Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
SCOTUS needs to get this decision right. The sheer arrogance of those that would command the baker to make a cake against his will deserves a bullet.
Slavery? No one is forcing the guy to be a baker. All we are saying that if he wants to be a baker, there are certain rules he has to follow.
This is why I mentioned that this is a distraction. Taxes and regulations have real consequences. They really stifle businesses, growth, etc. But preventing people from being racist or bigoted doesn't do the same; if anything, removing those kinds of barriers enhances productivity. Like you mentioned, his concerns about "God's commandments" are utter bogus. I mean, you could easily flip this. What if a guy believes that God's commandment is that he has to force people to live a Christian way of life? What if he uses government to do so? If you try and stop him, you are denying him entrance to heaven! Wouldn't that be a terrible thing?
Sure, there are poor applications of the principle, but that shouldn't mean throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Some traffic laws are not good, but that doesn't mean all of them are bad!
Plus, your buddy is basically complaining that he has to screen his emails. Cry me a river. Now, I would still say that when it comes to renting out your own private property, you should be able to rent it to whoever you want, at whatever price, only because of the personal nature of renting out living space. There is no hard rule...I'd also say that craigslist should allow you to post your listing as you want it. I think that it gets trickier with larger housing developers that claim EO or to be non-discriminatory...then I'd want more transparency.
I singled this out because I'm not sure this is against CL policy. I've definitely put gender restrictions on my postings.
SJWism etc. is getting insane (it is just the balance swinging one way after having swung in the other way for a long time; arc of history is long and all that), but that doesn't mean you toss out all of it.
I mean, there is a point to be made on why some people are planting their flag on this issue. From the colonial era to the 1960s, states had individual laws dictating how businesses could behave. No discrimination based on religion. No discrimination based on land-holding status. No discrimination based on beard length (yes, really). Criminilization of interracial marriage. Criminilization of homosexual acts. Criminilazation of serving a woman.
Yet, where were people protesting these unjust laws? Where were people talking about private property rights, freedom, liberty, etc? Then you have the Civil Rights act, and all of a sudden, these people come out of the woodwork. Now you try to have equal protection for gays, and the same people are out in force. Those who did not lift a finger to help with civil rights or gay marriage, are claiming to be principled!
..Title: Video puts Muslim bakeries, florists in gay-rights spotlight
By Valerie Richardson - The Washington Times - Sunday, April 5, 2015
Muslim bakers and florists have flown under the media radar during the recent uproar over Christian-owned businesses and gay rights, but a hidden-camera video may have changed that.
The video showing Muslim bakers in Michigan reluctant to bake a cake for a gay wedding went viral last weekend, snaring more than 2.2 million views in three days and igniting debate over whether Christian business owners are being singled out for lawsuits, complaints and media focus.
***
In the video, Mr. Crowder asks for a wedding cake with the message, “Ben and Steven forever.” Some employees refer him elsewhere. One baker shakes his head and says, “No, no, I don’t want it,” apparently referring to the cake-baking job.
“Many of the Muslim bakeries were kind enough and willing to serve us, but many of them were not,” Mr. Crowder said.
More at link...http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...n-gay-rights-/
Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members
Where was the fake news, mainstream media when Moslem bakeries refused such cakes?
Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members
Stop being a wussy. If someone does not want my business, then I don't beg them for it. I go to their competition. I give the rejecting merchant a F*ck you! to boot. I don't cry or force them through government.
These cake losers crying to government need to man up. They need the swift kick in the ass they never got. There is no such thing as "gay rights." You don't have a "right" to your cake. Guess that logic is useless for today's progressive.
Last edited by NorthCarolinaLiberty; 06-26-2017 at 09:13 PM.
Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members
Pfizer Macht Frei!
Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.
Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!
Short Income Tax Video
The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes
The Federalist Papers, No. 15:
Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.
Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members
Pfizer Macht Frei!
Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.
Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!
Short Income Tax Video
The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes
The Federalist Papers, No. 15:
Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.
If the Court allows that a seller MUST sell to someone, then they can easily make the argument that a buyer MUST buy from someone.
FRN's are simply a medium of exchange - you are trading the fruits of your labor for the fruits of someone else's labor. There is no difference between the buyer and seller. In this case, the baker is choosing not use his cake to buy FRN's from this person. The reason or justification for his decision doesn't matter. It's stupid to even question it.
If the Court screws this up, then it won't be long until they force YOU to buy goods from certain people. You want a coat? Better hope the government doesn't find out why you chose one store over another! And certain special interests will most definitely use this to their advantage.
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire
As a new business owner I've already been through people who want to hire me but I didn't want to work for them.
I think the mistake the baker made was letting his reasons be known why he was refusing service.
He could have simply just said no and left it at that. No reason to insult the people by explaining it to them why not. You aren't legally required to answer questions from people and if they persisted and made a scene, you could have them removed from your shop.
Let the snowflakes down easy so hopefully they don't break.
No - No - No - No
2016
Similar, yes. Although, in that case they didn't force you to buy insurance from a certain carrier. (Just one on an approved list.)
Imagine if a solicitor came to you and asked you to buy something - and you turned him down. You better have a good reason and the ability to prove it.
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire
The point of that post is that EVERYONE is both a buyer and seller at the same time. Every time you make an exchange, you give something and get something. Doesn't matter which side of the transaction you're on. You're both getting something and giving something.
It's not a stretch to suggest that if you can force someone to sell to someone against their will, you can also force someone to buy. Use the example of a door-to-door vacuum salesman. If you decide not to buy from him, perhaps because he's gay - first, you're an idiot - but second, he could say you discriminated against him and win. Because the precedent would have been set.
As to "democracy is about sticking it to the rich", I'm not sure I'm seeing what you're seeing. If anything, our democracy is about making it look like you're sticking it to the rich while giving them lots of favors and protections, thereby making them even richer.
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire
Do you have any example where the rich have special laws in their favor? When I say rich I'm talking about people getting rich in the private sector. I can think of a few really bad laws that discriminate terribly against the rich. Progressive taxation. Anti trust laws. Anti discrimination laws. Don't many of the civil rights laws target businesses with more than 50 employees?
One thing that bothers me about your post is that you are saying anti discrimination laws are bad because they could potentially be used against "buyers", in other words "us". But that implies it's ok now because it's only be used against the evil rich.
Last edited by Madison320; 06-27-2017 at 11:47 AM.
Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Robert Heinlein
Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler
Groucho Marx
I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.
Linus, from the Peanuts comic
You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith
Alexis de Torqueville
Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it
A Zero Hedge comment
Yet another distraction piece from the MSM sausage factory, and it looks like so many on this forum are just eating it up... :/
That's true but I'll bet the corporation that owns the stadium still pays more net in taxes than millions of poor people. On top of that I'm pretty sure individual welfare (SS, Medicare, etc) dwarfs corporate welfare(farm subsidies, stadiums, etc). Probably hundreds of times more spent on individual welfare.
It's not the Illuminati or the Rothchilds, or the Freemasons that control things, it's the average voter who wants free stuff.
Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Robert Heinlein
Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler
Groucho Marx
I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.
Linus, from the Peanuts comic
You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith
Alexis de Torqueville
Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it
A Zero Hedge comment
#NashvilleStrong
“I’m a doctor. That’s a baby.”~~~Dr. Manny Sethi
That's a good point but SS and Medicare are double the military budget. And I'm guessing that most of the military budget goes to salaries not a couple rich guys.
The laws favor the poor and middle class and there's a huge transfer of wealth from the rich to the poor in this country. It's called socialism. Do you dispute that?
Connect With Us