Page 23 of 173 FirstFirst ... 1321222324253373123 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 1723

Thread: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:113:123:292:647]

  1. #221
    Educator Soupnazi630's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    11-08-14 @ 09:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    855

    Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Dude open your eyes; ARTICLE 14, SEC 1

    Here let me spell it out for you since you seem to be incapable of doing so yourself:AMENDMENT XIV

    SECTION 1.

    All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


    See what a little education can do? Or are you still going to claim ignorance and that there is nothing about Equal Protection in the Constitution. DOH!!!
    I see you cannot tell the difference between articles and amendments.

    And as I have said repeatedly all of this applies to government.

    As in GOVERNMENT may not deprive someone of equal protection.

    This amendment ( as opposed to article ) in no way applies to private business

  2. #222
    Educator Soupnazi630's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    11-08-14 @ 09:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    855

    Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    LOL....wow....you should stop now before you display any more of your ignorance. Too funny......
    Ad hominen attacks mean you lost the argument.

    Amendments and articles are not the same and there is no article 14

    If you meant the fourteenth amendment you might have simply said so

  3. #223
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,144

    Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by Soupnazi630 View Post
    Ad hominen attacks mean you lost the argument.

    Amendments and articles are not the same and there is no article 14

    If you meant the fourteenth amendment you might have simply said so
    No...it simply means that seeing that you believe that the Constitution stops at Article 12 clearly shows your ignorance and explains in full detail why you cannot fully participate in this debate and why it is futile to spend any more time trying to intelligently debate the issue until you educate yourself a bit more.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  4. #224
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    08-19-16 @ 02:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,243

    Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Should have just refused to work for them because they are overbearing assholes. It's still ok to discriminate against assholes isn't it?

  5. #225
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,339

    Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    The center of all of this comes down to, is homosexuality a lifestyle choice, or is someone born that way?
    If it is a choice, it should not be afforded the same legal protections as a trait someone was born with.
    People and businesses can and do discriminate against others choices, I.E. no shirt, no shoes, no service, no smoking, ect.
    So if a person chooses a certain lifestyle, that is their choice, but choices do sometimes have consequences.
    If on the other hand homosexuality in a birth defect, it should be afforded the full weight of our anti discrimination laws.

  6. #226
    Sage
    Anthony60's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Northern New Jersey
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,564

    Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Hey, if they don't want to sell a cake to someone, they just plain don't have to. Good example of the left using judges to circumvent the Constitution. Isn't this the same business that was boycotted and ending up closing their doors? If so, it is proof positive that the courts shouldn't even be involved, as the free market took care of it without the iron fisted (liberal) government. Though, if I were a liberal, I would say that the shop owners should be bring suit against the community for not buying their products. After all, if the government can force them to sell a cake, then of course they can force someone to buy it.

  7. #227
    Haters gon' hate
    MarineTpartier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    01-04-16 @ 04:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,586
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    For example, say you live in town X. In town X, all the food selling venues (markets, restaurants, farms) decide to not sell food to group Y. Is that harming the public? Or is it permissible because they're harming only group Y's ability to feed itself?
    In that case, yes, gov't would have to take action. I'm not someone who's going to let ideology take precedence over the welfare of a whole group of people. However unrealistic that scenario is, if it did happen, I believe the local gov't would have to take action. If they refuse, it would have to work it's way up the levels of gov't above it's jurisdiction. One thing to think of though, by the time the pain of getting this moved through all of those levels of gov't occurred, I think group Y probably would have moved on from town X.
    To be fair, that isn't the case in this particular situation. Not by a long shot.
    “Mr. Speaker, I once again find myself compelled to vote against the annual budget resolution for a very simple reason: it makes government bigger.” ― Ron Paul
    Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty. – Thomas Jefferson

  8. #228
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,045

    Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by MarineTpartier View Post
    In that case, yes, gov't would have to take action. I'm not someone who's going to let ideology take precedence over the welfare of a whole group of people. However unrealistic that scenario is,
    So at what percentage of the businesses denying services to X group should the government take action? For example, should the government take action when it's 10% of businesses? Or 30%? Or 50% +1? Who sets these arbitrary standards for government action? It's not unrealistic at all. Many businesses have historically denied service to minorities (blacks, whites, Jews, Protestants, Catholics, Asians, Mexicans etc.) To the point where these occurrences have actually become part of the oral history of these groups.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  9. #229
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,125

    Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by MarineTpartier View Post
    And they're wrong for it, as has been proven by the evolution of most Christian's stances on things.
    That is what we define as a "moral majority". When there is disagreement on a particular interpretation of scripture or the times demand a reevaluation of traditional interpretations, it eventually falls to the majority to determine the moral stance. Genocide of Native Americans, slavery, segregation, restricting women's rights, etc. have all been issues that people used the Bible to support but which the moral majority eventually decided were immoral. The legitimacy of same sex relationships is the most recent and drastic shift in the moral majority. Of course, I am not saying that the majority actually determines right or wrong because that would be a fallacy, but rather that the demographics of the moral majority shape the attitudes that eventually form policy. Gay rights have advanced in the United States because of Christianity, not in spite of it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    The economy will improve under this bill. If a few people die, it will be for the betterament of this country.

  10. #230
    Sage
    Peter King's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,026

    Re: Colorado Judge: Bakery Owner discriminated against gay couple [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    The bigotry lies in forcing someone to go against their beliefs via their private business to provide you with a service for something they believe is wrong.

    This goes beyond gay "rights" and gets into bullying through the courts.
    I disagree, this certainly does not go beyond gay rights. The owners are not being bullied by the court, they have been judged to have broken the law of the land by refusing these gay men service. There is no "right to discriminate" but there is a right to get service without being discriminated for something as basic as a food item.
    Former military man (and now babysitter of Donald Trump) John Kelly, is a big loud lying empty barrel!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •