Author Topic: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.  (Read 71379 times)

Dicey

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8030
  • Age: 60
  • Location: NorCal
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #400 on: June 04, 2018, 03:27:18 PM »
I don't get people that take politics super-seriously or choose their friends based on politics.

I understand people who take police brutality seriously because they are far more likely to be shot by police for doing nothing at all.

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

I understand people who take oppression seriously because they can end up going to jail (or being shot by police) simply for waiting for a friend at a Starbucks, or cooking at the grill in a public park, or doing their job at their place of work, or asking directions from someone, or just opening their front door.

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

I understand people who take oppression seriously because they can't get promoted because of their gender, or get sexually harassed because, as Trump Jr put it so very clearly, if you can't stand being sexually harassed in the workplace, you should stay at home.  Or they have to learn at age 10 to go to the bathroom in groups so they won't get groped by some guy while they are away from their friends.  (You did know that's why girls do that?)   As one coworker put it, again so very clearly, when I brought up Trump's video self-confession to being a serial sexual assaulter, "Why should I care?  It's not like it's bad for the economy!"


Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.


What I can't get is people who have no damn empathy for folks in that situation and can't be bothered to give a damn about the injustice of it.  Because, after all, it's not affecting them, so why should they care?
This is a beautiful post. If it isn't there yet, I'm going to post it to the Best Thing... thread.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2018, 03:33:06 PM by Dicey »

ChpBstrd

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1037
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #401 on: June 04, 2018, 03:31:23 PM »
How many of you who believe the left lane (in the U.S. not the autobahn) is for passing only have explained to a police officer that there is actually no speed limit in the left lane because that lane is for passing all those cars doing the speed limit? How did it go?

I was given a warning for driving (not speeding) exclusively in the left lane on the interstate in the US.  Pulled over and the cop told me I could not drive in the left lane only because it was only to be used for passing.

If I was getting a warning, I'd probably keep my smart mouth shut too. But still I wonder what the cop would have answered if you had asked him what the speed limit is in the left lane, or why there is no minimum speed posted on a per lane basis.

Nobody here is literally arguing that there is no speed limit in the left lane...I mean that's nonsense.  Of course there's a speed limit.

What is the speed limit in the left lane then? Suppose for the sake of example the sign says the speed limit is 65 mph.

DreamFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1090
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #402 on: June 04, 2018, 03:46:02 PM »
I don't get people that take politics super-seriously or choose their friends based on politics.

I also don't understand how some people seem to agree with every position those on their "side" take.

I agree with both of the above points.  I also don't get the people that can't get over their candidate losing and continuously whine about it.

ixtap

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1001
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #403 on: June 04, 2018, 03:58:11 PM »
I don't get people that take politics super-seriously or choose their friends based on politics.

I also don't understand how some people seem to agree with every position those on their "side" take.

I agree with both of the above points.  I also don't get the people that can't get over their candidate losing and continuously whine about it.

I don't get people who continue to complain about the losing candidate years after the election

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5574
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #404 on: June 04, 2018, 04:51:30 PM »
How many of you who believe the left lane (in the U.S. not the autobahn) is for passing only have explained to a police officer that there is actually no speed limit in the left lane because that lane is for passing all those cars doing the speed limit? How did it go?

I was given a warning for driving (not speeding) exclusively in the left lane on the interstate in the US.  Pulled over and the cop told me I could not drive in the left lane only because it was only to be used for passing.

If I was getting a warning, I'd probably keep my smart mouth shut too. But still I wonder what the cop would have answered if you had asked him what the speed limit is in the left lane, or why there is no minimum speed posted on a per lane basis.

Nobody here is literally arguing that there is no speed limit in the left lane...I mean that's nonsense.  Of course there's a speed limit.

What is the speed limit in the left lane then? Suppose for the sake of example the sign says the speed limit is 65 mph.
In California there are multiple laws governing the speed of traffic.

Yes, the speed limit on our local highway is 65 mph.

However, there is also a law that you are not to impede traffic.  Meaning, if the speed of the rest of traffic is 72 mph, and you are going 65 mph, you can get a ticket for driving less than the prevailing speed in the left lane.

https://jalopnik.com/5501615/left-lane-passing-laws-a-state-by-state-map

Adam Zapple

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 204
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #405 on: June 04, 2018, 06:01:52 PM »
I don't get people that take politics super-seriously or choose their friends based on politics.

I understand people who take police brutality seriously because they are far more likely to be shot by police for doing nothing at all.

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

I understand people who take oppression seriously because they can end up going to jail (or being shot by police) simply for waiting for a friend at a Starbucks, or cooking at the grill in a public park, or doing their job at their place of work, or asking directions from someone, or just opening their front door.

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

I understand people who take oppression seriously because they can't get promoted because of their gender, or get sexually harassed because, as Trump Jr put it so very clearly, if you can't stand being sexually harassed in the workplace, you should stay at home.  Or they have to learn at age 10 to go to the bathroom in groups so they won't get groped by some guy while they are away from their friends.  (You did know that's why girls do that?)   As one coworker put it, again so very clearly, when I brought up Trump's video self-confession to being a serial sexual assaulter, "Why should I care?  It's not like it's bad for the economy!"


Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.


What I can't get is people who have no damn empathy for folks in that situation and can't be bothered to give a damn about the injustice of it.  Because, after all, it's not affecting them, so why should they care?
This is a beautiful post. If it isn't there yet, I'm going to post it to the Best Thing... thread.

One person's beautiful is another person's ridiculous

Dicey

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8030
  • Age: 60
  • Location: NorCal
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #406 on: June 04, 2018, 06:21:41 PM »
I don't get people that take politics super-seriously or choose their friends based on politics.

I understand people who take police brutality seriously because they are far more likely to be shot by police for doing nothing at all.

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

I understand people who take oppression seriously because they can end up going to jail (or being shot by police) simply for waiting for a friend at a Starbucks, or cooking at the grill in a public park, or doing their job at their place of work, or asking directions from someone, or just opening their front door.

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

I understand people who take oppression seriously because they can't get promoted because of their gender, or get sexually harassed because, as Trump Jr put it so very clearly, if you can't stand being sexually harassed in the workplace, you should stay at home.  Or they have to learn at age 10 to go to the bathroom in groups so they won't get groped by some guy while they are away from their friends.  (You did know that's why girls do that?)   As one coworker put it, again so very clearly, when I brought up Trump's video self-confession to being a serial sexual assaulter, "Why should I care?  It's not like it's bad for the economy!"


Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.


What I can't get is people who have no damn empathy for folks in that situation and can't be bothered to give a damn about the injustice of it.  Because, after all, it's not affecting them, so why should they care?
This is a beautiful post. If it isn't there yet, I'm going to post it to the Best Thing... thread.

One person's beautiful is another person's ridiculous
If lack of empathy is the requirement to join your club, AZ, I think I'll pass.

calimom

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 680
  • Location: Northern California
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #407 on: June 04, 2018, 06:41:37 PM »
I don't get picking and choosing who you wish to provide services for in a public accommodation business. Say, for example, the cake baker in Colorado who refused to make a wedding cake for a couple celebrating a same sex marriage.

And I don't get the Supreme Court for thinking that's fully acceptable.

I don't get why we don't have an Equal Rights Amendment that ensures full parity to all citizens.

DreamFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1090
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #408 on: June 04, 2018, 08:03:49 PM »
I don't get picking and choosing who you wish to provide services for in a public accommodation business. Say, for example, the cake baker in Colorado who refused to make a wedding cake for a couple celebrating a same sex marriage.

And I don't get the Supreme Court for thinking that's fully acceptable.

Actually, I get that.  And the majority of SCOTUS gets it, too.  The cake maker has his own rights as well.

nessness

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 232
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #409 on: June 04, 2018, 09:25:07 PM »
I don't get people that take politics super-seriously or choose their friends based on politics.

I understand people who take police brutality seriously because they are far more likely to be shot by police for doing nothing at all.

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

I understand people who take oppression seriously because they can end up going to jail (or being shot by police) simply for waiting for a friend at a Starbucks, or cooking at the grill in a public park, or doing their job at their place of work, or asking directions from someone, or just opening their front door.

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

I understand people who take oppression seriously because they can't get promoted because of their gender, or get sexually harassed because, as Trump Jr put it so very clearly, if you can't stand being sexually harassed in the workplace, you should stay at home.  Or they have to learn at age 10 to go to the bathroom in groups so they won't get groped by some guy while they are away from their friends.  (You did know that's why girls do that?)   As one coworker put it, again so very clearly, when I brought up Trump's video self-confession to being a serial sexual assaulter, "Why should I care?  It's not like it's bad for the economy!"


Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.


What I can't get is people who have no damn empathy for folks in that situation and can't be bothered to give a damn about the injustice of it.  Because, after all, it's not affecting them, so why should they care?
Thank you for this. I can't imagine the amount of willful ignorance it must take to say "it's just politics!" in this day and age.

NorCal

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 588
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #410 on: June 04, 2018, 09:35:59 PM »
I don't get people that take politics super-seriously or choose their friends based on politics.

I understand people who take police brutality seriously because they are far more likely to be shot by police for doing nothing at all.

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

I understand people who take oppression seriously because they can end up going to jail (or being shot by police) simply for waiting for a friend at a Starbucks, or cooking at the grill in a public park, or doing their job at their place of work, or asking directions from someone, or just opening their front door.

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

I understand people who take oppression seriously because they can't get promoted because of their gender, or get sexually harassed because, as Trump Jr put it so very clearly, if you can't stand being sexually harassed in the workplace, you should stay at home.  Or they have to learn at age 10 to go to the bathroom in groups so they won't get groped by some guy while they are away from their friends.  (You did know that's why girls do that?)   As one coworker put it, again so very clearly, when I brought up Trump's video self-confession to being a serial sexual assaulter, "Why should I care?  It's not like it's bad for the economy!"


Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.


What I can't get is people who have no damn empathy for folks in that situation and can't be bothered to give a damn about the injustice of it.  Because, after all, it's not affecting them, so why should they care?
Thank you for this. I can't imagine the amount of willful ignorance it must take to say "it's just politics!" in this day and age.

Yep, I still don't get it.  My reaction to over-dramatized politics is a big eye-roll.

No disrespect to you personally.  I just don't understand the mentality.

Also, if you MUST MUST MUST respond with political opinions, can you please start another thread? 

mak1277

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #411 on: June 05, 2018, 06:26:57 AM »
How many of you who believe the left lane (in the U.S. not the autobahn) is for passing only have explained to a police officer that there is actually no speed limit in the left lane because that lane is for passing all those cars doing the speed limit? How did it go?

I was given a warning for driving (not speeding) exclusively in the left lane on the interstate in the US.  Pulled over and the cop told me I could not drive in the left lane only because it was only to be used for passing.

If I was getting a warning, I'd probably keep my smart mouth shut too. But still I wonder what the cop would have answered if you had asked him what the speed limit is in the left lane, or why there is no minimum speed posted on a per lane basis.

Nobody here is literally arguing that there is no speed limit in the left lane...I mean that's nonsense.  Of course there's a speed limit.

What is the speed limit in the left lane then? Suppose for the sake of example the sign says the speed limit is 65 mph.

Technically or practically?

Technically the speed limit is whatever is posted, regardless of lane.

Practically, I don't think anyone is getting pulled over if they're within 5-7 mph of the posted limit.

dignam

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 121
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #412 on: June 05, 2018, 06:40:46 AM »
How many of you who believe the left lane (in the U.S. not the autobahn) is for passing only have explained to a police officer that there is actually no speed limit in the left lane because that lane is for passing all those cars doing the speed limit? How did it go?

I was given a warning for driving (not speeding) exclusively in the left lane on the interstate in the US.  Pulled over and the cop told me I could not drive in the left lane only because it was only to be used for passing.

If I was getting a warning, I'd probably keep my smart mouth shut too. But still I wonder what the cop would have answered if you had asked him what the speed limit is in the left lane, or why there is no minimum speed posted on a per lane basis.

Nobody here is literally arguing that there is no speed limit in the left lane...I mean that's nonsense.  Of course there's a speed limit.

What is the speed limit in the left lane then? Suppose for the sake of example the sign says the speed limit is 65 mph.

Technically or practically?

Technically the speed limit is whatever is posted, regardless of lane.

Practically, I don't think anyone is getting pulled over if they're within 5-7 mph of the posted limit.

This.  Most cops (emphasis most) care about overall safety vs. strictly enforcing posted limits.  At the end of the day, it's about safety anyway. 

We need more cops like this guy (try to ignore the obnoxious talking):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZhdvl_P1Zc

Adam Zapple

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 204
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #413 on: June 05, 2018, 06:58:59 AM »
I don't get people that take politics super-seriously or choose their friends based on politics.

I understand people who take police brutality seriously because they are far more likely to be shot by police for doing nothing at all.

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

I understand people who take oppression seriously because they can end up going to jail (or being shot by police) simply for waiting for a friend at a Starbucks, or cooking at the grill in a public park, or doing their job at their place of work, or asking directions from someone, or just opening their front door.

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

I understand people who take oppression seriously because they can't get promoted because of their gender, or get sexually harassed because, as Trump Jr put it so very clearly, if you can't stand being sexually harassed in the workplace, you should stay at home.  Or they have to learn at age 10 to go to the bathroom in groups so they won't get groped by some guy while they are away from their friends.  (You did know that's why girls do that?)   As one coworker put it, again so very clearly, when I brought up Trump's video self-confession to being a serial sexual assaulter, "Why should I care?  It's not like it's bad for the economy!"


Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.


What I can't get is people who have no damn empathy for folks in that situation and can't be bothered to give a damn about the injustice of it.  Because, after all, it's not affecting them, so why should they care?
Thank you for this. I can't imagine the amount of willful ignorance it must take to say "it's just politics!" in this day and age.

Yep, I still don't get it.  My reaction to over-dramatized politics is a big eye-roll.

No disrespect to you personally.  I just don't understand the mentality.

Also, if you MUST MUST MUST respond with political opinions, can you please start another thread?

I completely agree.  I couldn't imagine a life of sitting around and waiting for the television to tell me what I should be mad about. 

SwordGuy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4188
  • Location: Fayetteville, NC
    • Flipping Fayetteville
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #414 on: June 05, 2018, 07:04:48 AM »
I don't get people that take politics super-seriously or choose their friends based on politics.

