Canadian SC: Christian law school can't forbid students from gay sex

[Belk]

That is not the norm, which is that wedding cakes typically cost hundreds of dollars and must be contracted for well in advance, with down payment. There was a length thread in which this was documented, but as i am not corrected to my main PC i do no have it handy.

It is not the norm? You are claiming people normally sign a contract with their baker for a wedding cake?

Reducing this to merely selling a product is sophistry, for this was not that of simply not selling a product any one else could buy, but that of not consenting to contract to create a special work for the expressed purpose of celebrating that which contrary to the law of God,

No, that is what it is. A cake. A piece of confection. That it is an ornate cake does not suddenly change it into anything other then a commodity being sold by a baker. No one goes to a reception and says "Wow! Nice cake! The baker must have really approved of you two!"

as well as the highest law of the state.

Which is, again, irrelevant to the law broken.

And legally, by knowingly facilitate something unlawful then you are complicit in it, and can share guilt, just as those who facilitate doing good should get some credit.

Show me where selling a wedding cake to a couple who is not married is illegal?

And Scripture warns "neither be partaker of other men’s sins: keep thyself pure," (1 Timothy 5:22) and be selling information Judas became an accessory to murder.

Show me were selling anyone a product is against scripture.

 

[Belk]

But they were not discriminated based on their orientation. Jack Phillips served homosexual customers daily.

Woolworths served African Americans. Just not at their lunch counter. Simply because he was willing to serve homosexuals in other capacities does not change the fact he discriminated against these men because of their orientation. The only people who have same sex weddings are same sex couples

 

[redleghunter]

Woolworths served African Americans. Just not at their lunch counter. Simply because he was willing to serve homosexuals in other capacities does not change the fact he discriminated against these men because of their orientation. The only people who have same sex weddings are same sex couples

Your rebuttal is to introduce a racial false equivalence?

 

[Belk]

Your rebuttal is to introduce a racial false equivalence?

No. My rebuttal is to show how your reasoning is flawed. It is an analogy. Do you need me to further explain the parallels I am drawing? You have always struck me as an intelligent man redleghunter, so I thought you would understand the point being made.

 

[Belk]

Since when is supporting sin not in the Bible? Been that way for thousands of years.

If selling a cake is supporting sin it would seem the baker is in the wrong line of business.

 

[redleghunter]

No. My rebuttal is to show how your reasoning is flawed. It is an analogy. Do you need me to further explain the parallels I am drawing? You have always struck me as an intelligent man redleghunter, so I thought you would understand the point being made.

The analogy you present is based on a false equivalency as one refusing to bake a specialized object violating his religious convictions is not the same as white people refusing lunch to Blacks for being Black.

 

[redleghunter]

If selling a cake is supporting sin it would seem the baker is in the wrong line of business.

He is consistent. He refused Halloween cakes, lewd designs, a cake celebrating a divorce. He is consistent in not involving himself in the sins of others. In each case the request was specifically made and refused.

1 Timothy 5:22Do not lay hands upon anyone too hastily and thereby share responsibility for the sins of others; keep yourself free from sin.



He is living out his faith and even in the public square that is his right by the First Amendment.

 

[redleghunter]

No one is attempting to change his mind, his holy book, his church, his prayers, his worship schedule, or anything in his private life. His public life as a dude who bakes cakes in exchange for money is subject to the rules of public life.

Ah well that works both ways.

No one is stopping the gay couple from flying to MA to get hitched.

No one is attempting to stop the gay couple to live their lives at home

No one is attempting to stop the gay couple from celebrating their union. How many cake shops are there in the local area?

 

[Belk]

The analogy you present is based on a false equivalency as one refusing to bake a specialized object violating his religious convictions is not the same as white people refusing lunch to Blacks for being Black.

Ah. So you do need me to explain it to you. Very well. Simply because you limit your discrimination to specific circumstances does not change that it is discrimination. Treating someone well 90% of the time does not alter the 10% you do not. The specific circumstances of the example are irrelevant to the point being made.

 

[Belk]

He is consistent. He refused Halloween cakes, lewd designs, a cake celebrating a divorce. He is consistent in not involving himself in the sins of others. In each case the request was specifically made and refused.

1 Timothy 5:22Do not lay hands upon anyone too hastily and thereby share responsibility for the sins of others; keep yourself free from sin.



He is living out his faith and even in the public square that is his right by the First Amendment.

And that worked for him right up to the point where he broke the law. The courts have been consistent in their interpretation that baking cakes is not a religious expression and is not covered under the first amendment. If his religious convictions are of such paramount importance then it would seem he will need to take the responsibility to ensure he is not put in a position where he must choose between the law and his conscience.

 

[Joy]

MOD HAT ON

This Thread
From News & Current Events
To The Kitchen Sink
as This is a More Fitting Forum
for this subject
MOD HAT OFF​

 

[PeaceByJesus]

A cake does not represent a wedding. Neither does a bouquet of flowers or an open bar or a DJ who plays the Hokey Pokey.

Equal access to products and services. That's what it's all about.

