Office Depot's Version of the "Gay Wedding Cake"

[albeto.]

You're not talking about the video any more. You're only giving me your opinion about abortion. I think you've made your point about that, but I thought we were going to talk about PP and the supposed expose of illegal and immoral practices.

 

I won't reply any more to this.

 

 

[Catwoman]

Call me crazy, but I was very hopeful that this thread wouldn't turn into an abortion debate.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Call me crazy, but I was very hopeful that this thread wouldn't turn into an abortion debate.

Hi crazy!

[Catwoman]

Hi crazy!

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[albeto.]

. 

 

[Carol in Cal.]

 

. 

 

You're not talking about the video any more. You're only giving me your opinion about abortion.

 

No, on the contrary,  How can you possibly say that?  I haven't talked about abortion in that post at all.

 

What I have talked about is the horrifying way that an aborted, live baby was treated.

And it's clear that the heart would not have been able to beat unassisted unless there was life there.

 

Other videos talk in detail about PP's illegal practices--breaking laws about consent, about not distorting the abortion process to obtain specimens, etc.  Additionally they demonstrate a certain amount of haggling over prices, which is inconsistent with a straightforward repayment of expense model, and which I believe skates very close to illegally selling human body parts, if it doesn't cross the line.

 

I don't believe that the callousness displayed in the video I linked can be tolerated.  It should not be.  It's wrong, and it's horrendous.

[mamiof5]

Personal testimony is of course irrelevant to the legal misinformation and contextual misrepresentation being spread about Planned Parenthood.

Not sure what misinformation and misrepresentation you are referring to? Planned parenthood is a huge organization, they like money, they don't want their funding to go away. If the videos were not real they would have already put a stop to it, they have the funds to sue and crush someone. Had it not been true I doubt that more than one or two videos would have been released. I was watching a Fox news program on this matter the other day, and they were questioning why pp has not sued or stopped all this ordeal, and it's probably because they can't go there, they can't honestly answer what was going on in these videos without having to admit to their atrocities.

[Farrar]

I think Office Depot was within their rights. And, good grief, all the woman had to do was use the self-serve copier or go somewhere else and get the exact same service. It seems indisputable to me that the *government* doesn't have the right to stop her from creating or distributing the flyer. But this was a business.

 

On the other hand, I feel like businesses are increasingly the arbiters of our free speech rights - typically in online settings, but also sometimes in cases like these. I'm not in love with an Office Depot clerk deciding what is and isn't "inflammatory" (or a computer algorithm or a poorly paid offshore laborer...). I don't have a remedy for that and sometimes I don't feel like we need a remedy (while other times I do), it's just an issue I'm aware of.

[mamiof5]

Call me crazy, but I was very hopeful that this thread wouldn't turn into an abortion debate.

Kind of hard not to, when there's folks out there saying it's perfectly OK to murder innocent human babies :(

[Spy Car]

Don't feed the troll.

 

Bill

[Catwoman]

Kind of hard not to, when there's folks out there saying it's perfectly OK to murder innocent human babies :(

And here we go... :glare:

 

There are people on this forum who have serious trigger issues with this topic, and I am truly hoping they don't open this thread thinking it is about Office Depot refusing to print a flyer, only to discover that it has morphed into yet another patently unpleasant abortion debate, complete with graphic descriptions and accusations of brutal murder.

 

If people want to discuss the specifics of abortion, I strongly believe that they should start a spin-off thread. As it is, all that has happened is that the original topic of this thread has been totally derailed.

 

As usual.

[Joker]

Not sure what misinformation and misrepresentation you are referring to? Planned parenthood is a huge organization, they like money, they don't want their funding to go away. If the videos were not real they would have already put a stop to it, they have the funds to sue and crush someone. Had it not been true I doubt that more than one or two videos would have been released. I was watching a Fox news program on this matter the other day, and they were questioning why pp has not sued or stopped all this ordeal, and it's probably because they can't go there, they can't honestly answer what was going on in these videos without having to admit to their atrocities.

 

I've been to PP and needed their services. There were many pregnant women there receiving prenatal care who were never pressured to abort. I wouldn't be here today without their services and them pressuring other doctors to take them seriously and treat me. They may be a huge organization but so are many other places. Many organizations do good work and also make good money. It is that money, funding, which allows them to do good work in their community. I hear so many say there are other places to go but often times that is just not true.

[mamiof5]

And here we go... :glare:

 

There are people on this forum who have serious trigger issues with this topic, and I am truly hoping they don't open this thread thinking it is about Office Depot refusing to print a flyer, only to discover that it has morphed into yet another patently unpleasant abortion debate, complete with graphic descriptions and accusations of brutal murder.

