Related Posts

‘You Are The Worst Human Being’

“True stud” Elliot Page and “heartthrob” Mae Martin reunite after both coming out

Will the Biden administration retract a Trump-era policy harming LGBTQ refugees?

49 Comments on “Gay Wedding Cake Debate (PT. 3) | Andrew Seidel | LAW | Rubin Report”

  1. The government is not there to tell the citizens what they should think or believe. This case is not about discrimination because they serve everyone anything on their menu, and a gay wedding cake is not on the menu for anyone! So there is no discrimination. The government can force them to make a gay wedding cake!

  2. I am baffled by Seidel's inability to see that to most religious people, a same-sex union isn't marriage. It has been forced upon the majority by a tiny minority. Just like two women and one man isn't a marriage. Historically, same-sex unions became law yesterday. There are people alive that grew up in a world were no such thing existed. He should advocate for people's right to freedom from the religious view that same-sex marriages are morally legitimate.

    And when the Mastepiece baker's case started, Colorado didn't even allow same-sex marriage! So they planned to haul the cake to a different state to celebrate. Maybe, just maybe, it was a setup.

  3. Nobody nowhere in our Constitution has a right to be free FROM religion. What arrogance! And the couple did NOT say we love Jesus more than you. Suggestion: don’t put words in our Constitution, and don’t put words in peoples’ mouths. Much more to say about that but thanks, Dave, for being fair and truly rational and not imposing your secularism on others as this gentleman is trying to do.

  6. I'm so glad you presented the other side of this argument. I really don't like this guys point of view or that he says voting for Trump or having a religion is completely illogical, shows a complete lack of empathy to many American's and people of the world. But, if I hadn't watched this video, I'd never have heard this argument at all. For the record, his arguments are weak, but at least I heard them out. Thanks, Dave Rubin!

  8. This whole fiasco has nothing to do with religion, homophobia, civil rights or discrimination. It is simple contract law. Making a customized product, in this case – a cake, involves written or verbal agreement on the ingredients, size, shape, flavor, decoration, wording, price and a completion date. These are specifications. If a vendor says they cannot make this product or perform this service as described…that's the end of it. No one can be forced into a contract. The parties must agree on the terms for a contract to be formed. Otherwise, you could force a Jewish baker to make a Nazi themed cake or a Muslim baker to make a Christian cake or a black baker to make a KKK themed cake.

  9. This is a shop

    He should of never won

    He chose not to serve them because of who they are.

    In a shop open to the public you need to serve people who ask for service and product.
    Now he could of chosen to make a cake and let the gay couple put the 2 male dolls on the cake at home but no he refused service because they're gay

    He refused everything only because of their sexuality

    This is discrimination

  10. The problem by Andrews analysis seems to be that use of government power has historically expanded and that that power is being abused and the expanse of that power is leading to increase abuses of those powers. I don't really follow his logic in the application of a solution that therefore leads to the increase of government power.

  11. If I was a baker and said I will just serve white people. My religion just refuse to serve people with color. You still think it's OK? (Sorry English isn't my first language.)

  13. Thank goodness SCOTUS ruled on the side of the baker back in June. Think of what would happen if bakers (or creators in general) were forced to create anything anyone commissioned them to. That it essentially what would happen had the court ruled in favor of the gay couple.
    There is a difference in turning away customers because of who they are and refusing to provide a service because that partuicular service is in direct conflict with what you believe.
    The purpose of seperation between church and state is not just to protect the state, but also to protect churches.

  14. I think that it was good the media took interest in this case but taking it to court was going to too far. I believe gays are and should be protected class and should not be discriminated against, to hell with the cakemans religion just go to a better cake maker.

  16. In the Bible says don't fear people, but fear god. Not everything is about money. Some people are standing up for the word of God in the Bible. Homosexuality is an abomination to god. Read Romans,1:18 Jesus teaches against homosexuality. For god so loved the world, that he sent his one and only son, so that, whoever believes in him, shall not perish but have everlasting life. John 3:16

  17. The shop did not refuse service as some state. He said he would be glad to sell them anything they wish, but the specific design he has the right to not do. If an anti 2nd amendment shop was asked to make a cake with an AR 15 on it, sould they be required?

