There is no such thing as a "Christian" bakery unless they are working for the Church. Your religious beliefs and your PUBLIC business are two different things. If "Christian" bakeries don't have to make cakes for Gay weddings, what's next? Jewish Bakeries refusing Christian weddings? Muslim refusing Jewish weddings? Religion and Business shouldn't mix anymore than Politics and Religion.

The wedding cake issue is way overblown. It's just a way for anti-gay bigots to create a fake narrative that they are the ones being discriminated against. Anti-gay civil rights activists are also always WHINING that they are called bigots for promoting discrimination against gay people. That's rich ... if they don't want to be called bigots (CORRECTLY) there is an easy fix ... STOP being bigots.

The wedding cake issue is way overblown. It's just a way for anti-gay bigots to create a fake narrative that they are the ones being discriminated against. Anti-gay civil rights activists are also always WHINING that they are called bigots for promoting discrimination against gay people. That's rich ... if they don't want to be called bigots (CORRECTLY) there is an easy fix ... STOP being bigots.

No way mate , some people are against gay marriage ,thats their right ,so why do gay couples target their shops ,if thats what they believe ,leave them to it , and i am still waiting for a gay couple to target a muslim bakery , i wont hold my breath

The wedding cake issue is way overblown. It's just a way for anti-gay bigots to create a fake narrative that they are the ones being discriminated against. Anti-gay civil rights activists are also always WHINING that they are called bigots for promoting discrimination against gay people. That's rich ... if they don't want to be called bigots (CORRECTLY) there is an easy fix ... STOP being bigots.

No way mate , some people are against gay marriage ,thats their right ,so why do gay couples target their shops ,if thats what they believe ,leave them to it , and i am still waiting for a gay couple to target a muslim bakery , i wont hold my breath

You are obsessed with this fake cake issue.

Waste of time communicating on such nothing trivialities.

You paint a picture of armies of militant homos assaulting "Christian" bake shops.

All you're doing is red baiting but gay instead of red.

Welcome to my ignore list.

What does "targeting a bakery" mean anyway? What exactly are they doing? The phrase invokes scary images of somebody looking at the shop through the crosshairs of a high-powered rifle. But all it really means is that they were... trying to buy something? The Horror!

The wedding cake issue is way overblown. It's just a way for anti-gay bigots to create a fake narrative that they are the ones being discriminated against. Anti-gay civil rights activists are also always WHINING that they are called bigots for promoting discrimination against gay people. That's rich ... if they don't want to be called bigots (CORRECTLY) there is an easy fix ... STOP being bigots.

No way mate , some people are against gay marriage ,thats their right ,so why do gay couples target their shops ,if thats what they believe ,leave them to it , and i am still waiting for a gay couple to target a muslim bakery , i wont hold my breath

The problem with bigots is that when pressed, they can't even defend their position rationally, only to say "it's my belief." In this clip, the interviewer ask: if you believe in the bible and you know someone has committed adultery, would you still serve them? The lady says yes. But still she won't serve gay people. True religious convictions or simply pure hatred of gays? I'd say the latter.

http://edition.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/04/01/ac-pkg-tuchman-georgia-florists-religious-freedom-bill.cnn/video/playlists/gay-rights-movement/

The moment shop owners start turning away opposite-sex couples where one person is:

• a divorcee (forbidden to remarry by many christian sects)
  
• of a different faith (forbidden by some christian sects and judaism)
  
• where the partners are first cousins (forbidden in christianity depending on whom you ask)
  
• between stepchildren (good old christianity again)
  
• a woman who has been raped, if the groom is not her rapist (as mandated in Deuteronomy 22:28-29)
  

Then and only then will I believe that the shop owners are truly standing on their religious principles when turning away a same-sex engagement. But for shop owners to start whining only NOW while still turning a blind eye to all of those other "forbidden" marriage situations listed above is just a front for bigotry.

The wedding cake issue is way overblown. It's just a way for anti-gay bigots to create a fake narrative that they are the ones being discriminated against. Anti-gay civil rights activists are also always WHINING that they are called bigots for promoting discrimination against gay people. That's rich ... if they don't want to be called bigots (CORRECTLY) there is an easy fix ... STOP being bigots.

No way mate , some people are against gay marriage ,thats their right ,so why do gay couples target their shops ,if thats what they believe ,leave them to it , and i am still waiting for a gay couple to target a muslim bakery , i wont hold my breath

You are obsessed with this fake cake issue.

Waste of time communicating on such nothing trivialities.

You paint a picture of armies of militant homos assaulting "Christian" bake shops.

All you're doing is red baiting but gay instead of red.

Welcome to my ignore list.