 

If people want to discuss the specifics of abortion, I strongly believe that they should start a spin-off thread. As it is, all that has happened is that the original topic of this thread has been totally derailed.

 

As usual.

I am sorry. I had posted a very short-straight to the point answer with what I thought specifically about the question (totally leaving out the issue of abortion), but was answered with "the attack of those innocents who are being accused of horrendous things". So that kind of got me going a bit. You are right, no need to go there...but I just can't agree with those who state that such paper was a terrible attack to such innocent organization.

But I agree, no need to get this going. Just wanted to clarify that I had just answered the op's question to begin with.

[mamiof5]

I've been to PP and needed their services. There were many pregnant women there receiving prenatal care who were never pressured to abort. I wouldn't be here today without their services and them pressuring other doctors to take them seriously and treat me. They may be a huge organization but so are many other places. Many organizations do good work and also make good money. It is that money, funding, which allows them to do good work in their community. I hear so many say there are other places to go but often times that is just not true.

Few organizations do the evil that pp does, but I don't doubt that some of their facilities are helpful indeed. Unfortunately I do feel the bad prevails over the good, they do such atrocities, it's hard to see the good they do. I am glad your experience with them is good though.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Not sure what misinformation and misrepresentation you are referring to? Planned parenthood is a huge organization, they like money, they don't want their funding to go away. If the videos were not real they would have already put a stop to it, they have the funds to sue and crush someone. Had it not been true I doubt that more than one or two videos would have been released. I was watching a Fox news program on this matter the other day, and they were questioning why pp has not sued or stopped all this ordeal, and it's probably because they can't go there, they can't honestly answer what was going on in these videos without having to admit to their atrocities.

 

Well I am sure that Fox News analysis was spot on.

Or not.

In reality, trying to sue for defamation over claims made on a politically charged issue is close to impossible as the plaintiff generally must not only prove the information was false, but also prove malice.  And no, Planned Parenthood's coffers aren't overflowing to the point that they can waste money suing to get a judgement they likely wouldn't be able to collect.

[Arcadia]

"Prayer for the Conversion " on the flyer sounds awful to me as an agnostic.

 

ETA:

I don't know enough business law to comment on the right to refuse service.

[mamiof5]

Well I am sure that Fox News analysis was spot on.

Or not.

In reality, trying to sue for defamation over claims made on a politically charged issue is close to impossible as the plaintiff generally must not only prove the information was false, but also prove malice. And no, Planned Parenthood's coffers aren't overflowing to the point that they can waste money suing to get a judgement they likely wouldn't be able to collect.

Pp has plenty of supporters, big buck supporters in the private and public sector. I honestly doubt that the reason why they are not fighting such "rumors" is lack of money. I think that unfortunately, there is a lot of truth in those videos. Anyway, I already answered the op's original question (which like it or not brings up other issues), but will just try to leave it at that. No need to have another never ending thread on another "hot" issue. Have a great weekend :)

[SKL]

I think it's wrong to demand that all uncomfortable material be kept from the eyes of mature adults.

 

If it's acceptable to *do* something I don't see how it can be unacceptable to talk about it.

 

Especially since we seem very comfortable with talking about all sorts of horrible things that we agree are wrong to do.  Like the Holocaust example, and many many others.  How much effort is put into making sure everyone remembers how horrible 9/11 was.  Videos of people jumping out of windows to their deaths, etc.  We accept and circulate so many disturbing reports and images, but we can't stomach hearing about the actions of a US organization that claims to be doing nothing wrong.

[Carrie12345]

I'm having a hard time forming an official position on this.

 

I do think there's a huge and important difference between refusing a "type" of person vs. a "type" of content.  Nobody bakes a gay cake. I'm confident OD doesn't actively try to deny service to pro-lifers.

 

Having worked in several photo labs, there have been plenty of times I've been faced with uncomfortable content that ranged from asking another employee to handle the work to trying to determine if the content required a call to the police.  Police crime scene photos were the ones we all would have liked to refuse.

 

I don't know of any instances of refusal to print, but I can say that customers who brought it "icky" content (defined differently by each employee) did not get our typical service.  If I was around, a couple with birth photos would certainly get the entire color/exposure corrections and perfectly dust-free prints.  If I was alone in the store, people's home porn would get auto-printed and bagged with as little attention as I could possibly get away with.

 

If we had had a self-print machine, you bet your bananas that's where I would have been sending sex pictures and fake death scenes. Not because of the customer, but because I don't see why I should have to subject myself to that when there's an alternate method of getting the task done. Which is WAY different from refusing a product.

