Advertisement

Author Topic: supreme court sided with the cake guy....now you get this  (Read 15137 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dogmai

  • Jr. Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 2846
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: supreme court sided with the cake guy....now you get this
« Reply #30 on: June 14, 2018, 05:56:15 PM »
I'm showing you why the cake case from Bakersfield was won in favor of the cake owner. 


It is against his religion to sell to gay a cake that will be used for a gay event. 

He will sell but Don't use it to provoke his religion is the stance.

A cake is not just a good.  It is the artistic value to it that is at play here.

The court rule so shush it.

Changing again?

That's not even what this topic is about. I guess when you get proven wrong, you just change your stance.



Like this post: 0

Adverstisement

Offline dogmai

  • Jr. Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 2846
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: supreme court sided with the cake guy....now you get this
« Reply #31 on: June 14, 2018, 06:28:44 PM »
I'm showing you why the cake case from Bakersfield was won in favor of the cake owner. 


It is against his religion to sell to gay a cake that will be used for a gay event. 

He will sell but Don't use it to provoke his religion is the stance.

A cake is not just a good.  It is the artistic value to it that is at play here.

The court rule so shush it.

So whatever happened to

Don't matter what they sell.  Laws are not the same in different states. 






Like this post: 0

Offline DuMa

  • Elite Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 17907
  • Gender: Male
  • -(>^_^<)- 052806
  • Respect: +742
    • View Profile
Re: supreme court sided with the cake guy....now you get this
« Reply #32 on: June 14, 2018, 06:44:44 PM »
So whatever happened to

You said this
"So was the cake place selling people or sexual service"

And I responded with that it doesn't matter what they sell because the judge ruling did not focus on what they sell.  They focused on the artistic value of the product

Stay focus Daniel son. 



Like this post: 0
X_____________ ______________ ______________ ___

Offline dogmai

  • Jr. Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 2846
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: supreme court sided with the cake guy....now you get this
« Reply #33 on: June 17, 2018, 12:57:18 AM »
You said this
"So was the cake place selling people or sexual service"

And I responded with that it doesn't matter what they sell because the judge ruling did not focus on what they sell.  They focused on the artistic value of the product

Stay focus Daniel son.

Mr. Miyagi, I know it's hard for you to understand all of this, so I'll try and make it as simple as possible. The judge ruling wasn't because of the "freedom of religion" defense. Knowing how to comprehend the context of what is being discussed is key.



Like this post: 0

Offline dogmai

  • Jr. Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 2846
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: supreme court sided with the cake guy....now you get this
« Reply #34 on: June 17, 2018, 01:15:26 AM »
This is just one example of you changing your stance when you're proved wrong.

If I don't eat chicken then what can I eat at chick fil-a?

There you go.  Change your menu to fries and yogurt for gays.

It is not discrimination when what we sell, you have no use for.

In which your argument above failed as well. Proved that you do have and offer what the customer asked for, you're just refusing service for that particular customer.



Like this post: 0

Offline DuMa

  • Elite Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 17907
  • Gender: Male
  • -(>^_^<)- 052806
  • Respect: +742
    • View Profile
Re: supreme court sided with the cake guy....now you get this
« Reply #35 on: June 17, 2018, 01:57:58 AM »
Mr. Miyagi, I know it's hard for you to understand all of this, so I'll try and make it as simple as possible. The judge ruling wasn't because of the "freedom of religion" defense. Knowing how to comprehend the context of what is being discussed is key.

No chit Sherlock.  Where did I say it was?   O0



Like this post: 0
X_____________ ______________ ______________ ___

Offline DuMa

  • Elite Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 17907
  • Gender: Male
  • -(>^_^<)- 052806
  • Respect: +742
    • View Profile
Re: supreme court sided with the cake guy....now you get this
« Reply #36 on: June 17, 2018, 02:03:07 AM »
This is just one example of you changing your stance when you're proved wrong.

In which your argument above failed as well. Proved that you do have and offer what the customer asked for, you're just refusing service for that particular customer.

Understand to why I said what I said but if you read further to what you said, my response is a teaching at it. 

If it is against my religion to eat chicken, should I call discrimination because all you sell is chicken? 

Don't eat chicken then go elsewhere.  Can't buy cake by haters then why support haters?  Go somewhere else.  Why call it discrimination?



Like this post: 0
X_____________ ______________ ______________ ___

Offline dogmai

  • Jr. Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 2846
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: supreme court sided with the cake guy....now you get this
« Reply #37 on: June 17, 2018, 07:09:46 PM »
Understand to why I said what I said but if you read further to what you said, my response is a teaching at it. 

If it is against my religion to eat chicken, should I call discrimination because all you sell is chicken? 
like I said above, fries and yogurt is available.

Eating cake isn't against the religion of the gay couple,  that why they went to cake cake shop instead of going to a chicken farm because that know that chicken farms don't sell cakes.

Don't eat chicken then go elsewhere. 
Eat whopper, go to burger king, not chik fil-a. Eat big Mac, go to McDonald's, not chik fil-a. Eat cake, then go to a cake shop. Eat red herring, then stay here for some provided by DuMa.
Can't buy cake by haters then why support haters?  Go somewhere else.  Why call it discrimination?
Two different actions here by two different people. Support or not support haters - done by customers. Discrimination - done by owner.


hat·er
ˈhādər/
noun
a person who greatly dislikes a specified person or thing.

dis·crim·i·na·tion
dəˌskriməˈnāSH(ə)n/
noun
1.
the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex.