I understand people who take police brutality seriously because they are far more likely to be shot by police for doing nothing at all.

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

I understand people who take oppression seriously because they can end up going to jail (or being shot by police) simply for waiting for a friend at a Starbucks, or cooking at the grill in a public park, or doing their job at their place of work, or asking directions from someone, or just opening their front door.

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

I understand people who take oppression seriously because they can't get promoted because of their gender, or get sexually harassed because, as Trump Jr put it so very clearly, if you can't stand being sexually harassed in the workplace, you should stay at home.  Or they have to learn at age 10 to go to the bathroom in groups so they won't get groped by some guy while they are away from their friends.  (You did know that's why girls do that?)   As one coworker put it, again so very clearly, when I brought up Trump's video self-confession to being a serial sexual assaulter, "Why should I care?  It's not like it's bad for the economy!"


Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.


What I can't get is people who have no damn empathy for folks in that situation and can't be bothered to give a damn about the injustice of it.  Because, after all, it's not affecting them, so why should they care?
Thank you for this. I can't imagine the amount of willful ignorance it must take to say "it's just politics!" in this day and age.

Yep, I still don't get it.  My reaction to over-dramatized politics is a big eye-roll.

No disrespect to you personally.  I just don't understand the mentality.

Also, if you MUST MUST MUST respond with political opinions, can you please start another thread?

It's a ranting thread.

We're ranting because that's what this thread is about.

People who want to stay in their little bubble of privileged ignorance will have to find some other way to do so.   

I sure as hell have zero intention of making that easier for them.

I've watched video of an unarmed black man get shot by police.  The unarmed black man was lying on the street on his back in broad daylight with his empty hands in the air.   Lying on the street -- on his back -- in broad daylight -- with his empty hands in the air.   He was next to an autistic boy who had run away from his group home.  They boy was sitting on the road playing with a toy truck.    The police were concerned that the boy had a gun.

The black man explained to the cops -- you can hear it on the video -- that he worked in a group home and that the boy was autistic, the boy was NOT armed, the boy had a toy truck.  Other witnesses told the police it was a toy truck.

So, because the white autistic boy might have a gun, the police shot the black guy.   Because, well, tradition!

And the police authorities then said the police officer that shot the black man did nothing wrong.   Because, well, tradition!

Now, the police union representative came flat out and said that the black man was completely in the right, that he had correctly done everything that one could expect anyone to do.   When your union representative throws you under the bus like that it's time to recognize you screwed up.

It took a couple of years before it worked its way thru the courts and the police officer got in trouble.

Look it up for yourself.  Charles Kinsey.  You can find videos of the situation on youtube.   You can find newspaper accounts of the trial.

But what if there had been no video?

It would have been covered up, just like it's been covered up by countless cops and local governments for over a hundred years.   

Some police officer shooting a black man because, well, why not?    I think that police officer "over dramatized" the situation, not the folks who are mad as hell about it.

So, what am I ranting about?

People who are so willfully ignorant and so self-absorbed in their own privileged space that they don't give a damn about life and death injustices around them.   

That's my rant for the morning.



SwordGuy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4188
  • Location: Fayetteville, NC
    • Flipping Fayetteville
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #415 on: June 05, 2018, 07:29:28 AM »

The same jackass at work who made the comment about Trump's video self-confession of being a serial sexual assaulter, "Why should I care? It's not like it's bad for the economy!"  was always bitching about black NFL players quietly kneeling in protest during the national anthem.

I always wondered why he cared so much.  After all, it wasn't bad for the economy, so why should he care?

Always wondered why uppitty black men bothered him more than women getting sexually assaulted.   

I think he -- and a veritable shit-ton of others -- have their priorities bass-ackwards.

I wonder if he would change his tune if someone sexually assaulted his wife or daughters?    I wonder if he could actually manage to find some empathy for folks in that situation then?   Or if he would continue to focus on uppity black men quietly kneeling as something to get more upset about?

I thought it was a shame that his wife and daughters didn't come to the company picnic that summer.  I was going to ask them if they thought it was ok for men to sexually assault women as long as it didn't hurt the economy.    I was curious to see if their empathy-meter was stuck on zero as well, or whether self-interest might have unstuck it.   

I would have been relatively nice about it.  I wouldn't have directly quoted their husband / father by name.  But I would definitely have let him squirm a bit, wondering if I would do so.   Who knows, might have awakened in him a sudden burst of empathy for folks on the shit end of other people's actions.

Or not.

Personally, I think that would have been some awesome political drama.   FU money is a useful thing in many ways.






Imma

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1067
  • Location: Europe
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #416 on: June 05, 2018, 07:44:41 AM »
I don't get picking and choosing who you wish to provide services for in a public accommodation business. Say, for example, the cake baker in Colorado who refused to make a wedding cake for a couple celebrating a same sex marriage.

And I don't get the Supreme Court for thinking that's fully acceptable.

Actually, I get that.  And the majority of SCOTUS gets it, too.  The cake maker has his own rights as well.

So, if you can refuse to serve gay customers, can you also put up a sign saying 'whites only' or 'no irish need apply?'. If the baker had been a white supremacist, should they be allowed to refuse black customers? If the baker was a Protestant, should they be allowed to refuse a First Communion cake? After all, bakers have rights, too. ( full disclosure: I have a degree in law and constitutional law was always my favourite subject, but I know very little about the US Constitution. In my country horizontal effects of fundamental rights is not a topic that has been explored much, but I think it's very interesting).

I just looked up that Charles Kinsey case and it's one of the saddest things I've read in quite a while :( That guy did absolutely everything right. He was lying on the floor, hands in the air, fully cooperating with officers and in constant communication with the officers, explaining the situation, trying to save his patient. The officer who shot him can't even explain why he did it and is apparantly still employed, although he's finally facing criminal charges now.

Dicey

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8030
  • Age: 60
  • Location: NorCal
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #417 on: June 05, 2018, 07:49:48 AM »
I don't get people that take politics super-seriously or choose their friends based on politics.

I understand people who take police brutality seriously because they are far more likely to be shot by police for doing nothing at all.

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

I understand people who take oppression seriously because they can end up going to jail (or being shot by police) simply for waiting for a friend at a Starbucks, or cooking at the grill in a public park, or doing their job at their place of work, or asking directions from someone, or just opening their front door.

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

I understand people who take oppression seriously because they can't get promoted because of their gender, or get sexually harassed because, as Trump Jr put it so very clearly, if you can't stand being sexually harassed in the workplace, you should stay at home.  Or they have to learn at age 10 to go to the bathroom in groups so they won't get groped by some guy while they are away from their friends.  (You did know that's why girls do that?)   As one coworker put it, again so very clearly, when I brought up Trump's video self-confession to being a serial sexual assaulter, "Why should I care?  It's not like it's bad for the economy!"

Maybe your demographic doesn't have that problem.

What I can't get is people who have no damn empathy for folks in that situation and can't be bothered to give a damn about the injustice of it.  Because, after all, it's not affecting them, so why should they care?
Thank you for this. I can't imagine the amount of willful ignorance it must take to say "it's just politics!" in this day and age.

Yep, I still don't get it.  My reaction to over-dramatized politics is a big eye-roll.

No disrespect to you personally.  I just don't understand the mentality.

Also, if you MUST MUST MUST respond with political opinions, can you please start another thread?
This is a RANT thread. Why the hell does anyone think police brutality and gender inequality can be characterized as "over-dramatized politics" or "poltical opinions"? Do you give a flying fuck what is happening to other human beings or does it not matter because it's not you don't see it happening in your own personal bubble? These are a human rights/dignity issues, not politics. FUCK!

ETA: I see I've basically said what SwordGuy said, but far less eloquently. I'm going to let my comments stand, because there cannot be too few voices of reason in the room. Reading his post about just that one of countless shootings makes me sick to my stomach.

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3128
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #418 on: June 05, 2018, 07:58:12 AM »

So, if you can refuse to serve gay customers, can you also put up a sign saying 'whites only' or 'no irish need apply?'. If the baker had been a white supremacist, should they be allowed to refuse black customers? If the baker was a Protestant, should they be allowed to refuse a First Communion cake? After all, bakers have rights, too. ( full disclosure: I have a degree in law and constitutional law was always my favourite subject, but I know very little about the US Constitution. In my country horizontal effects of fundamental rights is not a topic that has been explored much, but I think it's very interesting).

The bolded is not what happened.  He did not refuse to serve gay customers, he said he'd happily make them a birthday cake, but he didn't want to make them a wedding cake because he didn't believe in gay marriage.  It's like, I dunno, demanding that your local Jewish deli make you a Christmas something or other. 

Is the baker an asshole?  Probably.  But should he be compelled to make something he doesn't want to make?  I don't think so, and neither does SCOTUS. 

ormaybemidgets

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #419 on: June 05, 2018, 08:01:06 AM »
I don't get picking and choosing who you wish to provide services for in a public accommodation business. Say, for example, the cake baker in Colorado who refused to make a wedding cake for a couple celebrating a same sex marriage.

And I don't get the Supreme Court for thinking that's fully acceptable.

Actually, I get that.  And the majority of SCOTUS gets it, too.  The cake maker has his own rights as well.

So, if you can refuse to serve gay customers, can you also put up a sign saying 'whites only' or 'no irish need apply?'. If the baker had been a white supremacist, should they be allowed to refuse black customers? If the baker was a Protestant, should they be allowed to refuse a First Communion cake? After all, bakers have rights, too. ( full disclosure: I have a degree in law and constitutional law was always my favourite subject, but I know very little about the US Constitution. In my country horizontal effects of fundamental rights is not a topic that has been explored much, but I think it's very interesting).

No, the SCOTUS decision was based on the lower court (actually, Civil Rights Commission) being inappropriate: [the cake maker] “was entitled to a neutral decisionmaker who would give full and fair consideration to his religious objection as he sought to assert it in all of the circumstances in which this case was presented, considered, and decided.” Because he did not have such a proceeding, the commission’s order “must be set aside.”

That's my rant. SCOTUS does not do any of the things people generally accuse it of - the court did NOT say that the cake maker was reasonable, the court did NOT say that the cake maker had his own rights so they trump or are equal to others' rights, the court did NOT say that a cake baker can't be "compelled" (Chris22's word) to make this cake. The court said that prior proceedings should have been held fairly. You might take from that opinion that the court is "for" cake bakers who refuse to make cakes for gay couples, but that is not what the court said. The court is not for or against anything. In fact, they specifically said that without a "hostile" prior proceeding, a case like this would not have come out the same way. And let's not forget, when all this happened same-sex marriage was not legal in Colorado, and Colorado had other laws that allowed service providers to deny other kinds of requested services. You cannot boil down an opinion to a pithy one-liner.

Adam Zapple

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 204
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #420 on: June 05, 2018, 08:05:56 AM »
Internet ranting or water-cooler chat does not make someone any more empathetic than someone who does nothing, nor does it accomplish anything.  I don't want to speak for @NorCal but I assume that is their point.

TheAnonOne

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1381
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #421 on: June 05, 2018, 08:15:34 AM »
Back on the speed limit topics, I don't actually understand speed limits on freeways AT ALL.

Speed limits on freeways are ultimately pointless.

A. When there is traffic, noone is going the speed limit.
B. When the road is open, everyone is speeding.

It is a law that is basically followed 0% of the time. Roads should maybe have a variable limit, if its sunny and clear the limit should be very high, maybe 90 to 110 MPH.

If the road is wet, maybe much lower 65MPH, or if it's dark it could be 55MPH.


Set speed limits on freeways are pointless, and limits are WAAYYYY too low for good conditions.



NOTE1: (I know I started this off saying limits are pointless, and then advocated for variable limits, I do see a benefit in getting all cars going one speed, though, I would argue that probably happens on it's own anyway)

NOTE2: (I swear I saw data showing that the actual speed traveling basically had 0 effect on accident rates, I will try to find this. *FOLLOWUP* Jury seems to be semi-out on this topic, seems like the number does not increase but crashes are higher speeds are worse, which seems obvious)
« Last Edit: June 05, 2018, 08:23:33 AM by TheAnonOne »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11308
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #422 on: June 05, 2018, 08:29:59 AM »

So, if you can refuse to serve gay customers, can you also put up a sign saying 'whites only' or 'no irish need apply?'. If the baker had been a white supremacist, should they be allowed to refuse black customers? If the baker was a Protestant, should they be allowed to refuse a First Communion cake? After all, bakers have rights, too. ( full disclosure: I have a degree in law and constitutional law was always my favourite subject, but I know very little about the US Constitution. In my country horizontal effects of fundamental rights is not a topic that has been explored much, but I think it's very interesting).

The bolded is not what happened.  He did not refuse to serve gay customers, he said he'd happily make them a birthday cake, but he didn't want to make them a wedding cake because he didn't believe in gay marriage.  It's like, I dunno, demanding that your local Jewish deli make you a Christmas something or other.

No, your example is poor.  It's not like asking a Jewish deli to make something that they don't already make.  If the Jewish deli made pastrami sandwiches and pickles, and refused to serve pastrami to anyone who wasn't Jewish (but will serve the goy's pickles) . . . that would be a closer example.

The baker makes wedding cakes, he just refuses to make wedding cakes for a class of people he is prejudiced against.

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3128
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #423 on: June 05, 2018, 08:32:40 AM »
Back on the speed limit topics, I don't actually understand speed limits on freeways AT ALL.

Speed limits on freeways are ultimately pointless.

A. When there is traffic, noone is going the speed limit.
B. When the road is open, everyone is speeding.

It is a law that is basically followed 0% of the time. Roads should maybe have a variable limit, if its sunny and clear the limit should be very high, maybe 90 to 110 MPH.

If the road is wet, maybe much lower 65MPH, or if it's dark it could be 55MPH.


Set speed limits on freeways are pointless, and limits are WAAYYYY too low for good conditions.



NOTE1: (I know I started this off saying limits are pointless, and then advocated for variable limits, I do see a benefit in getting all cars going one speed, though, I would argue that probably happens on it's own anyway)

NOTE2: (I swear I saw data showing that the actual speed traveling basically had 0 effect on accident rates, I will try to find this. *FOLLOWUP* Jury seems to be semi-out on this topic, seems like the number does not increase but crashes are higher speeds are worse, which seems obvious)

Speed limits basically serve three purposes: 1) cash grab by municipalities to tax behavior people are going to do anyways, 2) serve as a way for cops to pull people over whenever they want (manufactured probable cause) and 3) kowtowing to the insurance industry who want the ability to penalize people who get speeding tickets with higher premiums.

