Fake Gay Marriage Website and SCOTUS Ruling

[ZiprHead]

You still don't understand the difference between a difference in the product vs a difference in the customers.

There is no difference in the customers. If the designer can design for one female or one male, they can design for two of each.

 

[Gospel]

What you seem to missing is that there is no requirement that any business deal with all customers within the supposed client base it represents.

You're right, there is no requirement to deal with

all customers within the supposed client base it represents.

Whatever the heck that means. There WAS a legal requirement to treat all protected classes equally. This meant that if specialized services were provided to one protected class, they must be equally offered to all other protected classes without discrimination. Now anyone can pull faith out of their ass and discriminate against anyone for any reason. Welcome to the new old America!

You still haven't explained how laser tattoo removal is supposed to work on those with dark enough skin as it's fundamentally based on the tattoo being substantially darker than the surrounding skin.

I'm not an expert at Laser tattoos that's why. Go fucking Google that shit. You also have the option to call a professional in the trade and they can explain how it works on darker skin.

Edit: And to help you out a little, even if there are patients who can't be helped, they aren't being denied because they are black, they are being denied because the procedure won't work.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Likewise, just because they make wedding websites doesn't mean they have to make same-sex wedding websites.

Technically there is no such thing as a "same-sex wedding". There aren't "same-sex wedding certificates". They don't go on a "same-sex honeymoon".

So if software can manage a wedding website, it can manage weddings, regardless of the gender of those getting married.

I've already pointed out one difference: We traditionally use blue for male and pink for female. A same-sex wedding would be blue and blue or pink and pink. Having a stock blue and pink to use won't work same sex wedding sites. (And, yes, it could matter. Plenty of us guys have flawed color vision and can't pick pleasing combinations because we don't see it the same as others.)

That isn't a difference. That is a ridiculous series of sentences that tries to turn a Demand issue back into a Supply one. This was never about supply. It is about whether a person who decorates a wedding cake with flowers for straight couples is being compelled to support a same gender marriage for doing the same thing for a same gender couple.

Note that that already says they shouldn't be compelled to make such a site even before you get into the bit of compelling creativity that the person finds repulsive.

Note that this is different than requiring a company to sell a stock product to all comers.

Actually it is no different. This is about selling a product to one couple but not another, simply because they are the same gender. It is ridiculous to argue otherwise. I mean what if Terry is marrying Pat?! OMFG!!! Same gend... wait... Terry a guy or gal... wait is Pat a guy or a gal. Sorry, can't produce a wedding website because my programming abilities can't manage this ambiguity.

You still don't understand the difference between a difference in the product vs a difference in the customers.

That is absurd. Do you think I've got an IQ of 24? The difference between products and customers is quite clear. The problem is, I don't see the difference in product being remotely at issue as there are generally no viable differences between a cake for a mixed gender and a same gender wedding. The fondant, flour, eggs, icing, it is all the same. A website, they don't use Gay HTML for a same gender marriage websites.

I could open The Orange Store where all products are orange colored. You don't get to demand a blue version.

If I read one more fucking supply related analogy to this DEMAND of services being sold to other people case, I'm going to lose my fucking mind!

But you want to allow a customer to demand a same-sex wedding site. I'm afraid you're just going to have lose your mind.

I refuse to accept people that are different being refused service because of a make believe technical issue that doesn't actually exist. This isn't the 1930s. You sound like Dred Scot or Plessy. Creating these fantastical arguments or hypotheticals to justify immorality. Get your head out of the technicalities, look at the big picture.

 

[ZiprHead]

Never mind. Don't want to continue a derail.

 

[TomC]

Get your head out of the technicalities, look at the big picture.

I'd argue the same thing.
I'm in my mid60s, lived my whole life in conservative Indiana.

I've watched society go from legally and socially enforced discrimination of all kinds to the modern world. When I was a kid, us queers had better stay invisible if we valued our lives. Now, a bakery in Colorado or a hairdresser in Michigan can generate enough outrage to attract national news attention.

That's the big picture. I think it's time to start restricting the restrictions.
Tom

 

[Gospel]

Get your head out of the technicalities, look at the big picture.

I'd argue the same thing.
I'm in my mid60s, lived my whole life in conservative Indiana.

I've watched society go from legally and socially enforced discrimination of all kinds to the modern world. When I was a kid, us queers had better stay invisible if we valued our lives. Now, a bakery in Colorado or a hairdresser in Michigan can generate enough outrage to attract national news attention.

That's the big picture. I think it's time to start restricting the restrictions.
Tom

Are you suggesting a return to a time when concealing one's homosexuality was necessary for simple activities like shopping? That seems like a logical course of action.

 

[TomC]

Are you suggesting a return to a time when concealing one's homosexuality was necessary for simple activities like shopping? That seems like a logical course of action.

No.
Why would you think I'm suggesting that? It's kinda the opposite of what I said.
Tom

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Are you suggesting a return to a time when concealing one's homosexuality was necessary for simple activities like shopping? That seems like a logical course of action.

No.
Why would you think I'm suggesting that? It's kinda the opposite of what I said.
Tom

It isn't opposite. You, might want to think it is, but it isn't. A gay couple trying to get a "custom" wedding cake could have to do exactly that, conceal it is for them because they don't know the political and religious stance of any random bakery that makes wedding cakes. And now that SCOTUS has provided no guidance on the subject, we aren't certain where the line is now for protected discrimination.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Get your head out of the technicalities, look at the big picture.

I'd argue the same thing.
I'm in my mid60s, lived my whole life in conservative Indiana.

I've watched society go from legally and socially enforced discrimination of all kinds to the modern world. When I was a kid, us queers had better stay invisible if we valued our lives. Now, a bakery in Colorado or a hairdresser in Michigan can generate enough outrage to attract national news attention.

That's the big picture. I think it's time to start restricting the restrictions.

All people having access to a sold product isn't a restriction. It is the absolute opposite of it. Thanks to SCOUTS, marrying gays have fewer options. I don't know why anyone would support people being restricted from the marketplace.

 

[Gospel]

I don't know why anyone would support people being restricted from the marketplace.

It is possible that their intention is to embrace and accept others, even in cases where those individuals have not reciprocated and will not reciprocate acceptance towards them. I still can't make sense of it as regarding making it Law though. Personally? Sure go for it if you want. In public accommodations? Hell Nah.

 

[TomC]

It isn't opposite. You, might want to think it is, but it isn't. A gay couple trying to get a "custom" wedding cake could have to do exactly that, conceal it is for them because they don't know the political and religious stance of any random bakery that makes wedding cakes.

Nonsense.
If there are 20 bakers in town and 1 doesn't want to make you a cake to your specifications, you don't really have a problem.

Unless, you're an authoritarian ideologue and are willing to create a problem to serve your own purposes. Like Scardina did.
Tom

 

[Shadowy Man]

It isn't opposite. You, might want to think it is, but it isn't. A gay couple trying to get a "custom" wedding cake could have to do exactly that, conceal it is for them because they don't know the political and religious stance of any random bakery that makes wedding cakes.

Nonsense.
If there are 20 bakers in town and 1 doesn't want to make you a cake to your specifications, you don't really have a problem.

Unless, you're an authoritarian ideologue and are willing to create a problem to serve your own purposes. Like Scardina did.
Tom

And if you live in an area where all 20 don’t want to make you the cake what then? Or do places like that not exist?

 

[TomC]

And if you live in an area where all 20 don’t want to make you the cake what then? Or do places like that not exist?

As far as I know, none exist. Maybe you can find one, Scardina couldn't. Basic business practices will get rid of the hold outs.

Many years back, a local couple started a business. It was a website advertising wedding services of all kinds, venues and caterers and flowers and clothes... The one caveat was the suppliers had to be overtly gay friendly. They knew that prospective buyers, especially upscale buyers, cared about marriage equality. It failed, completely.

Turns out virtually every wedding business in southern Indiana was business savvy enough to take clients regardless of orientation. The few who weren't were well known and restricted to tiny niches.
I watched an extremely upscale bride delete a caterer from her short list. I asked her why. She said, "A friend told me that place wouldn't do her cousin's gay wedding." Simple as that. A bride with a $40K budget deleted that caterer, because she thought that they might be homophobic.

I believe that is the modern social norm, even here in conservative Indiana.
Tom

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It isn't opposite. You, might want to think it is, but it isn't. A gay couple trying to get a "custom" wedding cake could have to do exactly that, conceal it is for them because they don't know the political and religious stance of any random bakery that makes wedding cakes.

Nonsense.
If there are 20 bakers in town and 1 doesn't want to make you a cake to your specifications, you don't really have a problem.

Let's make that argument for blacks now (or Jews?). Or is it just okay just to limit options for gays or maybe just gays getting married?

What are your limits for allowed discrimination?

 

[bilby]

Thanks to SCOUTS, marrying gays have fewer options.

That Baden-Powell has a lot to answer for.

 

[Gospel]

Nonsense.
If there are 20 bakers in town and 1 doesn't want to make you a cake to your specifications, you don't really have a problem.

Wrong. The problem is segregation. There is a bakery that your folk can use and a bakery your folk can't use. I presume you're not ok with "heterosexuals only" water fountains right?

 

[Shadowy Man]

Nonsense.
If there are 20 bakers in town and 1 doesn't want to make you a cake to your specifications, you don't really have a problem.

Wrong. The problem is segregation. There is a bakery that your folk can use and a bakery your folk can't use. I presume you're not ok with "heterosexuals only" water fountains right?

Would it depend on what fraction of available water fountains were that way? What if all water fountains were not distributed equally on their convenient access?

Is it ok for black people to not be able to sit in the front of the bus because there are plenty of seats in the back?

 

[Gospel]

And if you live in an area where all 20 don’t want to make you the cake what then? Or do places like that not exist?

As far as I know, none exist. Maybe you can find one, Scardina couldn't. Basic business practices will get rid of the hold outs.

Many years back, a local couple started a business. It was a website advertising wedding services of all kinds, venues and caterers and flowers and clothes... The one caveat was the suppliers had to be overtly gay friendly. They knew that prospective buyers, especially upscale buyers, cared about marriage equality. It failed, completely.

Turns out virtually every wedding business in southern Indiana was business savvy enough to take clients regardless of orientation. The few who weren't were well known and restricted to tiny niches.
I watched an extremely upscale bride delete a caterer from her short list. I asked her why. She said, "A friend told me that place wouldn't do her cousin's gay wedding." Simple as that. A bride with a $40K budget deleted that caterer, because she thought that they might be homophobic.

I believe that is the modern social norm, even here in conservative Indiana.
Tom

So, from what I understand, segregation is acceptable as long as individuals can find venues that welcome them. Noted.

 

[ZiprHead]

Are you suggesting a return to a time when concealing one's homosexuality was necessary for simple activities like shopping? That seems like a logical course of action.

No.
Why would you think I'm suggesting that? It's kinda the opposite of what I said.
Tom

I too immediately questioned what you meant because it sure sounded like you wanted more restrictions on people.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Nonsense.
If there are 20 bakers in town and 1 doesn't want to make you a cake to your specifications, you don't really have a problem.

Wrong. The problem is segregation. There is a bakery that your folk can use and a bakery your folk can't use. I presume you're not ok with "heterosexuals only" water fountains right?

Would it depend on what fraction of available water fountains were that way? What if all water fountains were not distributed equally on their convenient access?

Is it ok for black people to not be able to sit in the front of the bus because there are plenty of seats in the back?

Hey, as long as it is separate but you know... equal. As long as the bakeries gays can shop at are as good as the ones that refuse to sell to them, it is all good.

I'm having a sense of deja vu here.