Supreme Court Sides With Colorado Baker Who Turned Away Gay Couple

[tinselwolverine]

I know. I'm being super controversial.


But I do remember people making the argument with respect to voting requirements that we don't need these dated rules that we've evolved beyond.

We're going to be invaded by space people before the anti-discrimination laws embodied in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and subsequent court rulings go away.

 

[Gulo Blue]

We're going to be invaded by space people before the anti-discrimination laws embodied in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and subsequent court rulings go away.

Fortunately, Trump is building a space force to prevent that.

 

[Spartanmack]

There is no good reason to believe that. We have these laws because the thing you trust in wasn't true back when baby boomers were young adults. There is no reason to believe things have changed that much. When it comes to housing (and education), people do not make decisions based on their principles and what companies treat others fairly. There are enough tradeoffs and enough motivation for a person just trying to do what's best for their family. I get that there's a difference between lending at different rates and not lending, but what I'm asserting is that if people don't take their business elsewhere over rate discrimination, they won't take their business elsewhere over discrimination by refusal.

it's legitimately delusional to think America isn't a lot less racist than it was when the baby boomers were young adults. And I'm not relying on people to take their business elsewhere based on rate discrimination - I think competing lenders will take care of that problem. I disagree with you about what people will do in the event of discrimination by refusal. We've seen that already.


Edit: and again, I'm OK with keeping most anti-discrimination laws, like those designed to prevent race based pricing or employment discrimination.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Let's say, a porn actress - let's say it's Stormy Daniels - is getting married.

She goes to a bridal shop, and wants a wedding dress and all the brides maids dresses made custom, crotchless and topless, so the vajayjays and boobs are exposed.

Now the store owner says, "you can buy what we have in stock, just like anybody else can, but I'm not going to make you the dress you're asking - it's against my morals."

Can Stormy sue?

What if Ron Jeremy goes to a hot rod place, and wants the replica of a giant penis put on the hood of a car.

Can he sue, if the shop refuses?

So this is how I see this case - the baker will sell the gays his stock stuff he would sell anybody else.

As long as the baker is willing to sell the gays anything he would sell anybody else, I don't see it as discrimination.

Custom artisans should have the right to refuse specific requests.

 

[Spartanmack]

Let's say, a porn actress - let's say it's Stormy Daniels - is getting married.

She goes to a bridal shop, and wants a wedding dress and all the brides maids dresses made custom, crotchless and topless, so the vajayjays and boobs are exposed.

Now the store owner says, "you can buy what we have in stock, just like anybody else can, but I'm not going to make you the dress you're asking - it's against my morals."

Can Stormy sue?

What if Ron Jeremy goes to a hot rod place, and wants the replica of a giant penis put on the hood of a car.

Can he sue, if the shop refuses?

So this is how I see this case - the baker will sell the gays his stock stuff he would sell anybody else.

As long as the baker is willing to sell the gays anything he would sell anybody else, I don't see it as discrimination.

Custom artisans should have the right to refuse specific requests.

I agree but I don't agree that if the custom artisan offers financing for their goods, that they should be able to charge protected classes higher interest than they charge non-protected classes with similar credit scores.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Here's another one; let's say a house painter goes to paint a house and it turns out the people there are Satanists, and they hand him a bucket of goats blood and say "here, smear this shit on the wall..."

Should they be able to sue him if he refuses?

 

[tinselwolverine]

I agree but I don't agree that if the custom artisan offers financing for their goods, that they should be able to charge protected classes higher interest than they charge non-protected classes with similar credit scores.

Well, in the examples of mine you quoted, I'm guessing Stormy Daniels and Ron Jeremy would both just probably pay cash.

 

[Gulo Blue]

it's legitimately delusional to think America isn't a lot less racist than it was when the baby boomers were young adults. And I'm not relying on people to take their business elsewhere based on rate discrimination - I think competing lenders will take care of that problem. I disagree with you about what people will do in the event of discrimination by refusal. We've seen that already.

We're not talking about whether or not America is a lot less racist. We're talking about whether it's less racist enough to self-police without protections.


And what have we seen already that you're talking about? Mostly, when big companies do things people don't like, little to nothing happens.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I agree but I don't agree that if the custom artisan offers financing for their goods, that they should be able to charge protected classes higher interest than they charge non-protected classes with similar credit scores.

Tinsel said "As long as the baker is willing to sell the gays anything he would sell anybody else, I don't see it as discrimination."


How do you agree? I thought you said people should be able to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

 

[tinselwolverine]

And what have we seen already that you're talking about? Mostly, when big companies do things people don't like, little to nothing happens.

People didn't like new Coke at all - it tasted like Pepsi.

People who liked Pepsi were already drinking Pepsi.

New Coke went away fast.

People didn't much care for baked chicken at KFC - duh? No shit?

Why the hell would KFC patrons go there for baked chicken?

So they stopped making it.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Here's another one; let's say a house painter goes to paint a house and it turns out the people there are Satanists, and they hand him a bucket of goats blood and say "here, smear this shit on the wall..."

Should they be able to sue him if he refuses?

Only if he does goat blood work for non-Satanists too.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Only if he does goat blood work for non-Satanists too.

Right.

I should have made it clear that he doesn't.

 

[Gulo Blue]

People didn't like new Coke at all - it tasted like Pepsi.

People who liked Pepsi were already drinking Pepsi.

New Coke went away fast.

People didn't much care for baked chicken at KFC - duh? No shit?

Why the hell would KFC patrons go there for baked chicken?

So they stopped making it.

Yeah. People react to what they like to consume for themselves. They don't say, Well's Fargo lent to 34,000 Hispanic and African American borrowers at higher rates, we should change banks.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Yeah. People react to what they like to consume for themselves. They don't say, Well's Fargo lent to 34,000 Hispanic and African American borrowers at higher rates, we should change banks.

Is that a hypothetical about Wells Fargo? I haven't heard that.

I am aware that a number of Wells Fargo employees committed criminal fraud against many of their depositors. I don't think they discriminated regarding whom they ripped off - I think they were equal opportunity thieves.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Right.

I should have made it clear that he doesn't.

Then no. The Satanists have to find someone else. But I do think the painter has to paint their Satanic Temple black if they ask him to.


I think it becomes questionable, if the painter is masterful at picking just the right color for a room and they ask him to paint it the perfect color. Then he's in a similar place to the baker where even his most plain work is a custom, artistic thing.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Is that a hypothetical about Wells Fargo? I haven't heard that.

I am aware that a number of Wells Fargo employees committed criminal fraud against many of their depositors. I don't think they discriminated regarding whom they ripped off - I think they were equal opportunity thieves.

It's in my racial bias post:


https://therealdeal.com/2012/07/12/wells-fargo-slammed-with-a-175-million-discrimination-charge/


They had to pay $175 million in the settlement. But people didn't take their business elsewhere as a result.

 

[Spartanmack]

We're not talking about whether or not America is a lot less racist. We're talking about whether it's less racist enough to self-police without protections.


And what have we seen already that you're talking about? Mostly, when big companies do things people don't like, little to nothing happens.

We're not? One of us said the following...

There is no good reason to believe that. We have these laws because the thing you trust in wasn't true back when baby boomers were young adults. There is no reason to believe things have changed that much. When it comes to housing (and education)...

 

[Gulo Blue]

We're not? One of us said the following...

"That much" being enough to not need these laws anymore.

 

[Spartanmack]

Tinsel said "As long as the baker is willing to sell the gays anything he would sell anybody else, I don't see it as discrimination."


How do you agree? I thought you said people should be able to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

boom, you got me. I surrender. Bake the cake.


Just kidding of course, he shouldn't have to bake them a cake. I made the distinction between wholesale discrimination and refusing to be compelled to participate in a particular event he objects to. I don't really think that's discrimination. I further believe that private businesses should be able to refuse service to anyone for any reason so it doesn't really matter if I think that particular case is discrimination or not. Even if I didn't agree, I didn't think I should explain every little difference between my opinion and someone esle's when we agree that the baker shouldn't have to bake the cake - but I forgot for a second who I was disagreeing with.

 

[Spartanmack]

"That much" being enough to not need these laws anymore.

that's what we disagree on, so that is at least part of what we're talking about.