Muslim Bakery refuses to bake cake for Gay Wedding?

[olushakes]

I think this is absolutely disgusting in a multitude of ways, and I'm not talking in the way of them not wanting to bake a cake for the Gay wedding. I personally don't have an issue with Gay marriage in the least but people must understand the issue some religions and people have relating to it, and that is bound to occur. The real issue I have with this is the double standard is that present, if this was a Christian owned bakery the local and major news outlets would be their in seconds to pound reporting down peoples throats.

Not just the media but riots  would have already be in progress in order to boycott the company itself for doing this act. I think there was a story around last year about all this occuring around last year

Here is the Muslim bakery story - https://twitter.com/AndyHortin/status/833810934887911424?s=09

What do you guys think about this?

For me I dont think its any where disgusting in as much as I dont support the idea of the discrimination against Gay people, I still feel people have the right to their believe and at the same time to be respected by others if we want a peaceful co-existence afterall, its not the only bakery in the country and they can equally patronise other bakeries that are more receptive its their loss that the revenue will go to a competitor who is really in business to make money.

[1713505583]

1713505583

[1713505583]

1713505583

[FlightyPouch]

I think that is discrimination. Beside from being a Muslim and not a supporter of same sex marriage, it is a real disrespect for the gays, and they are costumers, costumers are always right. You bake, we buy, what s wrong with that?

[Barbarian]

I think this is absolutely disgusting in a multitude of ways, and I'm not talking in the way of them not wanting to bake a cake for the Gay wedding. I personally don't have an issue with Gay marriage in the least but people must understand the issue some religions and people have relating to it, and that is bound to occur. The real issue I have with this is the double standard is that present, if this was a Christian owned bakery the local and major news outlets would be their in seconds to pound reporting down peoples throats.

Not just the media but riots  would have already be in progress in order to boycott the company itself for doing this act. I think there was a story around last year about all this occuring around last year

Here is the Muslim bakery story - https://twitter.com/AndyHortin/status/833810934887911424?s=09

What do you guys think about this?

I have always thought that if you don't want to perform a job for a person or group of persons that should be your right, if you don't have it then you are a slave, the problem is not that Muslims can refuse to do it but why the Christians can’t, they are not defending their rights as well as the Muslims.

[coolcoinz]

I don't get it myself. While I don't believe in discrimination for no good reason (I could give single fuck if someone is homosexual, more power to them), I certainly believe in any business owner's right to refuse service to anyone they choose. Just like I believe that homosexuals should boycott the dog shit out of this business. It's a two way street people. Why the hell would I want to spend my money at a place that doesn't want my business? Wouldn't want to enrich the fortunes of those bigoted assholes. So I say, make your voice heard with your wallet. I feel they (the Baker) would soon find how unpopular their attitude is amongst their customer base.

You can stand for whatever you want, but don't run when your ideology is called to task. Words and actions have serious, lasting consequences.

My wild guess is that there are at least as many radical muslims as gays, so on one hand he will lose customers (or maybe not, because I'm sure there aren't many homosexuals whose favourite bakery is run by an Arab) and on the other he'll get support from radicals. Anyway' he won't have to close the business as a result.
I think he had the right not to bake for them, I know it's rude, but it's not like there's only one bakery in town.

[Maximilian_333]

I think this is absolutely disgusting in a multitude of ways, and I'm not talking in the way of them not wanting to bake a cake for the Gay wedding. I personally don't have an issue with Gay marriage in the least but people must understand the issue some religions and people have relating to it, and that is bound to occur. The real issue I have with this is the double standard is that present, if this was a Christian owned bakery the local and major news outlets would be their in seconds to pound reporting down peoples throats.

Not just the media but riots  would have already be in progress in order to boycott the company itself for doing this act. I think there was a story around last year about all this occuring around last year

Here is the Muslim bakery story - https://twitter.com/AndyHortin/status/833810934887911424?s=09

What do you guys think about this?

For me I dont think its any where disgusting in as much as I dont support the idea of the discrimination against Gay people, I still feel people have the right to their believe and at the same time to be respected by others if we want a peaceful co-existence afterall, its not the only bakery in the country and they can equally patronise other bakeries that are more receptive its their loss that the revenue will go to a competitor who is really in business to make money.

There are gay men who do not advertise their ideas and I such people are tolerant, but when he's being defiant it's annoying me. How am I supposed to explain to their children why they are? I won't go in the cafe if you sit there gay. I think that those who are not serving they are not bankrupt, quite the contrary.

[teeneffigy]

Its a private business, if the owner doesn't like gays and refuses to bake a cake for them then they should just go elsewhere. This shouldn't even be news. Life goes on.