Oh come on ,does that mean you are never going to put a like on any of my posts in future? bloody discrimination i say

i think they will not have balls to do it

I've had an idea for next weeks survey..... "Has anyone ever met a bigot who admits to being a bigot?"

An inflammatory remark, and subsequent response to it removed.

Please someone correct me if I`m wrong, but I have always believed that the institution of marriage is all about families. Male and female couple get joined in wedlock and have children together.

I also strongly believe that children need both the maternal and the paternal upbringing at the start of their lives, I do not agree that one parent families and same sex couple guardians are beneficial for the upbringing of children.

If same sex couples wish to tie the knot I have no problems with that, except when children become involved via adoption of hiring surrogate mothers, the children having no choices in the matter. Although children can also not chose their parents and of course not all both sex couples make suitable parents, it`s still natural for all children to have mothers and fathers. Throughout their lives children require the nurturing of a mother and the support of a father, the provider.

To conclude, have nothing against same sex marriages, live and let live, but do not agree these couples should be permitted to adopt children for my reasons mentioned above.

Oh my god.... you people are broken! Don't know you it's apart of the 'new world order.' to break families up!

It deliberately promotes homosexuality which, according to experts, is a form of arrested development. Feminism neuters women, rendering them less fit to become wives and mothers. Men are emasculated, unable to create families, or make sacrifices for the sake for their children.

Please educate yourselves!!!

http://www.henrymakow.com/130302.html

Please someone correct me if I`m wrong, but I have always believed that the institution of marriage is all about families. Male and female couple get joined in wedlock and have children together.

I also strongly believe that children need both the maternal and the paternal upbringing at the start of their lives, I do not agree that one parent families and same sex couple guardians are beneficial for the upbringing of children.

If same sex couples wish to tie the knot I have no problems with that, except when children become involved via adoption of hiring surrogate mothers, the children having no choices in the matter. Although children can also not chose their parents and of course not all both sex couples make suitable parents, it`s still natural for all children to have mothers and fathers. Throughout their lives children require the nurturing of a mother and the support of a father, the provider.

To conclude, have nothing against same sex marriages, live and let live, but do not agree these couples should be permitted to adopt children for my reasons mentioned above.

I'm not a bigot...but....some of my best friends.....

I just came across this local radio phone-in show from the UK on the subject of gay marriage..

I know an older Western man who just died. He had a gay lover of 25 years. Guess who will get all of his money, property, and possessions? Not the man who cared for him! The man who loving nursed him through cancer and alzmehier's. His irish family is coming right over after not seeing him for 25 years to get the condo and bank accounts and everything else the couple worked for together. This is the reason gay marriage is needed. It is not so much the emotional, it is the legal rights that are needed. If they had been married the family that deserted this poor man 25 years ago would not be getting jack shit. And believe me they would not visit Thailand to see his grave or mourn! Greedy bastards!

^^^, nothing to do with being married, its to do with Thai laws.

Did the man have a will?

If not why not?

In this respect Thai laws apply, nothing to do with being married, all to do with no will.

http://www.samuiforsale.com/knowledge/inheritance-laws-thailand.html

Glad I caught you! Mr. James had a will. His foreign banks refuse to cooperate with the will claiming they are following the laws of their country. Or so they say! The thai has a lawyer and is fighting it. You are completely wrong! The banks refused to transfer any of he money or property to the thai. U r very naive about this subject. You would have to see it happen to believe it. The thai will not have the money to head off too Ireland to fight this and the greedy family knows it. The foreign attorney claims Mr. James was taken advantage of ... etc. etc. Marriage would have solved this problem. The will did not. Many gay couples learn this the hard way.

And one last post tonight! I was at Siam Paragon sitting in the front entrance way. Two thai school girls in uniform came up and asked me and a friend to fill out a survey. In big smiles they said they were making Thailand a better place for everyone. Right there in the questions about more public transit, easier visas,better vacation facilities, was SHOULD THAILAND LEGALIZE GAY MARRIAGE! I was sort of shocked. After I finished the survey they took my picture with them for their teacher. The thais are thinking about this and what the world thinks of them. I would think in their polite society they would want the best face forward for their country. That best face forward is joining the modern world!

Glad I caught you! Mr. James had a will. His foreign banks refuse to cooperate with the will claiming they are following the laws of their country. Or so they say! The thai has a lawyer and is fighting it. You are completely wrong! The banks refused to transfer any of he money or property to the thai. U r very naive about this subject. You would have to see it happen to believe it. The thai will not have the money to head off too Ireland to fight this and the greedy family knows it. The foreign attorney claims Mr. James was taken advantage of ... etc. etc. Marriage would have solved this problem. The will did not. Many gay couples learn this the hard way.

