Indiana Gov signs religious freedom bill......

[duane1969]

[/B]

the only rights you have in regards to your religion is the freesom to practice it. THATS ALL... Why do you feel that you are entitled to more rights than someone else?

I don't feel that I am entitled to anything (I am agnostic). I merely support freedom for all, not just the liberal left. I do not support gays being prevented from forming legal unions just because religious people don't like it and I don't support religious people being forced to provide services for gays.

Practicing means living it. I support a religious person's right to not have to make a gay wedding cake just like I support their right to not have to make a cake shaped like a woman's butt or breasts or a man's penis. If they find it offensive to their moral values they should not be forced to go against those moral values.

[habsheaven]

How about this question, should we force a muslim caterer to serve pork?

EDIT- someone beat me to it lol.

Yes, we should.

[habsheaven]

Not true. I don't have a "menu" of designs for my clothing. It's custom. So should it be anything goes? Should I have no right to decline any job? I would assume a caterer would be the same way. Custom choices for your event.

What's not true? You have the right to refuse a job if it has a cost factor that makes it unprofitable for you, or if it breaks a law. Other than that you should be required to make the shirt.

[habsheaven]

Again, discrimination is not serving an individual for whatever reason. It is not declining to do a specific job. Job does not = individual. How is this not realized?
Gay couple comes in to buy a cake. They want it to say "Support Gay marriage". Baker says they do not feel comfortable with that job and decline. Not discrimination.
Same gay couple comes in to buy a cake for an event. Business decides they wont do anything for them because they are gay. That can be considered discrimination.
Does anyone not see the difference in the two?

Yes, we all see the difference in the two scenarios. Problem is we don't agree that one is an acceptable refusal and the other isn't. They are both unacceptable refusals.

[habsheaven]

I don't feel that I am entitled to anything (I am agnostic). I merely support freedom for all, not just the liberal left. I do not support gays being prevented from forming legal unions just because religious people don't like it and I don't support religious people being forced to provide services for gays.

Practicing means living it. I support a religious person's right to not have to make a gay wedding cake just like I support their right to not have to make a cake shaped like a woman's butt or breasts or a man's penis. If they find it offensive to their moral values they should not be forced to go against those moral values.

Interesting, you support freedom for all, yet you didn't say gay marriage.

[shrewsbury]

please show me where it says gay marriage is a sin and you should not partake in it?

all you got is being gay is a sin, so how can you serve or work with or be friends with anyone who is gay?

and if your issue with gays is it is a sin, then how can you serve anyone?
are you making sure both parties of a hetero marriage are virgins and sin free?
how can you server ANYONE when we all know we are all sinners?

What comes out of you is what defiles you. For from within, out of your hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and defile you.

so you have never been envious? you have never slandered? you have never been arrogant? you have never lacked good sense on anything? you have never acted foolishly?

[shrewsbury]

Here is an ok read about this topic,

http://www.christianbiblereference.o...osexuality.htm

[bryanATX]

I don't feel that I am entitled to anything (I am agnostic). I merely support freedom for all, not just the liberal left. I do not support gays being prevented from forming legal unions just because religious people don't like it and I don't support religious people being forced to provide services for gays.

Practicing means living it. I support a religious person's right to not have to make a gay wedding cake just like I support their right to not have to make a cake shaped like a woman's butt or breasts or a man's penis. If they find it offensive to their moral values they should not be forced to go against those moral values.

No one had asked for a butt or penis cake as far as I know. But id be willing to bet this baker has done a bachelorette cake or two at some point. I dont see how a wedding cake (just a wedding cake) could be "offensive", unless you are offended by the people requesting it.

[timber09]

What's not true? You have the right to refuse a job if it has a cost factor that makes it unprofitable for you, or if it breaks a law. Other than that you should be required to make the shirt.

Keep in mind that there is some significant grey area in this case. As often happens the media and people in general try to simplify what is happening to make sense of it all and, in this case, there are a lot of caveats.

Based on what I have read so far (and I am nothing close to a lawyer) it appears that, even potentially with this bill in place, should a business refuse service (a service they would normally perform and/or have performed) they could still be subject to federal discrimination laws. That is a very dumbed down and there is a ton of layers to that however it should give some clarity.

So - in the current conversation, should a baker in Indianapolis refuse to bake a cake in the shape of something that can commonly be seen as offensive and this is done in a consistent fashion. So if you don't want to bake a penis cake, don't bake a penis cake - you have the right to refuse that service but you better do it for all. Should a business refuse service to bake a standard cake that is well within the normal course of operation based on, what is deemed to be, discriminatory practice - they can still be found to be unlawful.

That is all based on opinions at this point - obviously there is very little case law to show us how this will work in practice.

[duane1969]

Interesting, you support freedom for all, yet you didn't say gay marriage.

Because marriage is not a right for anyone. I have made this point on here often enough that I am sure you have read it by now.