[StefanReed]

Its a private business, if the owner doesn't like gays and refuses to bake a cake for them then they should just go elsewhere. This shouldn't even be news. Life goes on.

I would have refused. It seems to me that any tolerance should have its limits. I don't want people with such views walked the streets where my kids go and touting their views. So it would be better for them and for us.

[youdamushi]

Oh my god such a stupid argument...

"Hey! You're not attacking them because they're Muslims!!!"

And what if no? What if no one attacked them because the concerned gay couple didn't ask for justice? Because associations weren't aware of the story in time?

You understand that THOUSANDS of anti-homosexual actions are made every months, and that associations mostly pick... Symbolic cases where the victims really want to fight?

[Sundark]

By the look of it, Muslims can harass, show no respect, show intolerance for everything the don't like: other religions, cultures, habits, people and that's perfectly fine.
But when other religions are speaking or doing something against muslim's point of view it is suddenly very wrong and disrespectful.
That gay couple should be happy that this muslim baker didn't poison that cake instead.

[GreenBits]

Its a private business, if the owner doesn't like gays and refuses to bake a cake for them then they should just go elsewhere. This shouldn't even be news. Life goes on.

Despite the injustice, I pretty much have to concur with this. I don't believe in discrimination, but if you don't accept government subsidy for your business, you should have the right to serve who you want to. If you were black, and someone asked you to bake a "Kill the Blacks" cake, would you do it? Or if you were Jewish and someone wanted a "Cook the Jews" pie? Or even if you are human and someone asked for a "I fucked the baker's mom last night" cupcake arrangement?  No, you wouldn't. No one would. And this is why personal freedoms matter. But, when actions like this become public, you may have to explain to said public why you chose your particular course of action.

[youdamushi]

Its a private business, if the owner doesn't like gays and refuses to bake a cake for them then they should just go elsewhere. This shouldn't even be news. Life goes on.

Despite the injustice, I pretty much have to concur with this. I don't believe in discrimination, but if you don't accept government subsidy for your business, you should have the right to serve who you want to. If you were black, and someone asked you to bake a "Kill the Blacks" cake, would you do it? Or if you were Jewish and someone wanted a "Cook the Jews" pie? Or even if you are human and someone asked for a "I fucked the baker's mom last night" cupcake arrangement?  No, you wouldn't. No one would. And this is why personal freedoms matter. But, when actions like this become public, you may have to explain to said public why you chose your particular course of action.

Fact is that there are laws to protect consumers.
So I don't know much about USA laws, but in France for example that would be illegal.
It's mandatory for a company or a commercial to sell its products and services at the same price and quality no matter the race, religion or sexual orientation.
But that might be legal in USA I don't know.

[GreenBits]

Its a private business, if the owner doesn't like gays and refuses to bake a cake for them then they should just go elsewhere. This shouldn't even be news. Life goes on.

Despite the injustice, I pretty much have to concur with this. I don't believe in discrimination, but if you don't accept government subsidy for your business, you should have the right to serve who you want to. If you were black, and someone asked you to bake a "Kill the Blacks" cake, would you do it? Or if you were Jewish and someone wanted a "Cook the Jews" pie? Or even if you are human and someone asked for a "I fucked the baker's mom last night" cupcake arrangement?  No, you wouldn't. No one would. And this is why personal freedoms matter. But, when actions like this become public, you may have to explain to said public why you chose your particular course of action.

Fact is that there are laws to protect consumers.
So I don't know much about USA laws, but in France for example that would be illegal.
It's mandatory for a company or a commercial to sell its products and services at the same price and quality no matter the race, religion or sexual orientation.
But that might be legal in USA I don't know.

It's a per state thing here, but depending on the 'class' of the litigant, their class may be protected federally from discrimination. Homosexuals for example, or the disabled. It wouldn't be illegal per se here, but the injured party could file a civil suit that would have implications in federal case law. But if you accept state funds, even the lottery (which is a state institution), you cannot discriminate. Entirely private institutions are a different matter, but the same civil suit could be filed by the injured party. Might not get the same traction, but it could. So not worth the liability, in my opinion.

[youdamushi]

Its a private business, if the owner doesn't like gays and refuses to bake a cake for them then they should just go elsewhere. This shouldn't even be news. Life goes on.

Despite the injustice, I pretty much have to concur with this. I don't believe in discrimination, but if you don't accept government subsidy for your business, you should have the right to serve who you want to. If you were black, and someone asked you to bake a "Kill the Blacks" cake, would you do it? Or if you were Jewish and someone wanted a "Cook the Jews" pie? Or even if you are human and someone asked for a "I fucked the baker's mom last night" cupcake arrangement?  No, you wouldn't. No one would. And this is why personal freedoms matter. But, when actions like this become public, you may have to explain to said public why you chose your particular course of action.