Glad I caught you, as for being completely wrong, how many wills did he have?

One will for Thailand and a seperate will for his home country?

Yes the banks from his homecountry wont transfer for the simple reason, they are following their countries rules, not those of Thailand.

Very naive, please, put your prejudices to one side, this has nothing to do with gays only, it affects us all.

But to answer your observation, far from naive, I as one married to a Thai with assets in both countries am very au fait with the leagalities of being involved with a partner from another country.

Hence I have 2 wills, one for my home country assets and one for my Thai assets.

It would appear your friend was the one who was naive.

Marriage would not have solved this problem, but never mind.

Let this serve as a reminder, Thailand does not march to the beat of your homecountrys drum, PLEASE ENSURE you have seperate wills for each country you hold assets.

Missing the point again.

In a heterosexual marriage where one spouse dies, the legal framework of marriage helps ensure that assets and rights transfer properly, without the need to hire legal council to draft up wills or fight contesting relatives in court.

In a same-sex marriage (which is not recognized by the state) where one spouse dies, the survivor must hire expensive legal council beforehand to draw up a will, and even then will likely endure months or years in court fighting blood relatives who contest the will.

Your solution is for the same sex couple to "get a will". The fact that no similar "solution" is needed for the opposite-sex couple equates to an unfair burden and, according to the recent supreme court decision, a breach of the 14th amendment's equal protection clause. In the same way that a poll tax of as little as two dollars was found to be unconstitutional under the 14th amendment, because it creates an unfair burden on those who could not afford to pay it.

And going beyond the discussion of survivorship, here is a list of protections that are were denied to same-sex couples who, until recently, could not get legally married in the US. Not all of these will apply to Thailand, but surely some do (such as the immigration benefit).

http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pages/from-why-marriage-matters-appendix-b-by-evan-wolfson

^^^^

Missing the point again.

Sorry, I thought we were discussing Thailand and its marriage and inheritance laws, please forgive my oversight.

I have no idea of the relevance of the 14th amendment to Thailand, perhaps you can enlighten us dear readers.

Your solution is for the same sex couple to "get a will". The fact that no similar "solution" is needed for the opposite-sex couple equates to an unfair burden

Are you talking about Thailand or America?

It certainlty IS needed in Thailand for opposite sex couples.

The sad fact is gay or straight, if their is NO will, normal Thai law will prevail.

The only way to prevent this is for both partners to have a will..

Sorry, I thought we were discussing Thailand and its marriage and inheritance laws, please forgive my oversight.

That's okay but don't let it happen again.

This whole discussion is about what should or ought to happen, not necessarily what will happen. In that respect, we should be tackling this as a moral question and therefore we needn't get bogged down in whether we're in this country or that one. If something is a morally right thing to do, then it should be done regardless of what country we happen to be standing in at the moment.

Should Kenya legalize gay marriage? Yes. Will they ever do so? With about 90% of the population opposing the idea, it's almost certainly not going to happen for many generations to come.

The only way to prevent this is for both partners to have a will.

I'm not disagreeing there, I'm just pointing out that the status quo gives some Thai citizens benefits that others don't have. If one supports the idea that all citizens of a country should receive fair and equal treatment, then I can't see why anyone would vote anything other than 'yes' in this poll.

More important things to do.

Sent from my c64

Why Homosexual Marriage Matters For Straight Men

http://www.rooshv.com/why-homosexual-marriage-matters-for-straight-men

There is nothing such as "gay marriage". There is only equality before the law or discrimination.

Sure. Why not? Marriage is just a business arrangement under the law. As long as they don't let the ladyboys change their sex on the ID card I'm fine with it.

I know an older Western man who just died. He had a gay lover of 25 years. Guess who will get all of his money, property, and possessions? Not the man who cared for him! The man who loving nursed him through cancer and alzmehier's. His irish family is coming right over after not seeing him for 25 years to get the condo and bank accounts and everything else the couple worked for together. This is the reason gay marriage is needed. It is not so much the emotional, it is the legal rights that are needed. If they had been married the family that deserted this poor man 25 years ago would not be getting jack shit. And believe me they would not visit Thailand to see his grave or mourn! Greedy bastards!

Rubbish. He could have been clever enough to have a will. He also had a myriad of ways to compensate his partner prior to death. Don't blame the law, your friend is an idiot.

And as for the family coming right over and grabbing the condo, lol. That is gonna be an expensive nightmare for that family cuz your friend is an idiot.

Should every country in the world legalize gay marriage?

Yes.

Love should not be against the law...anywhere.

An offensive remark and response to it, removed.