What?! A wedding cake does not represent a wedding, signifying a celebratory event, which the cake is consecrated to do? An anniversary cake does not represent an anniversary? If a wedding cake had no signification why spend hundreds of dollars for one?

In the Bible, things are used as representations, such as a supper, and to treat such as common, contrary to what it represents, could have serious consequences.

 

[PeaceByJesus]

It is not the norm? You are claiming people normally sign a contract with their baker for a wedding cake?

Stop resorting to sophistry such as by making the issue that of signing a contract rather than entering into an oral agreement.

The average wedding cake costs $582 [delivery is extra]. Some bakers prefer to charge by the slice. Today, couples pay anywhere from $1.50 to $12 per slice. A wedding with 150 guests could cost you as much as $1,800!...You should order your wedding cake at least a few months before your special day - .Study: Average Cost of a Wedding Cake

Custom cake orders require two weeks notice. Your deposit of 30% is due at the time of ordering. Buttercream flowers and an inscription are the standard decoration that comes with the price of the cake. - Main Street Bakery & Gift Shop | Columbia, SC

“Refunds are not provided for any reason. Due to our full schedule and our attention to detail we spend many hours planning and preparing before even beginning on a cake.” - How to Establish Policies for Success with A Cake Business

And wedding cakes have traditionally been used to convey a message.

Without a doubt, the wedding cake has always been one of the central parts of the reception....Some modern wedding cakes are now so elaborate that they are more sculpture than pastry. More: A Brief History of Wedding Cakes - Traditional to Contemporary

A wedding cake is the ultimate centerpiece of your reception, and it should be beautiful. But just as important is taste. ..

When designing a cake we bring together elements that make your wedding cake one of a kind. Your wedding cake should be a combination of personal style and the most luscious ingredients imaginable that leaves your guests wanting more!..

There are many decisions that go into making your wedding cake as special as your wedding day. Flavors, shape, design, servings, presentation are just a few of the variables that go into making your cake unique.
- Tasteful Elegance - Wedding Cakes for Greenville and Upstate South Carolina

Not for all intents and purposes identical with any old cake.​

No, that is what it is. A cake. A piece of confection. That it is an ornate cake does not suddenly change it into anything other then a commodity being sold by a baker. No one goes to a reception and says "Wow! Nice cake! The baker must have really approved of you two!"

Wrong. The purpose for which the item is to be used marks it as special. A ring can be just a ring, but when dedicated for a special purpose is means something more than just being a ring, signifying something, and treasured for that reason. And if you create and provide something for an expressed purpose then you are facilitating it, and are complicit in whatever it is used for, whether it be a knife to kill your wife or a cake to celebration union with her.

Phillips has gone on record saying that he doesn’t judge anybody for how they live their lives. He just doesn’t see why he needs to be a part of it. He has said that if Craig and Mullins wanted to buy anything else from his shop, he would have been happy to sell it to them. Phillips just didn’t feel like he should have to create something for an occasion that he doesn’t want to be a part of, as it conflicts with his personal religious principles.

If Phillips refused to sell any kind of cake to a gay person because they were gay, I’d agree that this was an open and shut case of blatant unjust discrimination. It’s not though, which is why I’m on Phillips’ side, even though I’m pro-marriage equality and sympathetic to Craig and Mullins. When you boil it down, this case is much bigger than just whether or not it’s okay to discriminate. It’s about whether or not the government should be able to exert control over people and their businesses by forcing them to devote time and resources to something they don’t want to be a part of.

If a customer walked into Masterpiece Cakeshop and wanted a cake with Jake Phillips’ face on it, with text that says “Jake Phillips is the Worst,” should he be forced to do that? No, of course not. The current case isn’t much different, except it involves sensitive issues of gay discrimination and religious beliefs. Despite What the Left Says, Masterpiece Cakeshop is About Much More than Gay Discrimination

Which is, again, irrelevant to the law broken.

It can hardly be irrelevant when the baker is punished by the state for not recognizing homosexual marriage -which refusal is why he was charged with discrimination - when the state itself did not recognize homosexual marriage, in-state or out-of-state.

Show me where selling a wedding cake to a couple who is not married is illegal?

In the eyes of the law, one may not be held responsible in such a case, however morally the one who knowingly facilitates celebrating what is not a legal arraignment is complicit in it.
The range of behaviors “complicit” encompasses is vast. Senator Chuck Schumer recently denounced Trump’s behavior on the world stage as “puerile” and accused Republicans who fail to speak out against him of “complicity in the degradation of the presidency,..”

“Complicit” traces back to the French complice (a partner or associate), which derives from the Latin complex — which means “folded together,” as in the ingredients of a cake. It also means “complex.” There are so many ways to be complicit that you could make trading cards and never collect them all. You can be complicit through action or inaction, speech or silence, association or omission. You can engage in outright collusion, aiding in wrongdoing and lying your way through the cover-up. You can take advantage of an immoral situation to promote your book or your brand. But you can also feel coerced into complicity, intimidated or brainwashed. You can look the other way because you fear for your job or your reputation, or because you refuse to feel responsible for the systems around you....