 

 

[Cindy in FL.]

I deleted my response which was off the topic of OD's refusal to print the flier. Out of a desire not to blindside anyone or derail the thread, and because I respect Catwoman so much.

 

And here we go... :glare:

 

There are people on this forum who have serious trigger issues with this topic, and I am truly hoping they don't open this thread thinking it is about Office Depot refusing to print a flyer, only to discover that it has morphed into yet another patently unpleasant abortion debate, complete with graphic descriptions and accusations of brutal murder.

 

If people want to discuss the specifics of abortion, I strongly believe that they should start a spin-off thread. As it is, all that has happened is that the original topic of this thread has been totally derailed.

 

As usual.

[MSNative]

After reading three pages, I still cannot get why this is so complicated. OD doesn't want to print it, don't force them to. Go somewhere else. Put it on blast on FB that they wouldn't print your flyer. Why force people into doing things so that you don't have to be inconvenienced or feel bad? Why??? Just move on with your life and dust the dirt off of your sandals.

 

On the other hand, someone wants to make a flyer with rhetoric you find offensive, or untrue, or inflammatory and it is now hate speech. Can we please not clutch our pearls over every single thing that happens in this world? A flyer? Even if it said the most awful thing in the world, could we just admit that some people are awful and not give them power over our lives?

 

It's like the new sacred cow is not getting our feelings hurt by anyone for any reason.

ðŸ‘ðŸ‘ðŸ‘

This times a thousand!

[shinyhappypeople]

I'm having a hard time forming an official position on this.

 

I do think there's a huge and important difference between refusing a "type" of person vs. a "type" of content.  Nobody bakes a gay cake. I'm confident OD doesn't actively try to deny service to pro-lifers.

 

But (playing Devil's Advocate) the baker did not refuse types of people but a type of event.  So, in that sense the two scenarios are similar. 

 

An EVENT is not a protected class.  I don't care what the court says, since it wouldn't be the first time the court got it wrong.

 

So, that comes back to the question of whether OD should be required to accept all print jobs, assuming they contain legal speech. 

 

I don't know.  I lean heavily libertarin in some ways, so the less government the better.  On the other hand, those public accomodation laws came into being for a pretty important reason.

 

I do know that I'm glad I can exercise my right as consumer to never use Office Depot.   

 

Thanks for the interesting discussion :)

[ChocolateReignRemix]

But (playing Devil's Advocate) the baker did not refuse types of people but a type of event.  So, in that sense the two scenarios are similar. 

 

An EVENT is not a protected class.  I don't care what the court says, since it wouldn't be the first time the court got it wrong.

 

So, that comes back to the question of whether OD should be required to accept all print jobs, assuming they contain legal speech. 

 

I don't know.  I lean heavily libertarin in some ways, so the less government the better.  On the other hand, those public accomodation laws came into being for a pretty important reason.

 

I do know that I'm glad I can exercise my right as consumer to never use Office Depot.   

 

Thanks for the interesting discussion :)

 

The product/service provided is exactly the same.  He had agreed to provide it until he found the couple was homosexual.  The cake was for a reception and there is no legal distinction between a heterosexual reception and a gay reception, which is why the baker lost.

 

And no, OD cannot be required to accept all print jobs that contain legal speech.

[KungFuPanda]

I'm only on page two, but so far I have learned that only Catholics have priests and that liberals believe God is imaginary.

 

Off to read more . . .

[Cindy in FL.]

Karen Denning is still wrong in her assertion that the flier calls for the persecution of people who support abortion. I firmly believe she needs to retract that statement.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Karen Denning is still wrong in her assertion that the flier calls for the persecution of people who support abortion. I firmly believe she needs to retract that statement.

She shouldn't if she believes it to be true.

[Cindy in FL.]

It's factually not there.

 

She shouldn't if she believes it to be true.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

It's factually not there.

 

 

Depends on how the words are interpreted. Spy Car reads it the same way as her. You and I don't. Different strokes.

[Cindy in FL.]

There have been many times on this board where people have had what they believe to be true discounted because it wasn't supported by "facts". Karen Denning needs clarify that she feels that it calls for the persecution of people, not that it actually, factually does.

 

Depends on how the words are interpreted. Spy Car reads it the same way as her. You and I don't. Different strokes.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

There have been many times on this board where people have had what they believe to be true discounted because it wasn't supported by "facts". Karen Denning needs clarify that she feels that it calls for the persecution of people, not that it actually, factually does.

 

 

It was clearly her interpretation of OD policy. It is a bit different than when someone here says something like "Christians believe..." and then continues on with their personal interpretation.

