[Cherry Christmas]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Oh come on, that one's a stretch. Yes it's their religious beliefs, but it's their religious beliefs REGARDING sexually. You can't say it has nothing to do with sexuality ... What a bizarre statement Cherie.

Though to reiterate I don't think this should be a legal issue. I do think they deserve to go out of business for their prejudice but I'd prefer it to be the old fashioned way; through poor word of mouth and being boycotted for being homophobic, rather than the courts getting involved.

Why is it stretch to to believe they follow the teachings of the bible, we have no problem with other faiths following their faiths to the letter but when it comes to Christian beliefs it's 'nah mate, thems homophobic innit". rather than accepting they might actually want to follow their bible

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Why is it stretch to to believe they follow the teachings of the bible, we have no problem with other faiths following their faiths to the letter but when it comes to Christian beliefs it's 'nah mate, thems homophobic innit". rather than accepting they might actually want to follow their bible

It really is a concern, when the historical majority faith of this country is treated as having less importance and less rights than those of minority faiths in the country.

People can't be tolerant to some religous beliefs and not others - that in itself is discrimination.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

It really is a concern, when the historical majority faith of this country is treated as having less importance and less rights than those of minority faiths in the country.

People can't be tolerant to some religous beliefs and not others - that in itself is discrimination.

Since when was sexuality a faith?...

Do you mean the marginalised should just accept being marginalised as that's how it was, is and forever shall be?... pfffft!

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Since when was sexuality a faith?...

Do you mean the marginalised should just accept being marginalised as that's how it was, is and forever shall be?... pfffft!

Many faiths have issues with same sex relationships so therefore it clearly is related to faith and religion.

If for example someone were to excuse a Muslim cake shop from refusing to bake a cake for a same sex wedding based on their regions beliefs they cannot then accuse a Chritian shop of discrimination for doing so based on their regions beliefs.

That would be blatant discrimination.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Many faiths have issues with same sex relationships so therefore it clearly is related to faith and religion.

If for example someone were to excuse a Muslim cake shop from refusing to bake a cake for a same sex wedding based on their regions beliefs they cannot then accuse a Chritian shop of discrimination for doing so based on their regions beliefs.

That would be blatant discrimination.

But it's not a Christian Bakery nor is it a specialist bakery. Lovely Cakes is a normal bakery with Christian owners and that's where the problem lies. It would be common sense not to go to a religious place for custom made items for a gay wedding but that's not the case here.

Nobody has said they'd excuse a Muslim owner of it if they were in the same situation so you are literally using an imaginary situation to call people hypocrites based on imaginary things you've imagined them to say. You are inventing reasons to be offended.

Muslim BIGOTS would receive the same fine as these Christian BIGOTS because, in Oregon, even my example of a religious focused business from my last post wouldn't be exempt from Discrimination Laws since all Private Businesses in Oregon has to follow them.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

But it's not a Christian Bakery nor is it a specialist bakery. Lovely Cakes is a normal bakery with Christian owners and that's where the problem lies. It would be common sense not to go to a religious place for custom made items for a gay wedding but that's not the case here.

Nobody has said they'd excuse a Muslim owner of it if they were in the same situation so you are literally using an imaginary situation to call people hypocrites based on imaginary things you've imagined them to say. You are inventing reasons to be offended.

Muslim BIGOTS would receive the same fine as these Christian BIGOTS because, in Oregon, even my example of a religious focused business from my last post wouldn't be exempt from Discrimination Laws since all Private Businesses in Oregon has to follow them.

I did state that my use of a Muslim bakery was an example, one I used especially as it is a religion often excused its many bigoted behaviours, whereas those doing such excusing often attempt to ridicule and undermine the Christian Religion for the same.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I did state that my use of a Muslim bakery was an example, one I used especially as it is a religion often excused its many bigoted behaviours, whereas those doing such excusing often attempt to ridicule and undermine the Christian Religion for the same.

And that doesn't change the fact that you are calling people hypocrites based on something you've imagined.

Also I don't think any posters on here have ever 'excused' bigoted behavior based on the fact that a muslim is responsible. What I do see a lot is people opposing islamophobic people like yourself from branding millions of innocent people are savages or monsters because you are blinded by your own hatred and fear and can't tell the forest from the trees when it comes to muslims.

The actions of a few do not represent a whole, that's the argument that is always being made against your islamophobia, you can't tell the difference between your average muslim and an extremist and that's why you constantly misrepresent people as defending muslims that are in the wrong rather than opposing the fact you tar millions of people with the same brush, because you can't comprehend the fact that the muslim community is as diverse and wide reaching as christians are.

I would say the exact same thing about the owners of this bakery if they were of any religion, that they are in the wrong.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I did state that my use of a Muslim bakery was an example, one I used especially as it is a religion often excused its many bigoted behaviours, whereas those doing such excusing often attempt to ridicule and undermine the Christian Religion for the same.

To be fair... and of course at the risk of stereotyping... how many take-aways are owned by Muslim owners? The answer is "a lot". And how many of those take-aways refuse to serve gay couples? The answer is "I've never heard of any!". There is a likelihood that those owners are "not really OK in principle" with homosexuality but they don't then refuse service based on that... and also, more importantly based on your complete strawman argument that "people would be fine with it if it was Muslims!"... no, I don't think people WOULD be ok with it if the local take-away started refusing to serve gay couples.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Many faiths have issues with same sex relationships so therefore it clearly is related to faith and religion.

If for example someone were to excuse a Muslim cake shop from refusing to bake a cake for a same sex wedding based on their regions beliefs they cannot then accuse a Chritian shop of discrimination for doing so based on their regions beliefs.

That would be blatant discrimination.

That hasn't happened though has it?
Had a cake shop refused to make a cake for a same sex couple and when it went to court they said 'but we're Muslim' then I would expect the same outcome as this personally.