  20. The answer : all businesses should have to server all American and American visitors/guests no matter of race, color, creed, age, sex, religion, genetic coding and national origin. This means you have to perform the service or provide the good up to the point that it violates your religious belief. So in this case, they have to make a wedding cake but leave out specifics about it being a gay couple. the married couple can put two guys or two girls on the top or write both their names on it. This is a win win. the baker makes the cake with out violating their beliefs and the gay couple gets a cake for their wedding

  22. Debate it to no end but trying to force someone to bake a cake, public or private, celebrating sodomy or body mutilation, is repugnant and evil—plain and simple.  It's not sexual orientation, it's dis-orientation.  It's not 'Gay'  It's sodomy.  It's not trans-gendered, it's trans-perverted or trans-mutilated.

  24. THEY SHOULD HAVE MADE THE CAKE BUT FILLED IT WITH EX LAX. HEY DUDE SHIT HAPPENS. THEY WILL NOT COME BACK. BUT HEY LETS TEST THIS BOZOS IDEA. WE FIND A muslim BAKER AND ASK THEM TO MAKE A CAKE FOR HOMOSEXUAL AND SEE IF THEY BAKE THE CAKE.

  26. Here's the thing with people that think like this they do have their own brand of religion they just don't realize it and they push that on everybody.

  27. Trust me you don't want the Govn. involved not just here, but the right to bear arms. Because now you get Left vs. right as to who is in the right. It's not Church & State issue if the Left say this is right, & the Right says this is right. There are no more equal rights when the side you're on picks.

  30. I personally would just make the cake if it were my bakery but if its a privately owned business rooted in a religious conviction and a couple get declined then I respect their right and decision not to serve and make it. Interestingly enough Christians get demonized almost as if they're targeted but does anyone really think a Muslim bakery is more likely to serve a gay couple? Nope, probably less likely but who is going to them, getting declined and filing lawsuits against them? Are they specifically not going to them or are they going and not saying anything about being declined service because they are being declined by Muslims and if that's the case then why are they not saying anything and just letting that go? Is it because the gay population and the left look at Islam in sharing a common enemy with conservatives?

  31. Actually the man said he would bake a cake for them but not put the two grooms on top. So he din't refuse. He also would not bake cakes for divorce party or anti-gay cakes… Sooooo i feel the gay couple just were jerkes on this.

  34. Why don't the left just do what they always do? Just open up a gay bakery for those who want cakes made for their wedding?? Then May be we can come in and demand a cake be made for our
    One Man One Woman wedding. And if they don't make it we can take them to court. If the shoe fits then wear it.

  35. Yep, religious business owners are imposing their beliefs on others then playing the victim when their state comes after them for violating state law.

  36. He’s conflating the fact that it wasn’t the COUPLE the baker refused to serve, but the fact he refused to make a gay promoting an ideology he doesn’t believe should be promoted. HUGE DIFFERENCE MATE

  37. Property owners get to make these decisions for themselves. Yes, if I dont like black people, I do have the option of being a nasty bigot no matter how inconveniant it may be. Separation of church and state requires a limited government that does not impose its anti-discrimination agenda on the people.

  39. That baker in Oregon has the right to refuse service to people. The gay couple were just making a example of them. They were looking for the offense wether there was one or not.

  41. This guy is the problem with the current civil liberties crowd – on the left – when they make their case – they sound authoritarian and analogies and arguments are unconvincing.
    Dave: "Baker free not to do a custom cake"
    Seidel: "Ah- ya I don't know if you know this but I got a bakery in VA to do a cake for ex muslims"
    Dave: "A Private baker forced to do custom cake" (paraphrase)
    Seidel: "no no – muslim employee from a store ownered by national/corporate company wouldn't do it"

    Totally different case.. Next.

  42. As a Democrat I’m glad that Jack won! And as a Roman Catholic and future entrepreneur I’ll provide health insurance except any type of contraception.

  43. The like to dislike ratio is awful on this video, its easy to see why Dave is reluctant to have on people from the left, his audience largely doesn't want that. Dave is wrong on this issue, the bakery refused the couple simply because they were gay, they never even got to a point where they discussed what would be on the cake or how it would look, remember, like race, homosexuality is a protected class, so this isn't analogous to an imaginary incident where some Nazi's were turned down by a Jewish bakery to make them a pro Hitler cake.

  45. A man of Seidel’s obvious intelligence cannot possibly believe his own bullshit as expressed here. The only logical conclusion therefore is that he is intentionally lying and being deceitful in his reasoning so as to further his far-left aggressive secularist agenda

  46. For fucks sake just go to another baker man what is with these gays & bakers they don't want to bake a cake for you so use your brain & go somewhere else that will service you

  49. 21:40 with my knowledge of government corruption, it's probable that the Johnson Amendment was written to silence Churches who were speaking out against a certain government policy.

Comments are closed.