Fact is that there are laws to protect consumers.
So I don't know much about USA laws, but in France for example that would be illegal.
It's mandatory for a company or a commercial to sell its products and services at the same price and quality no matter the race, religion or sexual orientation.
But that might be legal in USA I don't know.

It's a per state thing here, but depending on the 'class' of the litigant, their class may be protected federally from discrimination. Homosexuals for example, or the disabled. It wouldn't be illegal per se here, but the injured party could file a civil suit that would have implications in federal case law. But if you accept state funds, even the lottery (which is a state institution), you cannot discriminate. Entirely private institutions are a different matter, but the same civil suit could be filed by the injured party. Might not get the same traction, but it could. So not worth the liability, in my opinion.

Oh yeah sure!
That's the same here, even with national laws.
Of course you can always sue the person or the company, but unless it caused you major damages (like if they didn't want to sell you some medecines) you wouldn't get much out of it. I'm not even sure you would get any compensation to be honest!
And that's rather... Logical. The guy wasn't cool and didn't want to do it? Well grow a pair and get over it.

[popcorn1]

Its a private business, if the owner doesn't like gays and refuses to bake a cake for them then they should just go elsewhere. This shouldn't even be news. Life goes on.

It's not a private business?..Did the shop say private bakery
Did i need to pay a membership fee and knock on a big steel door and show my membership card to get in to buy a cake..

Did it just say bakery so the public can just walk in and out..
They opened a shop to sell to the public now when you sell to the public you should have no rights to refuse anyone ..YOU ARE NOT A PRIVATE BAKERY..

Now does the law where the bakery is say being gay is against the law..If not they had no right to refuse and should be shut down..

Yes they can open up as a private bakery .But people must show a membership card before they enter that shop..

You are misunderstanding the point YOU ARE SELLING TO THE PUBLIC..NOT PRIVATE..

LIKE A GOLF COURSE .. ..Public golf course anyone can play..
private golf course you need to be a member..NO DIFFERENT ..

[popcorn1]

We’ve all seen signs posted in restaurants and shops announcing that management “reserves the right to refuse service.” It’s one of those commonly used legal phrases – like “legal tender” or “pleading the fifth” – that most people have a vague understanding of – without really knowing what it means. How can businesses refuse service? Who can they refuse it to? More importantly, who can’t they refuse to serve?


 
Over the last several decades, the civil rights movement in the United States has led to important legal changes guaranteeing the rights of individuals to be free from discrimination based on sex, gender, race, religion, and a number of other factors. The Federal Civil Rights Act mandates “full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.”

Restaurants and stores qualify as “public accommodations” even if they’re a private business. As such, discrimination laws apply just as much on private property and to private businesses as they do in any public place.


Read more at http://www.business2community.com/trends-news/right-refuse-service-businesses-discrimination-0766551#I5rWuId2CAD7yheb.99

So even if your a private company you have no right to refuse because someone is gay..
SO IT SHOULD BE ..

[GreenBits]

We are arguing semantics, let me explain.

While you can't discriminate per se, you can make up pretty shitty reasons to legally deny service. Like the no shirt no shoes thing. It actually is enforceable, because it is a reasonable accommodation that would detract from the business if not followed (you could not ride in my cab with no pants, for example. GTFO). If you are a federally state subsidized institution, the burden of proof on your "reasonable accommodation" would be a bit higher. But as a private institution, on private land, you have a bit of brevity on how you conduct business. Not all publically available businesses are open for public access, like factories for example (you can't get on the grounds without clearance). They can be very creative finding reasons why they cant fill your order, if they don't want to.

[popcorn1]

We are arguing semantics, let me explain.

While you can't discriminate per se, you can make up pretty shitty reasons to legally deny service. Like the no shirt no shoes thing. It actually is enforceable, because it is a reasonable accommodation that would detract from the business if not followed (you could not ride in my cab with no pants, for example. GTFO). If you are a federally state subsidized institution, the burden of proof on your "reasonable accommodation" would be a bit higher. But as a private institution, on private land, you have a bit of brevity on how you conduct business. Not all publically available businesses are open for public access, like factories for example (you can't get on the grounds without clearance). They can be very creative finding reasons why they cant fill your order, if they don't want to.

Not very smart are you .

How do you think this Muslim got caught ..Derrr hidden cam   

HIDDEN CAM: #GayWeddingCakes at Muslim Bakeries? - YouTube
Video for muslim bakery refusing gay wedding▶ 5:49
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgWIhYAtan4

[Sithara007]

Its a private business, if the owner doesn't like gays and refuses to bake a cake for them then they should just go elsewhere. This shouldn't even be news. Life goes on.