If we take everyday life “as a moral and social space” in which “our common humanity is created and sustained,” then we must take responsibility not only for what we produce and put into the world but also for how we consume — passively and mindlessly, or actively and critically. - Behind Every Villain Stands Someone ‘Complicit’

CO banned same-sex marriage, and its state constitution prohibited the legal recognition of same-sex marriage and defined marriage in Colorado as only a union between one man and one woman, and thus by knowingly facilitates celebrating what is not a legal arraignment the baker would be recognizing and sanctioning what the state did not recognize.

A baker agreeing to provide a cake for the expressed purpose of a KKK celebration is complicit in it, though KKK members right to freedom of speech is protected.

Show me were selling anyone a product is against scripture.

Which is more sophistry, for it need not be a product nor sold, nor is the case simply that of selling a product. Knowingly providing anything for the express purpose of doing something makes one a party to it, whether moral or immoral, whether it be Ahimelech helping David by providing food and a sword (and with Saul killing him for it) or Judas merely providing information in betraying Christ.

It is hard to believe that you cannot, or will not see this. For even legally...

Spoiler: Accomplice Mens Rea and Actus Reus

Accomplice Mens Rea and Actus Reus

In order to obtain a conviction of a defendant for being a principal or an accessory before the fact, the prosecution must prove that the defendant committed an act that either encouraged or actually helped the criminal, that he had the requisite intent of encouraging or helping the criminal, and that the criminal who was encouraged or assisted by the defendant actually committed the crime...

In order to demonstrate that the defendant committed the requisite actus reus, the prosecution must show that the defendant either directly or indirectly encouraged or facilitated the commission of the crime. A person has facilitated a commission of the crime if he provides the criminal with the means that the criminal uses to commit the crime...

Other jurisdictions only require the prosecutor to show that the accomplice knew that his actions would either assist or encourage the commission of a crime. The difference is that, in jurisdictions that require the prosecution to prove only that the accomplice acted while knowing that his actions would aid or encourage the commission of a crime, the accomplice can be convicted even if he did not actually want his actions to aid or encourage the commission of a crime. In these jurisdictions, even if the accomplice was dead-set against his actions being used to encourage or aid in the commission of a crime and even if he did not intend for his actions to aid or encourage the commission of the crime, so long as he knew that his actions would aid or encourage the commission of a crime, he can be convicted as an accomplice. Accomplice Mens Rea and Actus Reus - LawShelf Educational Media (emp. mine)

 

[essentialsaltes]

Yep that says it all. You think someone’s faith stays within the church doors.

So, in others words - you can have your belief/faith systems on 'his' terms inside the church walls.

I guess you have your talking points straight. But no, the faith travels around in a person's head. And no doubt influences their daily life in many different ways. But the right to free exercise is not unlimited. In the US, the Supreme Court ruled in Reynolds v. US: "Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious beliefs and opinions, they may with practices."

While it can be a tricky thing to balance public accommodation laws and religious exercise, I find it not very difficult to solve when the religious 'practice' is not-baking cakes for certain types of people.

Claiming discrimination with those that disagree?

No, claiming discrimination when someone discriminates among their customers! The law doesn't care whether you are anti-Semitic -- only if you refuse Jewish customers.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Ah well that works both ways.

Boy, talk about your flawed analogies.

 

[essentialsaltes]

What?! A wedding cake does not represent a wedding, signifying a celebratory event, which the cake is consecrated to do?

Consecrated? Get over yourself. The dude is religious, but he was not consecrating pastries.

A map represents the territory. A photograph represents its subject. A color photograph of a red-haired person will depict red hair, but a wedding cake consumed at a same-sex wedding is not gay.

 

[essentialsaltes]

A ring can be just a ring, but when dedicated for a special purpose is means something more than just being a ring, signifying something, and treasured for that reason.

Who does this dedicating? Who imbues it with meaning? Who treasures it? The jeweler or the buyer and recipient?

​

 

[Sparagmos]

What?! A wedding cake does not represent a wedding, signifying a celebratory event, which the cake is consecrated to do? An anniversary cake does not represent an anniversary? If a wedding cake had no signification why spend hundreds of dollars for one?

In the Bible, things are used as representations, such as a supper, and to treat such as common, contrary to what it represents, could have serious consequences.

Lol, so the cake is “consecrated” now?

 

[comana]

Lol, so the cake is “consecrated” now?

Right? Amazing what lengths people will go to to defend their argument. Reality is that the cake is not that important beyond the cake cutting photo op.

 

[PeaceByJesus]

Consecrated? Get over yourself. The dude is religious, but he was not consecrating pastries.

A map represents the territory. A photograph represents its subject. A color photograph of a red-haired person will depict red hair, but a wedding cake consumed at a same-sex wedding is not gay.

The map it not the territory either, but it is called a map of the US or whatever since that is what it represents by geographical correspondence, while an engagement ring is called that because of the purpose that it signifies, and likewise a wedding cake is called a "wedding cake" for the same reason, which purpose is celebrating a moral event. And providing it signifies recognition of that, at least to a man of conscience.