Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910
Results 91 to 93 of 93
  1. #91  
    Ancient Fire Breather Retread's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    I came to Texas as soon as I could
    Posts
    4,647
    Lakewood Cake Maker Appeals Order To Serve Gays

    Alliance Defending Freedom filed an appeal Monday on behalf of Masterpiece Cakeshop. A judge last month ordered the shop to stop discriminating against gay couples.

    <snip>

    ADF attorney Kristen Waggoner says “forcing Americans to promote ideas against their will undermines our constitutionally protected freedom of expression.”
    It's not how old you are, it's how you got here.
    It's been a long road and not all of it was paved.
    Live every day as if it were your last, because one of these days, it will be.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #92  
    Sin City Moderator RobJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    16,235
    Quote Originally Posted by Retread View Post
    Lakewood Cake Maker Appeals Order To Serve Gays

    Alliance Defending Freedom filed an appeal Monday on behalf of Masterpiece Cakeshop. A judge last month ordered the shop to stop discriminating against gay couples.

    <snip>

    ADF attorney Kristen Waggoner says “forcing Americans to promote ideas against their will undermines our constitutionally protected freedom of expression.”
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #93  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    8,920
    Does the Constitution Force Bakers to Bake?

    While vigorously defending the plaintiffs' claims that they have a right not to be offended, the judge, the ACLU, and others in the LGBT community seem to be ignoring (in this particular case) the rights of the baker who chose not to fulfill the plaintiffs' request. Most people would immediately think of the 1st Amendment's protection of freedom of religion, but in truth that is not the most relevant part of the Constitution here. It is the 13th Amendment, Section 1, which should be the controlling part of the legal debate in this situation.

    For those who don't have their pocket copy of the Constitution handy, the 13th Amendment, Section 1, reads:

    Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

    If Walmart, Sears, or any other retailer denied a gay couple the ability to purchase something that had been mass-produced, even if it was to be used for a wedding, nearly all Americans would agree that such a denial would be discriminatory. On the other hand, the cases that have gone to trial, and have had a judge find in favor of the plaintiffs, have been based on a refusal by the defendant, not to sell a mass-produced product, but rather to perform a personal service. The baker would have to personally bake and decorate a cake. The florist would personally have to arrange flowers. The photographer would personally have to take the photographs of the plaintiffs' wedding and possibly reception. In all three cases, the labor would have to be performed personally by the defendants against their clearly stated will.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/...#ixzz2q4GsenRw
    Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •