Comments by "Valen Ron" (@valenrn8657) on "Supreme Court rules in favor of baker in same-sex cake case" video.

  1. You're a hypocrite. As long a person doesn't impose their view point/belief on another person, it should be OK.
    2
  2. Sauron Merciful , Laws shouldn't override US constitution on religious freedoms. A wedding cake is part of an existing religious activity hence this is a narrow ruling.
    1
  3. Warrior of Light , I can refuse to serve Apple Macbook customers since I don't support MacOS X.
    1
  4. L1ttleT3d , Your "Religion has no claim over marriage" argument is a red herring. The issue here is Baker's religious view point not your view point. You can't force your view point on US constitutionally protected Baker's religious view point. You clearly don't have the first idea what you're talking about. Actually, it's you who doesn't know what the real issue at hand i.e. the ruling is against Colorado's (state law) bias against baker's constitutionally protected religious beliefs.
    1
  5. L1ttleT3d , Sure, but that's not a viewpoint. It's a fact that marriage is not a religious activity Again, another red herring. The real issue is baker's religious belief not your belief. You can't force your belief on somebody else. Homosexuals ARE a protected class State law can't trump federal law i.e. Colorado's state law was bias against baker's constitutionally protected religious beliefs.
    1
  6. There's nothing in Christianity on restricting Jews e.g. there are ex-Jewish members within Christianity.
    1
  7. That's a red herring argument. As long baker doesn't know the cake's purpose, service can be given.
    1
  8. There's nothing in Christian's NT bible that restricts interracial couples. Your argument is a red herring.
    1