What is actually dangerous on highways is not absolute speed, it's speed differentials.  If you make the speed limit 80 and everyone goes 80 +/-, it's safer than making the speed like 55 and half the people go 80, 45% go 70, and 5% follow the 55 limit.  THAT is dangerous. 

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3128
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #424 on: June 05, 2018, 08:33:44 AM »

So, if you can refuse to serve gay customers, can you also put up a sign saying 'whites only' or 'no irish need apply?'. If the baker had been a white supremacist, should they be allowed to refuse black customers? If the baker was a Protestant, should they be allowed to refuse a First Communion cake? After all, bakers have rights, too. ( full disclosure: I have a degree in law and constitutional law was always my favourite subject, but I know very little about the US Constitution. In my country horizontal effects of fundamental rights is not a topic that has been explored much, but I think it's very interesting).

The bolded is not what happened.  He did not refuse to serve gay customers, he said he'd happily make them a birthday cake, but he didn't want to make them a wedding cake because he didn't believe in gay marriage.  It's like, I dunno, demanding that your local Jewish deli make you a Christmas something or other.

No, your example is poor.  It's not like asking a Jewish deli to make something that they don't already make.  If the Jewish deli made pastrami sandwiches and pickles, and refused to serve pastrami to anyone who wasn't Jewish (but will serve the goy's pickles) . . . that would be a closer example.

The baker makes wedding cakes, he just refuses to make wedding cakes for a class of people he is prejudiced against.

It depends on whether or not you believe there is a difference between "wedding cakes" and "gay wedding cakes".  I don't know the answer to that.  But the baker doesn't make "gay wedding cakes" for anyone, whether they are gay or straight. 

GreenEggs

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 421
  • Location: Here & There
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #425 on: June 05, 2018, 08:40:34 AM »
I'd have thought that it would be easy to find gay bakers. 

GreenEggs

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 421
  • Location: Here & There
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #426 on: June 05, 2018, 08:43:14 AM »
I'd like to see variable speed limits, depending on how you score on the driving test.  ;)

Low scoring crappy drivers should be banned from the passing lane. 

Jouer

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 307
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #427 on: June 05, 2018, 09:02:37 AM »

So, if you can refuse to serve gay customers, can you also put up a sign saying 'whites only' or 'no irish need apply?'. If the baker had been a white supremacist, should they be allowed to refuse black customers? If the baker was a Protestant, should they be allowed to refuse a First Communion cake? After all, bakers have rights, too. ( full disclosure: I have a degree in law and constitutional law was always my favourite subject, but I know very little about the US Constitution. In my country horizontal effects of fundamental rights is not a topic that has been explored much, but I think it's very interesting).

The bolded is not what happened.  He did not refuse to serve gay customers, he said he'd happily make them a birthday cake, but he didn't want to make them a wedding cake because he didn't believe in gay marriage.  It's like, I dunno, demanding that your local Jewish deli make you a Christmas something or other.

No, your example is poor.  It's not like asking a Jewish deli to make something that they don't already make.  If the Jewish deli made pastrami sandwiches and pickles, and refused to serve pastrami to anyone who wasn't Jewish (but will serve the goy's pickles) . . . that would be a closer example.

The baker makes wedding cakes, he just refuses to make wedding cakes for a class of people he is prejudiced against.

It depends on whether or not you believe there is a difference between "wedding cakes" and "gay wedding cakes".  I don't know the answer to that.  But the baker doesn't make "gay wedding cakes" for anyone, whether they are gay or straight.


Under true equal rights, a wedding cake is a wedding cake. If we (well, you) are still seeing straight wedding cakes and gay wedding cakes, there is not true equal rights.

And don't give me any constitution bullshit talk here. I'm going beyond the bare minimum and talking about people stopping being assholes to other demographics because they do not "like their kind".

And yes there is a difference between doing this to a gay person and a white supremist. The white supremist wants to keep another group down while the gay person just wants to get a fucking cake to celebrate the love between themselves and a another human being.

sherr

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 509
  • Age: 33
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #428 on: June 05, 2018, 09:05:19 AM »
It depends on whether or not you believe there is a difference between "wedding cakes" and "gay wedding cakes".  I don't know the answer to that.  But the baker doesn't make "gay wedding cakes" for anyone, whether they are gay or straight.

For what it's worth that's what Gorsuch argued (and Thomas agreed with); that the object of disagreement is a "gay wedding cake" and the baker has a right to refuse to make "gay wedding cakes". Pretty much all the other justices disagree here and say that the object was a "wedding cake" and that gay people have the right to not be discriminated against under Colorado law, but enough other judges agreed that the baker was treated unfairly by the Civil Rights Commission to find for him in this specific case.

If you actually bother to read the opinions, which people should because they are written in easy-to-follow English (even if longwinded), it seems likely that the line that will be drawn in the future general case is that you have to make a cake but you don't have to write any specific messages on it that you disagree with. Which seems entirely reasonable to me. Note that in this case there was no request to write any message.
« Last Edit: June 05, 2018, 09:07:55 AM by sherr »

mak1277

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #429 on: June 05, 2018, 09:07:14 AM »

So, if you can refuse to serve gay customers, can you also put up a sign saying 'whites only' or 'no irish need apply?'. If the baker had been a white supremacist, should they be allowed to refuse black customers? If the baker was a Protestant, should they be allowed to refuse a First Communion cake? After all, bakers have rights, too. ( full disclosure: I have a degree in law and constitutional law was always my favourite subject, but I know very little about the US Constitution. In my country horizontal effects of fundamental rights is not a topic that has been explored much, but I think it's very interesting).

The bolded is not what happened.  He did not refuse to serve gay customers, he said he'd happily make them a birthday cake, but he didn't want to make them a wedding cake because he didn't believe in gay marriage.  It's like, I dunno, demanding that your local Jewish deli make you a Christmas something or other.

No, your example is poor.  It's not like asking a Jewish deli to make something that they don't already make.  If the Jewish deli made pastrami sandwiches and pickles, and refused to serve pastrami to anyone who wasn't Jewish (but will serve the goy's pickles) . . . that would be a closer example.

The baker makes wedding cakes, he just refuses to make wedding cakes for a class of people he is prejudiced against.

It depends on whether or not you believe there is a difference between "wedding cakes" and "gay wedding cakes".  I don't know the answer to that.  But the baker doesn't make "gay wedding cakes" for anyone, whether they are gay or straight.


Under true equal rights, a wedding cake is a wedding cake. If we (well, you) are still seeing straight wedding cakes and gay wedding cakes, there is not true equal rights.

And don't give me any constitution bullshit talk here. I'm going beyond the bare minimum and talking about people stopping being assholes to other demographics because they do not "like their kind".

And yes there is a difference between doing this to a gay person and a white supremist. The white supremist wants to keep another group down while the gay person just wants to get a fucking cake to celebrate the love between themselves and a another human being.

So where do you draw the line at allowing free expression of religious beliefs?  Can a fundamental Christian pastor refuse to marry a gay couple? 

sherr

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 509
  • Age: 33
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #430 on: June 05, 2018, 09:09:29 AM »
So where do you draw the line at allowing free expression of religious beliefs?  Can a fundamental Christian pastor refuse to marry a gay couple?

