Gay Colorado couple sues bakery for allegedly refusing them wedding cake

[cjjtulsa]

Like hospitals?

If it's 100% private, and accepts zero federal, state, or local funds, I'd say yes. The overwhelming majority of people wouldn't turn a sick person away, regardless of their views on whatever criteria you want to use. But if a private hospital has treated a certain person on more than one occasion without being paid for services rendered, then they should have every right to send them kicking rocks. If physicians take the Hippocratic Oath and take it seriously, then there shouldn't be a problem anyway.

Not sure if "Duty to Rescue" laws would also apply to hospital staff.

 

[ignerntbend]

Let's get it straight [ha!] baking wedding cakes is an inherently gay activity in the first place.
If a male wedding cake baker makes an issue of this, it sounds like someone needs to look in the mirror.

 

[KOPBET]

If it's 100% private, and accepts zero federal, state, or local funds, I'd say yes. .

Perhaps a Catholic hospital refusing to treat someone because he/she is a flamer?

 

[RidgeHunter]

Let's get it straight [ha!] baking wedding cakes is an inherently gay activity in the first place.
If a male wedding cake baker makes an issue of this, it sounds like someone needs to look in the mirror.

Good point. A straight wedding is about the gayest event I've ever seen.

What's next, a male dressmaker or hair stylist saying some event is to gay for him to work? Marcus Bachmann the baker here needs to shut up and get back in the kitchen.

 

[henschman]

This is why those pro-gay marriage libertarians crack me up. They claim to be libertarians yet are pulling for more government control, I guess you could call them big government libertarians.

I agree that anyone who thinks the end goal is just to get the government to recognize more people's definitions of marriage has no business calling himself a libertarian. However, gay marriage isn't necessarily more governmental control. I'd say that the more restrictive the legal definition is, the more governmental control there is over the institution. Some libertarians support separation of marriage and state, yet are of the view that as long as we are stuck with government licensed marriage, it should be available to as many people as possible... i.e. that marriage licenses for gays is a small step in the right direction, because it gets the government to respect slightly more of people's rights. Kind of like how a libertarian would prefer outright decriminalization of drug possession, but can get behind a law that legalizes, taxes, and regulates marijuana because it is a step in the right direction; or how a libertarian would prefer constitutional carry, but can get behind a law making licenses apply to open carry as well as concealed carry, for the same reason.

Like hospitals?

Yep. If any exception is made to the right to refuse service, it is nothing short of involuntary servitude.

 

[Glock]

Why is this still an issue in this country of much bigger issues? There seems to be a 50/50 chance all these gay rights lawsuits are for civil/public awareness, contributing to the cause... And the others are no different than Westboros model of profits. I don't see a difference between this and The fight for civil rights mid-century.

 

[TedKennedy]

Why is this still an issue in this country of much bigger issues? There seems to be a 50/50 chance all these gay rights lawsuits are for civil/public awareness, contributing to the cause... And the others are no different than Westboros model of profits. I don't see a difference between this and The fight for civil rights mid-century.

BINGO! "the fight for civil rights" is really "the fight to let government dictate whom you must serve in your business". This is simply more of the same lack of thinking.

 

[JonDough]

That's so gay..............

 

[MrBaldy]

BINGO! "the fight for civil rights" is really "the fight to let government dictate whom you must serve in your business". This is simply more of the same lack of thinking.

You're right, it does sound like they're trying to backdoor something. I mean who would want to eat a cake made by the person they just sued?

 

[daytomann]

"We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason."

What's so hard to understand?