Justice Dept. sides with baker who refused to serve gay couple

[Ban my account ffs!]

I don't believe anyone should be forced to provide a service directly related to any wedding.

Again, why the strange exception to only "weddings" ?
What if a gay couple wanted a cake for celebration of their 1 year dating anniversary (many couples of all types celebrate dating anniversaries) ?
That would be OK then, right ? Well it's not a "wedding."
What if a gay couple wanted a cake for their adopted daughter's birthday, and the owner refused because he was "repulsed" (like the good, loving Christians that they are) just by the sight of the couple in his/her store ?

Where do the strange exceptions start and stop ? When is it acceptable or not acceptable to everyday, normal social contact that WE WANT IN OUR NATION ?

You just blew a gaping hole right in Wulfric's tight logic clot.  This is how he weaves through various social issues... by making rigid rules with weird exceptions.  I'm beginning to wonder if he invented the German language as well.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Small businesses should have right to deny service to anyone.

So you oppose the Civil Rights Acts?

Of course I support the Civil Rights Act
Private Buisnesses not hiring someone based on race and sex is a civil rights violation  , but denying services To customers is not a civil rights violation in any sense of the word .

So not serving someone because they're black is not a civil rights issue? sh**t, you people are the ones who are mentally ill.

...

That is an outrageous accusation, and I specifically said  businesses that arent small businesses or family owned restaurants do not have the right to deny service.

There you go again!

What defines a small business?  What happens if such business crosses this threshold in one year but not the next?  Is their right to deny service to interracial or gay couples rescinded and then given back?

What happens if the two gays go into stealth mode and request a service individually and then their gayness is only made apparent after?  Does the business owner have the right to throw up all over them?

If I own a small restaurant and I see people praying in my restaurant do I have a right to angrily haul them out of my restaurant for "spreading their disgusting religion" to my other customers?

[Ban my account ffs!]

Oh America....continue to be the laughing stock of the western world.

How are those First Nations doing up there in the Bright White North?

[Ban my account ffs!]

This is why Evangelicals largely voted for Trump.  Not because the like him but because he doesn't think that they are the equivalent of the KKK.

No one is saying "they are equivalent to the KKK."
The KKK is pure hate. The Christian religion (all faiths) have some flaws, but I do believe that they at least try to preach some basic standards of decency, morals and love.

But for whatever reason, social liberals are obsessed with Christian teaching against homosexuality.  They think that people who hold such views are a threat to society.

... Bigotry isn't a threat to society?

It's not bigotry any more than Islam or Judaism is bigoted against me, a person who likes bacon.

You realize dietary restrictions are completely different right? No Jewish person looks down on you for eating bacon.

More likely he looks down on Jews and Muslims for not eating bacon and creates a projected fantasy that they actually look down on and judge him.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Okay, hypothetically, should a devout Catholic cashier be able to refuse to sell condoms? Or maybe just refuse to sell them to gay couples?

Should an accountant be able to refuse to help a married homosexual couple file their taxes jointly?

Should a religious bridal shop owner be able to refuse to sell a dress to a lesbian?

Should a devout realtor be able to refuse to sell a home to a newlywed homosexual couple, where they'll live together?

Should a mattress store owner be able to refuse to sell a mattress to a gay couple, knowing that it will be where they'll consummate the marriage?

Should a small hotel manager be able to refuse to allow a gay couple's wedding party to stay in his hotel's rooms?

There is a difference between a) selling a product which already exists, and b) using one's skills to create a new product for a specific purpose.

Should an artist be forced to paint a painting that he doesn't want to paint?

If that artist is willing to paint the same painting for a straight customer, there's no reason for her to not paint the same painting for a gay customer.

Artists paint things they don't want to paint all the time.  If you know artists who paint, you'd know the ones actually trying to make money generally do so by painting what other people want.  They don't prefer this, but it brings in $$$.

Then on the side they paint what /they/ want to paint and display it in galleries for sale.

All that said... I think the line can be drawn here:  If you are advertising your painting service to the general public, you do not have the right to discriminate based on the customer... though you would have the right to deny painting something sexually explicit, for example.

If you are an artist or a baker who serves people through word of mouth or through personal connections, you should have the right to refuse since you are not a public business.  But if you have a brick and mortar or online presence, then you are a public business regardless of size and must adhere to discrimination laws.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Fundamentally, a "gay wedding cake" is no different from a "regular wedding cake." The product, in essence, is the same. The only thing different is the people using it.

A baker should be able to refuse to serve a customer if they ask for something explicit - a cake covered in swastikas, for example. It doesn't matter if the customer is white, black, Jewish, or gay, the baker would never make a swastika cake. And that right to refuse should be extended to all potential cakes the baker may be asked to make. If a baker hates horses, he can refuse to make a cake with horse decorations. If a baker hates gays, he shouldn't be allowed to refuse service to them if they want some generic wedding cake.

That's the thing.  You can refuse as long as you would refuse to all potential customers... sexually explicit... overtly racist... malicious... or simply outside of your abilities.  There is nothing wrong with that.  But two grooms or two brides is not endangering your salvation.  If two men marrying is a slap in the face to you, turn the other cheek.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Your disagreement with the Court's legal reasoning on the Constitutional issues in Obergfell is an issue for a separate thread. You asked how church teachings against homosexuality represent a danger to society. The harm to society occurs when those groups demand that their religious beliefs and prejudices be codified into law to be imposed on all. You tried to analogize this bigotry to other groups who do not behave that way.

The bakers are trying to impose their views on anyone, they just want to be left alone.

While, as a Christian, I sympathize with your concerns, this argument is like saying that segregationists just wanted to be left alone.

I don't think so, because the bakers don't refuse to serve gay costumers, they simply refuse to make a cake for a wedding where people of the same gender are getting married.

Gender and sex are different things.

Not in any meaningful way.

What an empty and lazy response. Clearly, they are because they are different terms to describe different concepts. I suggest you look up some definitions and examples.

There are two biological sexes male and female, and each biological sex has a corresponding gender.  And gender is colloquially used as a synonym for sex.

Gender as different from sex is only useful in linguistics.  For instance, Latin, German, and Russian have three genders (masculine, feminine, and neuter), while Spanish and Portuguese only have masculine and feminine.  Other languages have no grammatical gender.

There are far more grammatical genders than just those three, and those span further than the few languages listed there. However, grammatical gender is not the same as social gender.

Social gender is assigned by society according to sex and expectations, yes, but practically nobody behaves on the extremes of masculinity and femininity. Gender exists on a continuum and is not absolute (e.g. you can usually say that someone is more masculine or feminine than someone else. Counter actively, there can also be the case when you can't tell a person's gender at all because it doesn't fall under your binary understanding of society's traditional conception of gender).

There are certain behaviors society considers masculine and others that society considers feminine.  But a tomboy is still a girl and a girly man is still a man.

And you're still a bigot justifying it with your religion.  Your heart is hard.  God has much more to say about that than the fairyboys you hate.

If your response be "I don't hate anyone"...prove it.