Yes, pastors and religious organizations in general are always given special deference to practice their religion the way they see fit as long as they're not sacrificing virgins or something. Bakeries are not religious organizations.

PoutineLover

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 794
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #431 on: June 05, 2018, 09:10:33 AM »

So, if you can refuse to serve gay customers, can you also put up a sign saying 'whites only' or 'no irish need apply?'. If the baker had been a white supremacist, should they be allowed to refuse black customers? If the baker was a Protestant, should they be allowed to refuse a First Communion cake? After all, bakers have rights, too. ( full disclosure: I have a degree in law and constitutional law was always my favourite subject, but I know very little about the US Constitution. In my country horizontal effects of fundamental rights is not a topic that has been explored much, but I think it's very interesting).

The bolded is not what happened.  He did not refuse to serve gay customers, he said he'd happily make them a birthday cake, but he didn't want to make them a wedding cake because he didn't believe in gay marriage.  It's like, I dunno, demanding that your local Jewish deli make you a Christmas something or other.

No, your example is poor.  It's not like asking a Jewish deli to make something that they don't already make.  If the Jewish deli made pastrami sandwiches and pickles, and refused to serve pastrami to anyone who wasn't Jewish (but will serve the goy's pickles) . . . that would be a closer example.

The baker makes wedding cakes, he just refuses to make wedding cakes for a class of people he is prejudiced against.

It depends on whether or not you believe there is a difference between "wedding cakes" and "gay wedding cakes".  I don't know the answer to that.  But the baker doesn't make "gay wedding cakes" for anyone, whether they are gay or straight.
This is why I like to send specific cards to people getting married. How else will we know if it's a wedding or a gay wedding??

OtherJen

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 359
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #432 on: June 05, 2018, 09:11:37 AM »

So, if you can refuse to serve gay customers, can you also put up a sign saying 'whites only' or 'no irish need apply?'. If the baker had been a white supremacist, should they be allowed to refuse black customers? If the baker was a Protestant, should they be allowed to refuse a First Communion cake? After all, bakers have rights, too. ( full disclosure: I have a degree in law and constitutional law was always my favourite subject, but I know very little about the US Constitution. In my country horizontal effects of fundamental rights is not a topic that has been explored much, but I think it's very interesting).

The bolded is not what happened.  He did not refuse to serve gay customers, he said he'd happily make them a birthday cake, but he didn't want to make them a wedding cake because he didn't believe in gay marriage.  It's like, I dunno, demanding that your local Jewish deli make you a Christmas something or other.

No, your example is poor.  It's not like asking a Jewish deli to make something that they don't already make.  If the Jewish deli made pastrami sandwiches and pickles, and refused to serve pastrami to anyone who wasn't Jewish (but will serve the goy's pickles) . . . that would be a closer example.

The baker makes wedding cakes, he just refuses to make wedding cakes for a class of people he is prejudiced against.

It depends on whether or not you believe there is a difference between "wedding cakes" and "gay wedding cakes".  I don't know the answer to that.  But the baker doesn't make "gay wedding cakes" for anyone, whether they are gay or straight.


Under true equal rights, a wedding cake is a wedding cake. If we (well, you) are still seeing straight wedding cakes and gay wedding cakes, there is not true equal rights.

And don't give me any constitution bullshit talk here. I'm going beyond the bare minimum and talking about people stopping being assholes to other demographics because they do not "like their kind".

And yes there is a difference between doing this to a gay person and a white supremist. The white supremist wants to keep another group down while the gay person just wants to get a fucking cake to celebrate the love between themselves and a another human being.

So where do you draw the line at allowing free expression of religious beliefs?  Can a fundamental Christian pastor refuse to marry a gay couple?

Not an equivalent comparison (see Sherr’s response). Rather, can an Evangelical Christian physician refuse to treat a Catholic or Muslim patient?

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3128
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #433 on: June 05, 2018, 09:16:34 AM »
Under true equal rights, a wedding cake is a wedding cake. If we (well, you) are still seeing straight wedding cakes and gay wedding cakes, there is not true equal rights.

And don't give me any constitution bullshit talk here. I'm going beyond the bare minimum and talking about people stopping being assholes to other demographics because they do not "like their kind".

And yes there is a difference between doing this to a gay person and a white supremist. The white supremist wants to keep another group down while the gay person just wants to get a fucking cake to celebrate the love between themselves and a another human being.

So don't give you any legal facts, just let you rant on and feel the way you want to feel.  Got it.

You'll note that in my original post on this topic, I called the baker an asshole.  I think he is an asshole.  But there's being an asshole, and not following the law.  They aren't the same. 

mak1277

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #434 on: June 05, 2018, 09:16:38 AM »

So, if you can refuse to serve gay customers, can you also put up a sign saying 'whites only' or 'no irish need apply?'. If the baker had been a white supremacist, should they be allowed to refuse black customers? If the baker was a Protestant, should they be allowed to refuse a First Communion cake? After all, bakers have rights, too. ( full disclosure: I have a degree in law and constitutional law was always my favourite subject, but I know very little about the US Constitution. In my country horizontal effects of fundamental rights is not a topic that has been explored much, but I think it's very interesting).

The bolded is not what happened.  He did not refuse to serve gay customers, he said he'd happily make them a birthday cake, but he didn't want to make them a wedding cake because he didn't believe in gay marriage.  It's like, I dunno, demanding that your local Jewish deli make you a Christmas something or other.

No, your example is poor.  It's not like asking a Jewish deli to make something that they don't already make.  If the Jewish deli made pastrami sandwiches and pickles, and refused to serve pastrami to anyone who wasn't Jewish (but will serve the goy's pickles) . . . that would be a closer example.

The baker makes wedding cakes, he just refuses to make wedding cakes for a class of people he is prejudiced against.

It depends on whether or not you believe there is a difference between "wedding cakes" and "gay wedding cakes".  I don't know the answer to that.  But the baker doesn't make "gay wedding cakes" for anyone, whether they are gay or straight.


Under true equal rights, a wedding cake is a wedding cake. If we (well, you) are still seeing straight wedding cakes and gay wedding cakes, there is not true equal rights.

And don't give me any constitution bullshit talk here. I'm going beyond the bare minimum and talking about people stopping being assholes to other demographics because they do not "like their kind".

And yes there is a difference between doing this to a gay person and a white supremist. The white supremist wants to keep another group down while the gay person just wants to get a fucking cake to celebrate the love between themselves and a another human being.

So where do you draw the line at allowing free expression of religious beliefs?  Can a fundamental Christian pastor refuse to marry a gay couple?

Not an equivalent comparison (see Sherr’s response). Rather, can an Evangelical Christian physician refuse to treat a Catholic or Muslim patient?

I agree with you, but I'm curious if jouer agrees with you, or believes that the pastors should be forced to perform gay weddings.

Jouer

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 307
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #435 on: June 05, 2018, 09:27:45 AM »
Under true equal rights, a wedding cake is a wedding cake. If we (well, you) are still seeing straight wedding cakes and gay wedding cakes, there is not true equal rights.

And don't give me any constitution bullshit talk here. I'm going beyond the bare minimum and talking about people stopping being assholes to other demographics because they do not "like their kind".

And yes there is a difference between doing this to a gay person and a white supremist. The white supremist wants to keep another group down while the gay person just wants to get a fucking cake to celebrate the love between themselves and a another human being.

So don't give you any legal facts, just let you rant on and feel the way you want to feel.  Got it.

You'll note that in my original post on this topic, I called the baker an asshole.  I think he is an asshole.  But there's being an asshole, and not following the law.  They aren't the same.

My point about constitutional bullshit was me saying: if the law is unjust, we must change the law. Arguing what is law or not is moot - we should be arguing about what is just.

I quoted you but I was really talking to everyone.

carolina822

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #436 on: June 05, 2018, 09:27:58 AM »
I don't think anyone (with any sense) believes pastors should be forced to perform gay weddings. They don't have to perform straight weddings of their own faith if they for whatever reason don't feel comfortable joining the couple in matrimony. The judge down at the courthouse does, but pastors can do or not do whatever wedding they want. I'm no fan of religion, but I'm fine with that exemption.

Pharmacists and doctors who push their beliefs on patients can get bent.

Jouer

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 307
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #437 on: June 05, 2018, 09:33:43 AM »

So, if you can refuse to serve gay customers, can you also put up a sign saying 'whites only' or 'no irish need apply?'. If the baker had been a white supremacist, should they be allowed to refuse black customers? If the baker was a Protestant, should they be allowed to refuse a First Communion cake? After all, bakers have rights, too. ( full disclosure: I have a degree in law and constitutional law was always my favourite subject, but I know very little about the US Constitution. In my country horizontal effects of fundamental rights is not a topic that has been explored much, but I think it's very interesting).

The bolded is not what happened.  He did not refuse to serve gay customers, he said he'd happily make them a birthday cake, but he didn't want to make them a wedding cake because he didn't believe in gay marriage.  It's like, I dunno, demanding that your local Jewish deli make you a Christmas something or other.

No, your example is poor.  It's not like asking a Jewish deli to make something that they don't already make.  If the Jewish deli made pastrami sandwiches and pickles, and refused to serve pastrami to anyone who wasn't Jewish (but will serve the goy's pickles) . . . that would be a closer example.

The baker makes wedding cakes, he just refuses to make wedding cakes for a class of people he is prejudiced against.

It depends on whether or not you believe there is a difference between "wedding cakes" and "gay wedding cakes".  I don't know the answer to that.  But the baker doesn't make "gay wedding cakes" for anyone, whether they are gay or straight.


Under true equal rights, a wedding cake is a wedding cake. If we (well, you) are still seeing straight wedding cakes and gay wedding cakes, there is not true equal rights.

And don't give me any constitution bullshit talk here. I'm going beyond the bare minimum and talking about people stopping being assholes to other demographics because they do not "like their kind".

And yes there is a difference between doing this to a gay person and a white supremist. The white supremist wants to keep another group down while the gay person just wants to get a fucking cake to celebrate the love between themselves and a another human being.

So where do you draw the line at allowing free expression of religious beliefs?  Can a fundamental Christian pastor refuse to marry a gay couple?

Not an equivalent comparison (see Sherr’s response). Rather, can an Evangelical Christian physician refuse to treat a Catholic or Muslim patient?

I agree with you, but I'm curious if jouer agrees with you, or believes that the pastors should be forced to perform gay weddings.

Nope, Sherr nailed it. So did OtherJen (I think) who said it wasn't an equivalent comparison.

sherr

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 509
  • Age: 33
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #438 on: June 05, 2018, 09:39:31 AM »
Hooray we all agree! Problem resolved forever!

Sojourner

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 127
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #439 on: June 05, 2018, 10:57:34 AM »
I'd have thought that it would be easy to find gay bakers.

Favorite comment on this sub topic :D

dividend

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 42
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #440 on: June 05, 2018, 11:38:07 AM »

So, if you can refuse to serve gay customers, can you also put up a sign saying 'whites only' or 'no irish need apply?'. If the baker had been a white supremacist, should they be allowed to refuse black customers? If the baker was a Protestant, should they be allowed to refuse a First Communion cake? After all, bakers have rights, too. ( full disclosure: I have a degree in law and constitutional law was always my favourite subject, but I know very little about the US Constitution. In my country horizontal effects of fundamental rights is not a topic that has been explored much, but I think it's very interesting).

The bolded is not what happened.  He did not refuse to serve gay customers, he said he'd happily make them a birthday cake, but he didn't want to make them a wedding cake because he didn't believe in gay marriage.  It's like, I dunno, demanding that your local Jewish deli make you a Christmas something or other.

No, your example is poor.  It's not like asking a Jewish deli to make something that they don't already make.  If the Jewish deli made pastrami sandwiches and pickles, and refused to serve pastrami to anyone who wasn't Jewish (but will serve the goy's pickles) . . . that would be a closer example.

The baker makes wedding cakes, he just refuses to make wedding cakes for a class of people he is prejudiced against.

It depends on whether or not you believe there is a difference between "wedding cakes" and "gay wedding cakes".  I don't know the answer to that.  But the baker doesn't make "gay wedding cakes" for anyone, whether they are gay or straight.


Under true equal rights, a wedding cake is a wedding cake. If we (well, you) are still seeing straight wedding cakes and gay wedding cakes, there is not true equal rights.

And don't give me any constitution bullshit talk here. I'm going beyond the bare minimum and talking about people stopping being assholes to other demographics because they do not "like their kind".

And yes there is a difference between doing this to a gay person and a white supremist. The white supremist wants to keep another group down while the gay person just wants to get a fucking cake to celebrate the love between themselves and a another human being.

So where do you draw the line at allowing free expression of religious beliefs?  Can a fundamental Christian pastor refuse to marry a gay couple?

Not an equivalent comparison (see Sherr’s response). Rather, can an Evangelical Christian physician refuse to treat a Catholic or Muslim patient?

They can certainly refuse to perform abortions.

sherr

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 509
  • Age: 33
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #441 on: June 05, 2018, 11:45:58 AM »
Not an equivalent comparison (see Sherr’s response). Rather, can an Evangelical Christian physician refuse to treat a Catholic or Muslim patient?

They can certainly refuse to perform abortions.

Sure, but they could not choose to perform abortions for straight people and refuse gays (in Colorado). Or white / black. Or Christians / Muslims.

Honestly the fact that no one can come up with a reasonable comparison to defend refusing to bake cakes for a protected class of people should tell you something.

mak1277

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #442 on: June 05, 2018, 11:51:06 AM »
Not an equivalent comparison (see Sherr’s response). Rather, can an Evangelical Christian physician refuse to treat a Catholic or Muslim patient?

They can certainly refuse to perform abortions.

Sure, but they could not choose to perform abortions for straight people and refuse gays (in Colorado). Or white / black. Or Christians / Muslims.

Honestly the fact that no one can come up with a reasonable comparison to defend refusing to bake cakes for a protected class of people should tell you something.

Could a baker refuse to sell a "congrats on your abortion" cake?  Or a "congrats on your divorce" cake?

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11308
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #443 on: June 05, 2018, 11:53:39 AM »
Not an equivalent comparison (see Sherr’s response). Rather, can an Evangelical Christian physician refuse to treat a Catholic or Muslim patient?

