Dedicated to the advancement of the State of Indiana by re-affirming our state's constitutional principles that: all people are created equal; no religious test shall be imposed on our public officials and offices of trust; and no special privileges or immunities shall be granted to any class of citizens which are not granted on the same terms to all citizens. Advance Indiana, LLC. Copyright 2005-16. All rights reserved.
Nytes sold out the gay community on this issue just like she has sold out the citizens of her district over and over again.
I think you give Corporation Counsel too much credit. I know we disagree, Gary, but the City was going to face a lawsuit if they terminated the lease based on the refusal to make those cookies, cupcakes, or whatever it was. The City had gone too far out on the limb on this one. This is just a face-saving settlement for everyone involved.
Please hear me out, as I am a supporter of gay rights.Just Cookies did not discriminate against gays by not making rainbow cookies. They would have sold good to gays or anyone else, but they don't have to make a product that differs from their religious beliefs.If I go to a tattoo artist who belongs to religion "A", and I ask him to give me a tattoo that says "Religion A's deity sucks", it's not discrimination for the tattoo artist to refuse my business.This whole affair is overblown and taking away from serious causes, like gay marriage.
I think that is a false comparison, Unigov. There was nothing offensive about rainbow-colored cupcakes. If a you had walked in and said I would like to order rainbow-colored cupcakes for my daughter's birthday party, the owner wouldn't have had a problem with it. What he objected to according to his own words was selling cupcakes to a GLBT-oriented organization. If they had requested he make cupcakes with something obscene depicted on them, he would have been well within his rights to decline to make them if he so chose. A tattoo artist is a bad analogy to use. From what I can tell, there is nothing most of them won't tattoo on someone's body as long as they pay for it. They don't seem to have any problem with swastikis, violent gang symbols, etc.
Gary the only cupcake I've ever seen at that cookie shop was a 20 year old blonde, she was in front of me placing her order for cookies.If a shop sells just tires and you need wheels, is that shop required to sell you what it doesn't have just because you’re of a different sexual orientation?Clearly, the owner opened his mouth and inserted his foot, he should have kept his anti gay opinions to himself but, he doesn't have to sell what he doesn’t produce or stock.
Ernie, We've been over that point before. Just Cookies did in fact sell cupcakes and its website indicated as much.
Post a Comment
6 comments:
Nytes sold out the gay community on this issue just like she has sold out the citizens of her district over and over again.
I think you give Corporation Counsel too much credit. I know we disagree, Gary, but the City was going to face a lawsuit if they terminated the lease based on the refusal to make those cookies, cupcakes, or whatever it was. The City had gone too far out on the limb on this one. This is just a face-saving settlement for everyone involved.
Please hear me out, as I am a supporter of gay rights.
Just Cookies did not discriminate against gays by not making rainbow cookies. They would have sold good to gays or anyone else, but they don't have to make a product that differs from their religious beliefs.
If I go to a tattoo artist who belongs to religion "A", and I ask him to give me a tattoo that says "Religion A's deity sucks", it's not discrimination for the tattoo artist to refuse my business.
This whole affair is overblown and taking away from serious causes, like gay marriage.
I think that is a false comparison, Unigov. There was nothing offensive about rainbow-colored cupcakes. If a you had walked in and said I would like to order rainbow-colored cupcakes for my daughter's birthday party, the owner wouldn't have had a problem with it. What he objected to according to his own words was selling cupcakes to a GLBT-oriented organization. If they had requested he make cupcakes with something obscene depicted on them, he would have been well within his rights to decline to make them if he so chose. A tattoo artist is a bad analogy to use. From what I can tell, there is nothing most of them won't tattoo on someone's body as long as they pay for it. They don't seem to have any problem with swastikis, violent gang symbols, etc.
Gary the only cupcake I've ever seen at that cookie shop was a 20 year old blonde, she was in front of me placing her order for cookies.
If a shop sells just tires and you need wheels, is that shop required to sell you what it doesn't have just because you’re of a different sexual orientation?
Clearly, the owner opened his mouth and inserted his foot, he should have kept his anti gay opinions to himself but, he doesn't have to sell what he doesn’t produce or stock.
Ernie, We've been over that point before. Just Cookies did in fact sell cupcakes and its website indicated as much.
Post a Comment