth regarding literalist vs original intent.
But even if you wanted to consider the original intent of the 13th Amendment, I don't see how you can suppose that they intended "involuntary servitude" narrowly, say to only mean black chattel slavery as then existing. If they had intended such a narrow meaning, then they would have had no reason to add an exception: "except as a punishment for crime". The fact that they felt the need to carve out an exception for involuntary servitude as punishment for a crime indicates that they had in mind the normal, broad, general understanding of "involuntary servitude."
Comment
-
Originally posted by Joel View PostI tend to agree with Darth regarding literalist vs original intent.
But even if you wanted to consider the original intent of the 13th Amendment, I don't see how you can suppose that they intended "involuntary servitude" narrowly, say to only mean black chattel slavery as then existing. If they had intended such a narrow meaning, then they would have had no reason to add an exception: "except as a punishment for crime". The fact that they felt the need to carve out an exception for involuntary servitude as punishment for a crime indicates that they had in mind the normal, broad, general understanding of "involuntary servitude."
Comment
-
Originally posted by Psychic Missile View PostI doubt they considered taxes, the draft, or jury duty involuntary servitude, and I think compliance with protected class laws can fall under that "legal duties" umbrella if need be.
Perhaps there is no way to know what the original intent was regarding the draft. Perhaps among the people on the committee, among the members of congress, and among those in the states who ratified, the intent varied from person to person. Perhaps they didn't even think through the logical conclusions of what they wrote. Maybe if someone had brought it up, they would have smacked their heads and said, "Doh! We obviously have to write in additional exceptions for the draft and jury duty." But there's probably no way of knowing. Thus I think the literal way is usually better.
The fact is that the wording they actually passed is very broad, saying involuntary servitude shall not exist, and explicitly carved out exactly one specific exception. If they wanted additional exceptions, they should have stated them. They didn't (whether by intent or error). If more exceptions are desired, the Constitution needs to be amended.
It seems obvious that if someone challenges a law as violating the 13th Amendment, the government has only the following ways out:
1) Demonstrate that it isn't servitude,
2) Demonstrate that it isn't involuntary, or
3) Demonstrate that it is only specifying the punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostThis is great news. Just as the KKK needed to be actively rooted out after slavery was abolished, there are still those today who need to be stopped from persecuting gay people despite the fact that we now have supposed 'equality'. I hope case serves as a well-publicized example that inspires people not to discriminate against gay people
I note the fine is yet to be decided, and the specified amount is simply a theoretical maximum. US fines seem to be always waaaaaay over the top though. But I imagine they'll be no end of Christian groups fundraising to help them pay the fine. Bizarrely a gay-Christian group has already given them money."The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostAnd who in their right mind would want a cake from someone who does not like you and you're forcing them to make it? Jesse Jackson once boasted in an interview published in Life magazine back in 1969 how he would spit in the food of white customers he didn't like when he worked as a waiter[1]. I imagine that someone who made the food could do worse.
1. Once he told of his days as a waiter at the Jack Tar Hotel in his home town of Greenville, S.C. Just before leaving the kitchen he would spit into the food of white patrons he hated and then smilingly serve it to them. He did this, he said, “because it gave me psychological gratification.”"The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy
Comment
-
Originally posted by phank View PostNobody is being "forced to do work". If you go to a baker and buy a cake, are you "forcing" the baker to work for you?
The fines are for breaking the law, not for providing products for customers."The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
|
6 responses
48 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by whag
Yesterday, 08:38 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
|
42 responses
234 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by whag
Yesterday, 03:53 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
|
24 responses
104 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Ronson
Yesterday, 02:40 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
|
33 responses
189 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Roy
Today, 07:43 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
|
73 responses
311 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 03:51 AM |
Comment