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

Freddie1980 said:
Come on it's clear the couple intentionally went their because they knew it was a Christian Bakery and just wanted to cause trouble.
Click to expand...

It's not a "Christian Bakery" at all, there is no way they could have known the owners/operators were Christian either.

If we are all going to make ridiculous statements then I'm going to go ahead and say they are intolerant of gays and they are just using the bible so they don't get sued.
 
Tombo said:
It stands for transgender and as a supposed supporter of gay/LGBT rights I find the fact you don't know this hilarious.

So do you just hate religion and are using this as an excuse to bash it without actually caring about gay people or what? I would imagine if you cared you would know what the acronyms mean.
Click to expand...

Page 7, me.
I don't even have anything to do with all the LGBT stuff
Click to expand...

I'm not a LGBT supporter - they can do what they like, I treat a gay bloke no different to a straight one. Transvestite/ transgender is basically the same thing, the bloke still prances around pretending he's not a bloke, ultimately that's his prerogative, doesn't fuss me.

Hate is a strong word. I strongly disagree with religion and believe is has no place in the modern world, it only stands to hold us back and that most religious people have a next to no understanding of the original philosophy instead using the consensus of a mob or the words of a preacher to decide what they should do, what is ethical, what is right and wrong. And that if they're going to do it they shouldn't think they're in some way special.

Just because you believe homosexuality is a sin doesn't mean you should go treating gays like second class citzens.
 
Last edited:
MooMoo444 said:
Surely it is their right to refuse certain requests. Like having a message in frosting consisting of nothing but expletives for example.
Click to expand...

They could indeed refuse that request, what they can't do is act in a way that discriminates due to religion, gender, race or sexuality.
 
FoxEye said:
You honestly mean to tell me you think those things are a declaration of a persons sexuality? Ie, "Everybody, I'm straight. Straight Power!"

Well you'd be wrong. Those things are a consequence of their sexuality, and the primary factor is a *specific* attraction to an individual. Ie, "Phwoar, isn't Lucy from accounting hot?"

How many times have you heard a straight guy say "Phwoar, aren't women hot? I like women. I'm straight." It would be absurd.
Click to expand...

When you gave examples of gay people shoving it in your face, they were really just 'consequences of their sexuality' as you put it. This is what I was highlighting with my counter-example. You obviously completely missed the point though.

If you think gay men go around saying things like 'phwoar, aren't men hot. I like men. I'm gay' then you obviously don't know many.
 
cheesyboy said:
How about some comparisons which aren't directly insulting? Because the Gay Cake wasn't insulting anyone (nor was it promoting something which harms anyone else)
Click to expand...

Yes, a better comparison would be to a bakery refusing to make a cake with an 'I believe in racial equality' message on it. Think of the outrage against the bakery if that occurred!
 
spoffle said:
It really really isn't. Transgenderism is usually a psychological disorder, transvestites aren't at all the same.
Click to expand...

Acme said:
Jesus Christ...
Click to expand...

Same sort of thing though though isn't it - you can't deny the LGBT stick their neck out for transvestites and transgenders.

Sort of beside the point and all isn't it? You can call them plant pots and it doesn't change who they are.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom