NM Supreme Court Forces Christian to Take Gay Wedding Photos

[Dyakovo]

You find people reacting negatively to discrimination to be bad taste?

Do you find angry protestors threatening the lives of your family, force you to shut down your business, and boycotting anyone whom even came near you in some kind of dumbgay blacklist for not getting cake discriminating in good taste?

Yes.

[Llamalandia]

I personally find it in bad taste.

But then again, force is often the driving point of progress or whatever it is called.

You find people reacting negatively to discrimination to be bad taste?

Depends on how they react, MLK fought discrimination respectfully and peacefully. I'm not so sure that many of today's "rights activists" evince the same level of decorum as he had. Then again i don't know all the details of the bakery protest so...

[ALMF]

Do you find angry protestors threatening the lives of your family, force you to shut down your business, and boycotting anyone whom even came near you in some kind of dumbgay blacklist for not getting cake discriminating in good taste?

Yes.

Concur

[Oliver Boringwell]

Do you find angry protestors threatening the lives of your family, force you to shut down your business, and boycotting anyone whom even came near you in some kind of gay blacklist for not getting cake in good taste?

Yes.

Kay.

[Neo Rome Republic]

You find people reacting negatively to discrimination to be bad taste?

Depends on how they react, MLK fought discrimination respectfully and peacefully. I'm not so sure that many of today's "rights activists" evince the same level of decorum as he had. Then again i don't know all the details of the bakery protest so...

Did you read the article?

[Farnhamia]

You find people reacting negatively to discrimination to be bad taste?

Depends on how they react, MLK fought discrimination respectfully and peacefully. I'm not so sure that many of today's "rights activists" evince the same level of decorum as he had. Then again i don't know all the details of the bakery protest so...

Yes, well, I expect that some of Dr. King's opponents in Alabama and Mississippi and elsewhere in the South would disagree about how respectful and peaceful all those marches and sit-ins were. From what I can tell, the people involved in this specific case in New Mexico were quite decorous and well-behaved.

[HappyShark]

I will have you note that PFLAG which has been at the forefront of supporting gays, lesbians, their friends and families for well over 40 years internationally has recognized their position, and even retracted their 11 year old stance on Born This Way, in recognition of choice. At the end of the day the stronger message is "Respect my choice and do not condemn me for it". This does not mean someone has to agree with your choice, but from a legal stand point they cannot use it to condemn you for it either.

"Born This Way" will always leave room for someone to challenge it, because it relies on underlying biological proof, which for all intents and purposes will not be forthcoming.

You may not like what I am saying but you should really think it over.

Why won't biological proof be forcomin? I mean we've already identified genes and patterns of inheritance for many diseases even before we fully understood molecular genetics. I mean do the research find the answer get back to us on it. Doesn't seem that unreasonable to me. But yeah, i mean trying to refute science with non-science isn't going to work out too well.

Of course the problem with bio proof is that even once you find it youre going to have people legitimately try and argue it is a disease state (keep in mind if i understand correctly the APA still regards gender dysphoria as a disease or condition and not as normal human variation). So it's a bit of a catch 22. It seems there's a tentative general consensus that if it's a choice then it shouldn't be protected and if it isn't a choice is should be protected so really teh biological question is of great importance to the debate.

Whether the court in NM was right (outside of law ithink it's hards to argue they misinterpreted the law) but more broadly and philosophically "right" very much hinges on fundamental question of gay rights in general.

It will not be forth coming because the current position is a tentative compromise taking many factors including the catch 22, legalities, and politics into consideration. It is not science, but interpretation of results, from the sense of data analysis, which can be made to say just about anything. There are also forces which will discredit and support science research based on the result interpretations, punching holes in work submitted is easy, defending how it was interpreted is much harder. The latter is why we simply get compromises, just enough to get a point across but never a conclusive claim, that is if 1. you want it published and 2. you want your grant to be extended for further studies.

I doubt the LGBT community wants to enter a world of oh they figured out it was some hormonal imbalance during pregnancy, and is easily tested for and treated today. Parents then become responsible for whether or not their child will be gay? Would be an interesting turn of events, how protected would this child be if parents made this decision for them?

[Oliver Boringwell]

Depends on how they react, MLK fought discrimination respectfully and peacefully. I'm not so sure that many of today's "rights activists" evince the same level of decorum as he had. Then again i don't know all the details of the bakery protest so...

Yes, well, I expect that some of Dr. King's opponents in Alabama and Mississippi and elsewhere in the South would disagree about how respectful and peaceful all those marches and sit-ins were. From what I can tell, the people involved in this specific case in New Mexico were quite decorous and well-behaved.

We are actually talking about a different case a page back which I posted from fox news.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/09/ ... -protests/

Not sure where another similiar story of this one is, so I would bare with 'miliant gay' bias.

[Farnhamia]

Yes, well, I expect that some of Dr. King's opponents in Alabama and Mississippi and elsewhere in the South would disagree about how respectful and peaceful all those marches and sit-ins were. From what I can tell, the people involved in this specific case in New Mexico were quite decorous and well-behaved.

We are actually talking about a different case a page back which I posted from fox news.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/09/ ... -protests/

Not sure where another similiar story of this one is, so I would bare with 'miliant gay' bias.

I see. That article isn't very slanted in its wording, now is it? I recall the incident, vaguely, I think we even had a thread on it last year. It seems like the same sort of thing as the New Mexico case, people thinking that their religious views give them the right to violate anti-discrimination laws.

[Oliver Boringwell]

We are actually talking about a different case a page back which I posted from fox news.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/09/ ... -protests/

Not sure where another similiar story of this one is, so I would bare with 'miliant gay' bias.

I see. That article isn't very slanted in its wording, now is it? I recall the incident, vaguely, I think we even had a thread on it last year. It seems like the same sort of thing as the New Mexico case, people thinking that their religious views give them the right to violate anti-discrimination laws.

Many people think of giving wedding services to people whom in general are against their religious beliefs is something of a moral cunundrum for many. It doesn't help either when the LGBT community went into a rampage like this and prodded them out of business and threatened their family they way they did.

[Farnhamia]

I see. That article isn't very slanted in its wording, now is it? I recall the incident, vaguely, I think we even had a thread on it last year. It seems like the same sort of thing as the New Mexico case, people thinking that their religious views give them the right to violate anti-discrimination laws.

Many people think of giving wedding services to people whom in general are against their religious beliefs is something of a moral cunundrum for many. It doesn't help either when the LGBT community went into a rampage like this and prodded them out of business and threatened their family they way they did.

I condemn the threats categorically.

As for the rampage, why is it a rampage for the activists to organize boycotts against the bakery's suppliers? We're often told that if there were no anti-discrimination laws, the free market would take care of these things, that a business that discriminated would quickly go out of business because fair-minded people would stop patronizing them. Encouraging their suppliers to be fair-minded as well is just part of that free market activism. I see nothing wrong with this.

[Maineiacs]

A cursory search on the internet turned up this http://portlandtribune.com/go/42-news/1 ... but-sweet- as one of the few sources outside of Fox and several blogs talking about this Oregon case. It doesn't mention anything about death threats to children. It also doesn't use loaded, inflammatory words like "a vicious boycott by militant homosexual activists".

[Llamalandia]

Many people think of giving wedding services to people whom in general are against their religious beliefs is something of a moral cunundrum for many. It doesn't help either when the LGBT community went into a rampage like this and prodded them out of business and threatened their family they way they did.

I condemn the threats categorically.

As for the rampage, why is it a rampage for the activists to organize boycotts against the bakery's suppliers? We're often told that if there were no anti-discrimination laws, the free market would take care of these things, that a business that discriminated would quickly go out of business because fair-minded people would stop patronizing them. Encouraging their suppliers to be fair-minded as well is just part of that free market activism. I see nothing wrong with this.

Well like you said the threats that's the real issue. I have no problem with the free market working (including legal boycotts protests walkouts etc) as long as it stays legal. I believe the fact that it devolved to the point of threats of violence however undermines the position of the legitimate protesters as well.

[Farnhamia]

I condemn the threats categorically.

As for the rampage, why is it a rampage for the activists to organize boycotts against the bakery's suppliers? We're often told that if there were no anti-discrimination laws, the free market would take care of these things, that a business that discriminated would quickly go out of business because fair-minded people would stop patronizing them. Encouraging their suppliers to be fair-minded as well is just part of that free market activism. I see nothing wrong with this.

Well like you said the threats that's the real issue. I have no problem with the free market working (including legal boycotts protests walkouts etc) as long as it stays legal. I believe the fact that it devolved to the point of threats of violence however undermines the position of the legitimate protesters as well.

You should read the article Maineiacs linked. It's rather calmer than the others you can find about this.

[Maineiacs]

I condemn the threats categorically.

As for the rampage, why is it a rampage for the activists to organize boycotts against the bakery's suppliers? We're often told that if there were no anti-discrimination laws, the free market would take care of these things, that a business that discriminated would quickly go out of business because fair-minded people would stop patronizing them. Encouraging their suppliers to be fair-minded as well is just part of that free market activism. I see nothing wrong with this.

Well like you said the threats that's the real issue. I have no problem with the free market working (including legal boycotts protests walkouts etc) as long as it stays legal. I believe the fact that it devolved to the point of threats of violence however undermines the position of the legitimate protesters as well.

As per my previous post, Fox says there were threats; the Portland Tribune says otherwise.

[Oliver Boringwell]

A cursory search on the internet turned up this http://portlandtribune.com/go/42-news/1 ... but-sweet- as one of the few sources outside of Fox and several blogs talking about this Oregon case. It doesn't mention anything about death threats to children. It also doesn't use loaded, inflammatory words like "a vicious boycott by militant homosexual activists".

While I use Fox News for my news source, this is more accuarate it would seem.

[Farnhamia]

Well like you said the threats that's the real issue. I have no problem with the free market working (including legal boycotts protests walkouts etc) as long as it stays legal. I believe the fact that it devolved to the point of threats of violence however undermines the position of the legitimate protesters as well.

As per my previous post, Fox says there were threats; the Portland Tribune says otherwise.

And quotes the owner as saying there were none.

Oh, you have a quote from Muravyets in your sig. There's a name I've not heard in ages.

[Maineiacs]

As per my previous post, Fox says there were threats; the Portland Tribune says otherwise.

And quotes the owner as saying there were none.

Oh, you have a quote from Muravyets in your sig. There's a name I've not heard in ages.

It was actually from several years ago, but praise is praise so I left it there.

[Oliver Boringwell]

As per my previous post, Fox says there were threats; the Portland Tribune says otherwise.

And quotes the owner as saying there were none.

Oh, you have a quote from Muravyets in your sig. There's a name I've not heard in ages.

Well, scooby, the mystery of the rogue fox opinion article has been solved.

[happy ending]

[Bottle]

Many people think of giving wedding services to people whom in general are against their religious beliefs is something of a moral cunundrum for many. It doesn't help either when the LGBT community went into a rampage like this and prodded them out of business and threatened their family they way they did.

I condemn the threats categorically.

As for the rampage, why is it a rampage for the activists to organize boycotts against the bakery's suppliers? We're often told that if there were no anti-discrimination laws, the free market would take care of these things, that a business that discriminated would quickly go out of business because fair-minded people would stop patronizing them. Encouraging their suppliers to be fair-minded as well is just part of that free market activism. I see nothing wrong with this.

Ah, but you see, this is how it works.

If gay rights activists participate in the political process by backing pro-equality candidates, supporting pro-equality legislation, or any other government-based means, then they are evil fascists seeking to use the law to force their queer agenda down the throats of innocent religious citizens.

If gay rights activists instead opt for boycotts and privately-funded campaigns to raise awareness about homophobic businesses and encourage people to take their money elsewhere, then they are rampaging vigilantes seeking to use threats to shove their gay agenda down the throats of innocent religious citizens.

This is why I continually argue to gay rights activists, and indeed any other pro-equality sorts: don't spend one instant of your time worrying about how your behavior will be received by the anti side. It doesn't matter what you do. No amount of politeness or gentleness will matter. Be as loud and aggressive as you want to be, because you're going to get exactly the same response regardless.

[Llamalandia]

I condemn the threats categorically.

As for the rampage, why is it a rampage for the activists to organize boycotts against the bakery's suppliers? We're often told that if there were no anti-discrimination laws, the free market would take care of these things, that a business that discriminated would quickly go out of business because fair-minded people would stop patronizing them. Encouraging their suppliers to be fair-minded as well is just part of that free market activism. I see nothing wrong with this.

Ah, but you see, this is how it works.

If gay rights activists participate in the political process by backing pro-equality candidates, supporting pro-equality legislation, or any other government-based means, then they are evil fascists seeking to use the law to force their queer agenda down the throats of innocent religious citizens.

If gay rights activists instead opt for boycotts and privately-funded campaigns to raise awareness about homophobic businesses and encourage people to take their money elsewhere, then they are rampaging vigilantes seeking to use threats to shove their gay agenda down the throats of innocent religious citizens.

This is why I continually argue to gay rights activists, and indeed any other pro-equality sorts: don't spend one instant of your time worrying about how your behavior will be received by the anti side. It doesn't matter what you do. No amount of politeness or gentleness will matter. Be as loud and aggressive as you want to be, because you're going to get exactly the same response regardless.

Look it doesn't matter how you behave. If gay rights activists were less san fran pride parade and more buttoned down "normal" i'd likely be a more vocal supporter of gay rights. Right now i'm more meh. I think the best example is the divergence in Malcolm X and MLK one accepted (limited) violence the other demanded his people remain non-violent, one is remembered by history the other isn't so much. I think we all know which is which. IT's like I've had discussion with people about gay rights and basically they came around on the issue (despite growing up in a very anti environment) when they met ordinary plain average vanilla gay people. It's when you demonstrate sameness and unity that you bring people around not when you simply try to be as radical as possible for no reason other then being radical. It seems to a small degree that is what happened here with this wedding photographer. a gay couple saw an oppurtunity to make "a federal case out of it" (not literally of course) just for the sake of publicitly but I could be mistaken.

[Oliver Boringwell]

I condemn the threats categorically.

As for the rampage, why is it a rampage for the activists to organize boycotts against the bakery's suppliers? We're often told that if there were no anti-discrimination laws, the free market would take care of these things, that a business that discriminated would quickly go out of business because fair-minded people would stop patronizing them. Encouraging their suppliers to be fair-minded as well is just part of that free market activism. I see nothing wrong with this.

Ah, but you see, this is how it works.

If gay rights activists participate in the political process by backing pro-equality candidates, supporting pro-equality legislation, or any other government-based means, then they are evil fascists seeking to use the law to force their queer agenda down the throats of innocent religious citizens.

If gay rights activists instead opt for boycotts and privately-funded campaigns to raise awareness about homophobic businesses and encourage people to take their money elsewhere, then they are rampaging vigilantes seeking to use threats to shove their gay agenda down the throats of innocent religious citizens.

This is why I continually argue to gay rights activists, and indeed any other pro-equality sorts: don't spend one instant of your time worrying about how your behavior will be received by the anti side. It doesn't matter what you do. No amount of politeness or gentleness will matter. Be as loud and aggressive as you want to be, because you're going to get exactly the same response regardless.

7/10

Three points for 'queer agenda down the throats of innocent religious civilians'

[Bottle]

If gay rights activists were less san fran pride parade and more buttoned down "normal" i'd likely be a more vocal supporter of gay rights. Right now i'm more meh.

Funny, because attitudes like this are the only reason I engage in "San Fran Pride Parade" types of queeritude: I hope to hell I drive away people with this attitude. With fair-weather friends like that, who would need enemies?

The "I'd totally be for equality if y'all weren't so uppity" sorts are worse than useless as allies. Good riddance!

[Llamalandia]

If gay rights activists were less san fran pride parade and more buttoned down "normal" i'd likely be a more vocal supporter of gay rights. Right now i'm more meh.

Funny, because attitudes like this are the only reason I engage in "San Fran Pride Parade" types of queeritude: I hope to hell I drive away people with this attitude. With fair-weather friends like that, who would need enemies?

The "I'd totally be for equality if y'all weren't so uppity" sorts are worse than useless as allies. Good riddance!

i disagree like I said MLK demonstrated in the streets sure but guess what he kept all his clothing on.

And guess what you're only keeping enemies, I sincerely doubt you truly are fighting for the right to be san fran like all the time and if you are then my goodness that's just umm…eww.

[Esternial]

If gay rights activists were less san fran pride parade and more buttoned down "normal" i'd likely be a more vocal supporter of gay rights. Right now i'm more meh.

Funny, because attitudes like this are the only reason I engage in "San Fran Pride Parade" types of queeritude: I hope to hell I drive away people with this attitude. With fair-weather friends like that, who would need enemies?

The "I'd totally be for equality if y'all weren't so uppity" sorts are worse than useless as allies. Good riddance!

So if you can't be a gay rights activist if you don't partake in the "San Fran Pride Parade"?

This is news to me.