TexasCHLforum.com

Abraham wrote: ↑Thu Jun 07, 2018 9:23 am Not to be a downer, but what next will the LGB... - etc. crowd 'demand' next?

Your first born?

O.K., I'm being facetious, but what's next?

Demand garment makers make dresses/ball gowns to accommodate the male physique?

Ditto for lingerie.

When in public, as an example, when a cashier is helping a customer check out, be forced by law to use the pro-noun 'she' be used (or go straight to jail if not) when addressing obvious males who decide to wear lipstick and mascara, but male clothing.

Or....O.K. you get my point.

Where does it end?

When will the tyranny/bullying of the minority of the majority end?

When?

When the courage of the majority says O.K. we've had enough of this nonsense - the answer to your next demand is NO!

The knuckling under of the majority is at an end.

We need to stop criminalizing instances where people get their feelings hurt. If I walk into a store and the person working there makes me feel unwelcome, or flat out tells me that I am not welcome there, I leave. I don't need to call the cops. I don't need to file a lawsuit. I just go somewhere else.

I think we all would love to be accepted by everyone, whether we like to admit it or not. But being an adult means understanding that not everything is going to go our way all the time. Some people won't like us, for whatever reason. That's fine. Put your big boy / big girl pants on and deal with it. The problem is that we have an entire generation or two that was brought up believing that everyone is a winner, and that no one should ever make you feel unhappy. If they do, then they must be punished.

Allons wrote: ↑Mon Jun 04, 2018 1:31 pm Call me crazy, but I would not want someone making any type of FOOD! for me that did not want too. No telling what they would do to it. You dont want to make my cake ,ok thank you move to the next baker. This lawsuit was money wasted.

If I'm upset with anyone preparing or handling my food / drink, I tell them after they have delivered, not before. If someone dislikes me, for whatever reason, the last thing I want is for them to make me something to eat.

mojo84 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 04, 2018 1:45 pm For those that think the decision so "narrow", do you think the decision wouldn't apply to a Muslim baker when a customer requests their cake be made with pure vanilla extract, pork lard, Christian theme or a gay couple on it?

How about a Jewish kosher deli that someone demands they make them a non-kosher meal?

The decision supports religious liberty. The "narrow" narrative is just liberal political spin in my opinion to try to convince people this decision doesn't apply to other situations.

It's not about any one religion. This decision effects all religions and the liberty to observe one's religious standards and beliefs.

The court ruled that the commissions decision against this baker was invalid because they displayed bias (in comments during the arguments, I believe). So no, I don't think that this decision automatically applies to any other cases. But then again, IANAL. If you are, then I defer to your legal opinion.

The ruling was narrow in application. That might be what they mean by using this terminology.