They can certainly refuse to perform abortions.

Sure, but they could not choose to perform abortions for straight people and refuse gays (in Colorado). Or white / black. Or Christians / Muslims.

Honestly the fact that no one can come up with a reasonable comparison to defend refusing to bake cakes for a protected class of people should tell you something.

Could a baker refuse to sell a "congrats on your abortion" cake?  Or a "congrats on your divorce" cake?

Sure.

An abortion or divorce are not exclusive to a single protected class of people.

sherr

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 509
  • Age: 33
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #444 on: June 05, 2018, 11:56:25 AM »
Not an equivalent comparison (see Sherr’s response). Rather, can an Evangelical Christian physician refuse to treat a Catholic or Muslim patient?

They can certainly refuse to perform abortions.

Sure, but they could not choose to perform abortions for straight people and refuse gays (in Colorado). Or white / black. Or Christians / Muslims.

Honestly the fact that no one can come up with a reasonable comparison to defend refusing to bake cakes for a protected class of people should tell you something.

Could a baker refuse to sell a "congrats on your abortion" cake?  Or a "congrats on your divorce" cake?

"Probably fine" since those are not protected classes of people. To answer the broader question you're getting at I'll just quote myself:

If you actually bother to read the opinions, which people should because they are written in easy-to-follow English (even if longwinded), it seems likely that the line that will be drawn in the future general case is that you have to make a cake but you don't have to write any specific messages on it that you disagree with. Which seems entirely reasonable to me. Note that in this case there was no request to write any message.

Schaefer Light

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1034
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #445 on: June 05, 2018, 12:09:04 PM »
I don't get the unwritten (or in some cases documented) rule that says a salaried employee has to be in the office from 8-5 every day.

ChpBstrd

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1037
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #446 on: June 05, 2018, 01:08:41 PM »
How many of you who believe the left lane (in the U.S. not the autobahn) is for passing only have explained to a police officer that there is actually no speed limit in the left lane because that lane is for passing all those cars doing the speed limit? How did it go?

I was given a warning for driving (not speeding) exclusively in the left lane on the interstate in the US.  Pulled over and the cop told me I could not drive in the left lane only because it was only to be used for passing.

If I was getting a warning, I'd probably keep my smart mouth shut too. But still I wonder what the cop would have answered if you had asked him what the speed limit is in the left lane, or why there is no minimum speed posted on a per lane basis.

Nobody here is literally arguing that there is no speed limit in the left lane...I mean that's nonsense.  Of course there's a speed limit.

What is the speed limit in the left lane then? Suppose for the sake of example the sign says the speed limit is 65 mph.

Technically or practically?

Technically the speed limit is whatever is posted, regardless of lane.

Practically, I don't think anyone is getting pulled over if they're within 5-7 mph of the posted limit.

This.  Most cops (emphasis most) care about overall safety vs. strictly enforcing posted limits.  At the end of the day, it's about safety anyway. 

We need more cops like this guy (try to ignore the obnoxious talking):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZhdvl_P1Zc

So the speed limit is subjective?

mak1277

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #447 on: June 05, 2018, 01:33:59 PM »
How many of you who believe the left lane (in the U.S. not the autobahn) is for passing only have explained to a police officer that there is actually no speed limit in the left lane because that lane is for passing all those cars doing the speed limit? How did it go?

I was given a warning for driving (not speeding) exclusively in the left lane on the interstate in the US.  Pulled over and the cop told me I could not drive in the left lane only because it was only to be used for passing.

If I was getting a warning, I'd probably keep my smart mouth shut too. But still I wonder what the cop would have answered if you had asked him what the speed limit is in the left lane, or why there is no minimum speed posted on a per lane basis.

Nobody here is literally arguing that there is no speed limit in the left lane...I mean that's nonsense.  Of course there's a speed limit.

What is the speed limit in the left lane then? Suppose for the sake of example the sign says the speed limit is 65 mph.

Technically or practically?

Technically the speed limit is whatever is posted, regardless of lane.

Practically, I don't think anyone is getting pulled over if they're within 5-7 mph of the posted limit.

This.  Most cops (emphasis most) care about overall safety vs. strictly enforcing posted limits.  At the end of the day, it's about safety anyway. 

We need more cops like this guy (try to ignore the obnoxious talking):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZhdvl_P1Zc

So the speed limit is subjective?

Nope, but the enforcement of it is certainly discretionary on the part of the police. 

By the letter of the law, I speed at least 75% of the time, but I have only been pulled over once in the last decade.  Staying within 5-7 MPH of the legal limit is typically ignored.

Jouer

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 307
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #448 on: June 05, 2018, 01:35:53 PM »
How many of you who believe the left lane (in the U.S. not the autobahn) is for passing only have explained to a police officer that there is actually no speed limit in the left lane because that lane is for passing all those cars doing the speed limit? How did it go?

I was given a warning for driving (not speeding) exclusively in the left lane on the interstate in the US.  Pulled over and the cop told me I could not drive in the left lane only because it was only to be used for passing.

If I was getting a warning, I'd probably keep my smart mouth shut too. But still I wonder what the cop would have answered if you had asked him what the speed limit is in the left lane, or why there is no minimum speed posted on a per lane basis.

Nobody here is literally arguing that there is no speed limit in the left lane...I mean that's nonsense.  Of course there's a speed limit.

What is the speed limit in the left lane then? Suppose for the sake of example the sign says the speed limit is 65 mph.

Technically or practically?

Technically the speed limit is whatever is posted, regardless of lane.

Practically, I don't think anyone is getting pulled over if they're within 5-7 mph of the posted limit.

This.  Most cops (emphasis most) care about overall safety vs. strictly enforcing posted limits.  At the end of the day, it's about safety anyway. 

We need more cops like this guy (try to ignore the obnoxious talking):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZhdvl_P1Zc

So the speed limit is subjective?

Yes.

The world isn't always black and white....sometimes it's good to live in the grey.

What I don't get: buzzword / marketing phrases. (even though I just used one above)

GreenEggs

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 421
  • Location: Here & There
Re: The 'I Don't Get It' thread. Rants accepted.
« Reply #449 on: June 05, 2018, 01:36:35 PM »
I'd have thought that it would be easy to find gay bakers.

Favorite comment on this sub topic :D

Thank you.

I was beginning to rant about being ignored.  ;) You saved me from such petty behavior. 

I'm getting tired of reading about gay wedding cakes anyway.   I find transgenders much more interesting and am still trying to figure them out.  Talk about gay rights has been around for years, but the trans acknowledgment is relatively new in public conversation. 

Are they getting married & buying cakes?  Do they marry other trans people, or can they marry straight and gay people too?  Can they have kids?  I guess I'm "trans-curious"... 

Hmm?  I wonder if the percentage of tailgaters is same among the various gender preferences?  And does the percentage of tailgaters differ in legal marijuana states?  Does it vary between genders and races?  Are there any studies and stats available?  Do Uber drivers tend to tailgate more or less? 

That reminds me, I am not normally a tailgater, but after following a pickup for miles & miles in the left lane & not passing I found myself tailgating him.  He squirt windshield washer water on my car! (which I was really impressed with).  I was eventually able to pass him from the right lane.  He wasn't a "clueless" jerk.