 

And nothing says her opinion can't be wrong.

[Cindy in FL.]

You're missing my point, which I am probably not making very well. I don't see it as being different at all. They are both interpretations. When Christians do this on this board they get called on it. I'm calling her on it.

 

It was clearly her interpretation of OD policy. It is a bit different than when someone here says something like "Christians believe..." and then continues on with their personal interpretation.

 

And nothing says her opinion can't be wrong.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

You're missing my point, which I am probably not making very well. I don't see it as being different at all. They are both interpretations. When Christians do this on this board they get called on it. I'm calling her on it.

 

 

Christians get called for it when they try to speak for all Christians.

 

At the time she sent that statement, she was saying why it failed OD's stated policy. OD's opinion (which has now changed) has the weight of fact when applying their own policy.

[mamiof5]

Glad OD apologized. But yeah, totally disagree with Denning's interpretation of the flyer.

[livetoread]

 

I don't know of any instances of refusal to print, but I can say that customers who brought it "icky" content (defined differently by each employee) did not get our typical service. If I was around, a couple with birth photos would certainly get the entire color/exposure corrections and perfectly dust-free prints. If I was alone in the store, people's home porn would get auto-printed and bagged with as little attention as I could possibly get away with.

 

If we had had a self-print machine, you bet your bananas that's where I would have been sending sex pictures and fake death scenes. Not because of the customer, but because I don't see why I should have to subject myself to that when there's an alternate method of getting the task done. Which is WAY different from refusing a product.

When I was pregnant with my first, eighteen years ago, my dh took weekly pictures of me in a bikini, standing sideways and holding up a sign saying which week it was. We got them developed every few weeks. I had to laugh when I got the final roll back though, and week 41 was developed in panorama. Some worker had a great sense of humor!

[Carol in Cal.]

It's interesting to consider how meaningful (or not) freedom of the press is when access to a 'press' is quite limited.

I suppose we should be grateful that the internet circumvents this issue to some extent.

I fear for the fourth estate.  For a democratic republic to survive in a healthy, robust way, we need one.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

It's interesting to consider how meaningful (or not) freedom of the press is when access to a 'press' is quite limited.

I suppose we should be grateful that the internet circumvents this issue to some extent.

I fear for the fourth estate. For a democratic republic to survive in a healthy, robust way, we need one.

Freedom of the press (in the United States) has never provided access to a printing press owned by someone else.

 

The fourth estate has never been understood to include commercial print shops.

 

Ever.

[Carol in Cal.]

Freedom of the press (in the United States) has never provided access to a printing press owned by someone else.

 

The fourth estate has never been understood to include commercial print shops.

 

Ever.

Nor did I argue for that view.

 

I just think that it's interesting the way that corporatization of 'the press', coupled with consolidation of outlets from many to few, (except on the internet, thankfully), has redefined the fourth estate function almost to the point of eliminating it.  For those who follow how democracies function, this is a great concern.

 

But the sky is, in fact, blue.  I imagine someone will say that I said it was purple, and that blue is actually a code name for purple, or than I actually meant yellow.  

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Nor did I argue for that view.

 

I just think that it's interesting the way that corporatization of 'the press', coupled with consolidation of outlets from many to few, (except on the internet, thankfully), has redefined the fourth estate function almost to the point of eliminating it. For those who follow how democracies function, this is a great concern.

 

But the sky is, in fact, blue. I imagine someone will say that I said it was purple, and that blue is actually a code name for purple, or than I actually meant yellow.

It seems a strange issue to bring up in a discussion about commercial printing.

[Carol in Cal.]

It seems a strange an issue to bring up in a discussion about commercial printing.

It's actually the second or third time I've brought it up in this thread.  It's exemplary of one of the meta issues that this turns up.

[SKL]

It is not difficult to find alternative ways to produce printed flyers in this country.

 

In addition to the obvious ones readily available to most of us, there are Christian publishing houses dedicated to printing Christian literature.  Maybe incidents like the one discussed here is one reason why such companies exist.

[Carol in Cal.]

It is not difficult to find alternative ways to produce printed flyers in this country.

 

In addition to the obvious ones readily available to most of us, there are Christian publishing houses dedicated to printing Christian literature.  Maybe incidents like the one discussed here is one reason why such companies exist.

True.  Although if someone is accustomed to fast TAT in their own neighborhood, it's kind of startling at best to be denied access.  

 

I don't think that people have an inherent right to a specific copy shop, but where their are limitations they should be clear upfront.  

 

And in general (going meta), the consolidation and decreasing independence of news outlets concerns me.