Why call it discrimination?
Because that's what it is. An action that was done will remain what it is regardless of anyone reporting it or not.
Ex: I killed a person in front of you. You ran away with the choice of reporting it to the cops or not. Either way, the fact is that I killed a person in front of you.



Like this post: 0

Offline dogmai

  • Jr. Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 2846
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: supreme court sided with the cake guy....now you get this
« Reply #38 on: June 17, 2018, 07:56:45 PM »
If it is against my religion to eat chicken, should I call discrimination because all you sell is chicken? 

No, because food don't discriminate,  people do.
If it is against my religion to eat books, I would go to chik fil-a and eat something there and not to a book store that only sell books. If it is against my religion to go to a gay wedding, then I would just attend straight weddings and not gay weddings, but I won't deny entrance to anyone attending the gay wedding. If it is against my religion to bake a cake,  them I would not be a baker and open up a cake shop. If it is against my religion to celebrate immoral marriage,  then I would not have wedding cakes as part of my service. Because I run the risk of participating in an immoral marriage whether I know it or not. An act of sin is an act of sin even if I choose to ignore some parts of that act of sin.




Like this post: 0

Offline hmgROCK

  • Elite Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 35741
  • The Hmong Nostradamus
  • Respect: +216
    • View Profile
Re: supreme court sided with the cake guy....now you get this
« Reply #39 on: June 17, 2018, 10:02:10 PM »
Duma

How bout you stop eating bacon and shrimp first



Like this post: 0
God did not created man...man created god

Offline DuMa

  • Elite Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 17907
  • Gender: Male
  • -(>^_^<)- 052806
  • Respect: +742
    • View Profile
Re: supreme court sided with the cake guy....now you get this
« Reply #40 on: June 17, 2018, 11:48:35 PM »


Blah blah blah

Supreme Court still sided with the cake guy.  Your Kung Fu is still weak so STFU  :2funny:



Like this post: 0
X_____________ ______________ ______________ ___

Offline DuMa

  • Elite Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 17907
  • Gender: Male
  • -(>^_^<)- 052806
  • Respect: +742
    • View Profile
Re: supreme court sided with the cake guy....now you get this
« Reply #41 on: June 17, 2018, 11:49:46 PM »
Duma

How bout you stop eating bacon and shrimp first

The hell you talking about? 

Me stop eating any food got nothing to do with the topic at hand. 



Like this post: 0
X_____________ ______________ ______________ ___

Offline DuMa

  • Elite Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 17907
  • Gender: Male
  • -(>^_^<)- 052806
  • Respect: +742
    • View Profile
Re: supreme court sided with the cake guy....now you get this
« Reply #42 on: June 18, 2018, 02:22:56 AM »
No, because food don't discriminate,  people do.
If it is against my religion to eat books, I would go to chik fil-a and eat something there and not to a book store that only sell books. If it is against my religion to go to a gay wedding, then I would just attend straight weddings and not gay weddings, but I won't deny entrance to anyone attending the gay wedding. If it is against my religion to bake a cake,  them I would not be a baker and open up a cake shop. If it is against my religion to celebrate immoral marriage,  then I would not have wedding cakes as part of my service. Because I run the risk of participating in an immoral marriage whether I know it or not. An act of sin is an act of sin even if I choose to ignore some parts of that act of sin.

Well this cake maker who just won his case said he don't discriminate so you are still wrong.  Some people don't discriminate. 

I already told you.  It is not what they sell.  Unlike other goods, a cake is for occasion that has an artistic value and a message behind it.  Supreme Court is in his favor for a reason.  Learn from it cuz obviously, you are not smarter than the supreme Court.   :2funny:


"Baker who refused to make cake for gay wedding: 'I don't discriminate'
Jack Phillips maintained he would 'serve everybody that comes in my shop,' but that he wouldn't 'create cakes for every message.'"
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna880061



Like this post: 0
X_____________ ______________ ______________ ___

Offline dogmai

  • Jr. Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 2846
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: supreme court sided with the cake guy....now you get this
« Reply #43 on: June 18, 2018, 03:25:55 AM »
Blah blah blah

Supreme Court still sided with the cake guy.  Your Kung Fu is still weak so STFU  :2funny:

But was still strong enough defeat yours, resulting in your use of ad hominem attack.

There's no need for you to admit defeat, your actions speak for itself.



Like this post: 0

Offline DuMa

  • Elite Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 17907
  • Gender: Male
  • -(>^_^<)- 052806
  • Respect: +742
    • View Profile
Re: supreme court sided with the cake guy....now you get this
« Reply #44 on: June 18, 2018, 06:01:49 AM »
But was still strong enough defeat yours, resulting in your use of ad hominem attack.

There's no need for you to admit defeat, your actions speak for itself.

No need to cry foul play.  You are arguing against the supreme Court and lost.  What was the latest verdict for that Colorado cake Baker guy?   The court found in favor for his case. 

He is an artist just like a painter or any other artist.  So you telling me that the government should tell a cake Baker what to bake or a painter what to paint? 

Blah blah blah, your Kung Fu is still weak.   :2funny:



Like this post: 0
X_____________ ______________ ______________ ___

 

Advertisements