Bakers refuse Gay wedding cake - update: Supreme Court rules in favour of Bakers

RDM said:
No I "literally" said "With homosexuality none of these issues are present in any greater degree than in normal heterosexual relationships."

So the rest of your post is frankly gibberish.
Click to expand...

No that's not why you're saying the rest of my post is gibberish.

Your argument is still absolutely false even if you quote the entire sentence. You are still assuming the relatively comparable heretosexual relationship is going to be "normal" and quoting your whole sentence simply exposes another factor of your ignorance which is to ignore heterosexual relations where birth defects and imbalance of power ARE present.

Heterosex is the ONLY (most popular) method where BIRTH defects are even POSSIBLE.

Conclusion: Another absolutely ridiculous point.




Funny thing is I personally find incest detestable, but it's due to personal moral reasons, not for two absolutely ridiculous conditional technicalities like "birth defects" and "domination". haha If that's the two things wrong with incest then, just lol.
 
Last edited:
This thread needs more gay cakes

gaywedding.jpg
 
So now we have free reign to troll cake shops by requesting the most in appropriate insulting images for their choosen faith and they have no choice but to make it. Huzza!!!! :D
 
Dis86 said:
I...I agree entirely with Asim.
Click to expand...

So do I, on this particular aspect of this particular issue. He presents a line of argument that is logical and consistent both internally and externally and he presents it clearly. There's no rational reason to disagree with him, which is why the posts disagreeing have to ignore what he's written and rely on repeating claims that don't make sense.

The people objecting to incestuous marriage between consenting adults who can't have biological children together are doing the same thing as people objecting to homosexual marriage between consenting adults. Exactly the same thing, using the same ideas and even the same words in many cases.
 
Angilion said:
Making harmless things illegal solely because only a minority of people want to do them is normally bad practice.
Click to expand...

I don't really think that is why the incest laws are there, I am fairly sure it is there to protect children from abusive parents or to protect younger siblings being groomed by older siblings. The fact that it might also affect homosexual twin brothers from getting it on is a side effect of it.

Much like the age of consent laws draw an imaginary line where a real one doesn't exist. Ruling n a case by case basis could leave too many vulnerable.
 
asim18 said:
Now you're just applying selective conditional factors now lmao :D

When speaking about homosexuality you assume all conditions all always fine and mutual, but for incest you think they cant consent or have mutual attraction?

To compare something properly you need to have constants and variables. The potential variation of "imbalance of power" needs to be constant, you need to compare like-for-like. You cant just create a condition for one type and create a worse condition for the other type and expect to form a proper comparison.

Anyway, in simple terms your argument is only valid if certain conditions are met, which renders any percieved comparions wholly flawed.


What next? Are you actually going to start comparing a peadoincestuous relationship between a 20 year old and his 8 year old sibling, with a homosexual relationship between two 40 year olds?

Really? You cant do that to compare properly, but you can do it to clutch at straws ;), you need to assume the incest couple are 40 and 38 or something.
Click to expand...

That..logic. I can not disagree with it. Faultless. :p
 
RDM said:
I don't really think that is why the incest laws are there, I am fairly sure it is there to protect children from abusive parents or to protect younger siblings being groomed by older siblings. The fact that it might also affect homosexual twin brothers from getting it on is a side effect of it.

Much like the age of consent laws draw an imaginary line where a real one doesn't exist. Ruling n a case by case basis could leave too many vulnerable.
Click to expand...

If we can make a up a new term to protect children from abusive parents, you will be happy for two brother twins getting married? And Bakers shouldn't refuse to make them a make incest legal cake based on 'outdated' views?
 
RDM said:
Except I didn't say that for homosexual relationships all conditions will always be fine and mutual.
Click to expand...

Except i didnt say you said that, i said your argument revolves around those conditions being inconsistent between incest-sex, homo-sex and herero-sex.

If you want to compare a gay relationship with an incest one you cant just say the incest one is worse just because the incest one has a possibility of a dominant person involved or that they are only doing it for offspring which then has a further possibility of being a defective birth.
 
Last edited:
RDM said:
I don't really think that is why the incest laws are there, I am fairly sure it is there to protect children from abusive parents or to protect younger siblings being groomed by older siblings. The fact that it might also affect homosexual twin brothers from getting it on is a side effect of it.

Much like the age of consent laws draw an imaginary line where a real one doesn't exist. Ruling n a case by case basis could leave too many vulnerable.
Click to expand...

Except that argument presumes guilt and intent before any crime has been committed. Ironically enough, Incest laws came about the same reason laws against homosexuality did - our society is based upon church enforced morality.
 
Tosno said:
If we can make a up a new term to protect children from abusive parents, you will be happy for two brother twins getting married? And Bakers shouldn't refuse to make them a make incest legal cake based on 'outdated' views?
Click to expand...

It seems a bit of stretch that it is a likely event. But if it really is that common then maybe the law would need changing. Let me know how you and your brother get on...

Remind me again what the harm in homosexual relationships is?
 
Angilion said:
So do I, on this particular aspect of this particular issue. He presents a line of argument that is logical and consistent both internally and externally and he presents it clearly. There's no rational reason to disagree with him, which is why the posts disagreeing have to ignore what he's written and rely on repeating claims that don't make sense.

The people objecting to incestuous marriage between consenting adults who can't have biological children together are doing the same thing as people objecting to homosexual marriage between consenting adults. Exactly the same thing, using the same ideas and even the same words in many cases.
Click to expand...

^^ this, yet as the concept is much less acceptable socially then it is rather awkward to have to state, if they support the ruling in this case, that they also therefore support the idea that a baker could be forced to make an incest cake...

perhaps we can add another layer to this - the baker is proud of his custom cakes and displays all custom cakes in the window prior to collection. Baker might well be also discriminating if he doesn't display the massive incest cake in the window too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom