I don't believe sexual orientation should have anything to do with how business is conducted.

While your solution is correct in every way, I believe that neither side would be happy with it, even assuming they understood it.

I posit that both sides only believe in the irrational and false concept of "group rights". The issue to them is not individual rights, but "religious rights" vs. "gay rights". This is the converse of the old Certs commercials: "Stop, you're both right!". In this case, both sides are wrong.

As Rand wrote eloquently long ago: "There is no such thing as 'group rights', only individual rights". As implied in this post main quote, each individual should be allowed to decide, for whatever reason whatsoever, whom they wish to trade with. The baker should refuse to bake the cake on those grounds. that "principle" and leave religion out of it, and the gay person/couple are then free to choose another baker, which I am certain they could easily find.

But then the gays would not be able to pursue their broader agenda of claiming their other "rights", for example, to government goodies only reserved for married couples. (To make myself clear and consistent: I don't have a problem with gays getting married, I DO have a problem with the government engaging in "social engineering" by granting tax breaks, health insurance breaks etc. to married couples over single couples, and gays getting married to claim these rights.)

As far as the religious and their "religious rights", they cannot recognize individual rights and still insist on trying to impose their religious, non-scientific views on abortion, contraception, certain private "sexual acts" forbidden by the Bible, via laws implemented by the government.

So the proprietor should have been allowed to specifically cater to gays or straights as his business plan dictated so you knew what you were getting into when you joined. Obviously the gay people were going there for to interact with other gays, not straight people. Its a little like the restaurants that have kid's menus. You are inviting screamers, as I call them, who run loose around the restaurant screaming and crying under no parental control. People like me who want a quieter dining experience should be allowed to sit in a quieter "no children" section. But in todays culture, imagine the uproar if a restaurant announced no children under 5 permitted, or isolated parents with children in a special section? Unfortunately I am sure its illegal to do this. So, I have to stay away from sit down restaurants that have kids menus, or whose inexpensive menus attract kids, and keep quiet about my views (lest I be labeled as a kid hater). As a result of all this, I have to admit I stay away from kids in general because of the way parents refuse to keep them under control in public. The worst are the welfare mothers, mostly black and mexican and trailer park whites.

Replace 'Gay Couple' with 'Black Couple'. Sexual orientation is not a philosophical position as the writer seems to imply.

Quite so. If I go to a restaurant or a barber or any other service provider and get lousy service....I don't go back. It would be ridiculous to try to force them to cater to my desires--and not worth the effort to try.

As you say, there are a lot of bakeries out there. This situation has also created an opportunity for one or more of them to put a "gay friendly" or similar sign in the window and pick up at least some of the business others do not want.

A business owner who believes that his or her customers' money has different values or ideological content is a fool. But one is, after all, allowed to be a fool if one so chooses. If it shows in the bank balance, business owners can draw their own conclusions.

I tell straight people that I will tolerate their straight sex behavior if they will tolerate my gay behavior. Straight sex is just as viscerally disgusting to gays as gay sex is to straights. I dont like collard greens and find them disgusting, but do like broccoli and find it pleasurable. I bet there are people out there who feel the opposite way. So what. Believe me, gays dont want to force straights NOT to have straight sex, so straights shouldnt try to force gays NOT to have gay sex. So many problems in the world, and we worry about such nonsense.

There are a LOT of bakers out there. Just go to one who wants to trade services for your money. We make choices all the time in terms of who has friendly personnel, fast service, best price, best quality, etc. I would rather know right off if someone didnt like me, than have to try and trick the shopkeeper by lying about who I was. If Obama came into my shop to buy something, I would probably refuse service to him and I should be allowed to openly do that.

We cant expect him as a comedian to be a consistent philospher too. He is better than most of the entertainers out there, so I cant chastise him. He could be a bit more consistent in his libertarian ideas if he thought about them more. But, in his defense, even the founding fathers made some glaring errors in the constitution, like not protecting private property. They crowed about life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness (whatever that is), but left out property. The result was the cronyism we see today.

In this climate, one has to figure out how to "hide in plain sight", where you can be free, but not be noticed. If you dont want to bake a lot of cakes for gays (I say why not, their money is as good as anyones), dont open a shop in a gay area. If you dont want to serve people in the black culture in your restaurant for whatever reason, dont offer the foods they prefer or open up in areas where they dont frequent. Just do it quietly.

I understand completely where you are coming from. By and large, parents today take their children kicking and screaming wherever they go, no matter how dangerous it is for them. They bring them to the buffets in Las Vegas, where they are allowed to run free like its a park, and they go and play with the food on the line with their dirty fingers. One day I complained to a parent about it. I was disgusted. I was met with universal condemnation about hating children, etc. I have decided that in this political climate to just NOT patronize restaurants that have kid's menus and cater to these irresponsible parents. Restaurants need "no children" seating sections, as do airlines. The is no reason to allow 3 year olds into places like Home Depot either- just too dangerous. The only reason I dont get into trouble at Home Depot is that experiences have taught me what to do and what NOT to do. 3 year olds dont have that experience and go climbing on things they shouldnt, and generally get into trouble for it.

In this current case, I think the market can deal with the issue. In the case of Jim Crow laws, the issue would have taken a lot longer for the market to correct since the law itself was imposing an impediment that in part prevented the equal participation of the people in the market. It was the laws that imposed the separation, not the market.

This dude is an entertainer, not a serious philosopher. He is not consistent nor intellectual. At least he is somewhat libertarian, however. Even the founding fathers didnt put things down in the Constitution as you have in the above paragraph. They left glaring loopholes and in fact they asked for freedom to practice THEIR religion as opposed to the king's religion, but not others like the Mormon religion. And what about the slaves and the indians- their rights were violated in the name of the constitution. Its a wonder this country lasted as long as it did. I give it no more than 20 years more and we will see Venezuelan economics here.

I am not racist, but definitely culturist. By that I means I have preferences in people based on their culture. Its a generalization of course, but will millions of people around, its very inefficient on a mass scale to treat each person as their own person right off. After you get to know individuals, of course, its different. I can tell you that I do not like the current black entitled culture and in general do not want to sell things to them. Their expectations are way out there and they are arrogant. Just go to a fast food restaurant and watch how they act. I would rather patronize sit down places that do not cater to that group in general. Sorry- its politically incorrect, but thats the way it is. If their food is good and they have drive-through, I might go there in any event. Force me to deal with groups I dont like and I will shrug or move to a place where I am not controlled.

Unfotunately in this politically correct environment, the baker will have to close up shop and at least move to another place where they dont know him. No matter if he bakes cakes for gay people now, they wont go to him most likely cause they know in his heart he is still anti gay. Others wont go to him because they will be thought of as anti-gay. So he should plan on radically reduced business and make plans to either close up or move his shop to somewhere else.

"Hanging for Witchcraft is reserved for a later time."
Not too much longer, I think.

An excellent observation, Snezzy.

There are other sources of input that, however irrational, continue to distract many from learning to discern the truth. Overcoming the propaganda machine is difficult for even the best rational persuasive arguments. Of course, one can persist and continue to develop more persuasive arguments. However, it is also rational not to waste scarce resources.

Right. We train horses, and it's what we call a "set-up". You want the horse who occasionally tries to bite people to learn that he must never even THINK of biting. How to correct him? You deliberately create a situation where he will try biting you, and you have the punishment ready. (We usually punish the biter by biting him, exactly as another horse would do. "You even THINK about biting me and you get bitten!")

Because the training is just for the horse, not for the general public, we do that training in private. You won't see me biting my horse. All you'll see is that my horse never bites anyone.

If, however, you are trying to TRAIN THE PUBLIC, you create a PUBLIC set-up. The baker, and >>> anyone who chooses to agree with the baker <<< is caught and punished. The punishment is PUBLIC SHAME. The baker (and all who fail to follow the Correct Religion) are placed in the stocks on Salem Common, ready for thrown stones and vegetables. Hanging for Witchcraft is reserved for a later time.

I have always been somewhat torn on this entire debate. Substitute "gay" for "black" in this forum and most of the comments on this forum are the same you would have heard 50 years ago. "Damn nigras, flaunting their deviant life around me. The Bible says they are inferior so don't want their black germs in my shop". Jim Crow was around for a long time in the Southern US and the arguments in support of Jim Crow were probably the same as those who are in support of banning homosexuals from their businesses. If you believe that the colour of someone's skin or their sexual orientation makes them inferior to you, or deviant, you are wrong. However, I also believe that laws that force a business to sell their services or products to someone the business do not want to service are wrong as well. If Jim Crow was not legally repealed, would it still exist? Is this how Jim Crow starts?

I had a similar situation. I had an antique store and a gay man would come in now and then. He was obviously gay, but didn't make an issue of it. I knew he was, he knew I knew he was. He was fun to talk with. We got along great.

One day he comes into my shop looking glum. I asked him what was wrong. He just kinda sighed and say "I just need a good man". I about died laughing until my wife paused her laughing and said "Me Too". Now that's just rude.

If you'll pardon a quick story.

A barber shop had a sign outside saying "Hair Cuts $1.00". Someone opened competition across the street with a sign that said "Hair Cuts 50 Cents". The first shop changed their sign to read "We Fix 50 Cent Hair Cuts. $1.00".

They didn't go running to the guv'ment crying unfair. They just took care of bid'ness.

Maybe so. But that doesn't mean I have to serve you poke salad.

It's forcing someone to support a life style they don't approve of. Kinda like us putting the whoop arse on any country that doesn't want our brand of government.

Let them take a flying leap if they want but don't call us for catch net. And remember, mess in my garden and yours will never grow poesies again. Kinda like what Rome did to Carthage after the final Punic war.

That and there are so many people that just can't keep their noses our of everyone's business.

Many thanks. I looked around every corner for days for fear she's be back with her 6'6" hubby.

You are right, even the Catholic church is changing a little (slowly).

I agree 100% though, it's not the gay or straight, it's the rude. Seemed like for a long time, it was necessary to wear their status on their sleeve... most didn't, but it was the obnoxious few that stood out enough for all of them.