Then what about the fine of $135,000 which was imposed on someone who did just than in Oregon? I agree that it shouldn't be even news, but as long as we have LGBT activists such as Brad Avakian in higher echelons of power, democratic values doesn't matter anymore.

[GreenBits]

We are arguing semantics, let me explain.

While you can't discriminate per se, you can make up pretty shitty reasons to legally deny service. Like the no shirt no shoes thing. It actually is enforceable, because it is a reasonable accommodation that would detract from the business if not followed (you could not ride in my cab with no pants, for example. GTFO). If you are a federally state subsidized institution, the burden of proof on your "reasonable accommodation" would be a bit higher. But as a private institution, on private land, you have a bit of brevity on how you conduct business. Not all publically available businesses are open for public access, like factories for example (you can't get on the grounds without clearance). They can be very creative finding reasons why they cant fill your order, if they don't want to.

Not very smart are you .

How do you think this Muslim got caught ..Derrr hidden cam  

HIDDEN CAM: #GayWeddingCakes at Muslim Bakeries? - YouTube
Video for muslim bakery refusing gay wedding▶ 5:49
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgWIhYAtan4

We are in the same side man, relax   I don't think they should have been discriminated against. Its not fair to be singled out because you prefer dick over pussy. With that being said, for the aforementioned reasons, I don't think anyone in private industry should be forced to transact with customers they don't want to. If they are, it's pretty much slavery (being forced to perform a task that you have no desire to). I don't care how they got caught, I'm not defending them. Fuck them, if that makes you feel happy. But I won't back down from my statement that business owners should have a choice in who they serve. Would you sell ammo to a warlord? Or baking soda to a crack dealer? And if we are talking about discrimination, lets address the unfairness of having to defy ones religious beliefs to satisfy a customer. I'm a Christian, there is no way in hell (or heaven for that matter) you will get me to bake a cake with a satanic phrase on it. Not only would I be violating my religion, to me, I would be damning my very soul, my most valuable possession. Should I be punished for my faith? Over a goddamned cake?

The cake, in this instance, is indeed a lie.

[popcorn1]

Its a private business, if the owner doesn't like gays and refuses to bake a cake for them then they should just go elsewhere. This shouldn't even be news. Life goes on.

Then what about the fine of $135,000 which was imposed on someone who did just than in Oregon? I agree that it shouldn't be even news, but as long as we have LGBT activists such as Brad Avakian in higher echelons of power, democratic values doesn't matter anymore.

So the same should go because of skin colour ..
I should have the right to refuse who i like then ?..Is this what your saying  

when you sell to the public you think it's my business i will refuse who i want too.
And the law should not get involved ?.Hmmm sounds good to me..

See we in the UK are over run with sand people and INDIANS smelly ones not pow wow ones
Like hindu who sleep with there sisters and first cousins and produce spastic children then claim invalidity benefits because the genes fuck up when you sleep with your blood spouse..

Now we have loads of smelly hindus spastic indians   because they sleep with their sisters and cousins .
When a hindu comes in my shop should i say get out we cannot serve people who do

Incest in Hinduism - Hinduism | Indian Religious Traditions ...
www.sikhawareness.com › ... › Hinduism | Indian Religious Traditions
9 Jan 2007 - 12 posts - ‎4 authors
apparently more common in Hindu society than in any other part of the world: ... brother-sister incest was introduced by the ancient Hindus :.


SO YOU AS A HINDU FUCK YOUR BROTHER..THAT IS DIRTY WRONG..

HAVE YOU SLEPT WITH YOUR BROTHER ?..You are HINDU.. ..

2 FACED ..Your religion produces spastics because you sleep with your own spouse..

NOW BY LAW YOU SHOULD BE IN JAIL..For incest ..
Now if a hindu walks in with a wheel chair just think he or she been sleeping with the brother or cousin
to produce that spastic child..

And you call gays    as a hindu  ..You sleep with your brother ..

And to top it off if you live in the UK you will get a good life for producing a spastic
So the hindus love it here  ..

I WILL SLEEP WITH ME BROTHER    AND WE WILL PRODUCE A SPASTIC AND CLAIM LOADS OF MONEY..

So you as a hindu cost more to the tax man than a gay..A gay will make money you will get invalidity benefits
because you slept with your brother..

And the funny thing is your a hindu and thinking it's horrible the way men sleep with men ..
Arr well i will go and fuck me brother or me first cousin ..

2 FACED.Incest is worse than being gay .. So people should have the right to remove HINDUS
Because they believe in INCEST..DIRTY OR WHAT