Page 111 of 122 FirstFirst ... 1161101109110111112113121 ... LastLast
Results 1,101 to 1,110 of 1212

Thread: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451:959]

  1. #1101
    Sage
    Somerville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    On an island. Not that one!
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:28 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,843

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451:959]

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    <snip>
    In fact it is because it isn't just a cake - it is a wedding cake. It is a part of a celebration of a union of two people. If baker believes that he cannot in good conscience take part in that celebration, well it's not your right to force him or her to do so anyway simply because you disagree.
    <snip>
    Seemingly unrelated but as I read cpwill's words I realised something, I find it funny - opinions may vary.

    Using cpwill's argument to the effect that a baker may be seen as "taking part" in an action he finds objectionable, therefore he/she refuses to make a cake for a gay wedding, one could say that a gun salesperson who sells a weapon to a shady buyer is thereby participating willingly in any criminal action the gun buyer instigates.
    “And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
    ~ James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822

  2. #1102
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451:959]

    Quote Originally Posted by 1750Texan View Post
    This passage above all the others is indicative of your undertanding of rights.
    Naturally. Rights are negative, not positive in nature. That's why the rights enshrined in our Bill of Rights dictate that the State shall not be used to inhibit our liberty, they are negative rights.

    If I were to have ten Christian ministers, with churches and congergations in the community, to testify in court on my behalf that Christianity does not foster or advocate disrimination against anyone for any reason...would that help or hurt my case against religious dicrimination?
    neither. Christian denominations disagree with each other on homosexuality, and all have equal right to exercise their faith; whether or not you think it is discrimination.

    There is [and will be shown by the US Supreme court that there is] a difference in of one's religious convitions[which are protected] and religious belief meant to discriminate[which are not protected].
    Oh, so you are free to believe what you like so long as you do not attempt to live in it?

    Well, flip it. Let us say that I get law passed that while you are free to believe in left-leaning causes, you have to vote for conservatives. You're free to believe whatever you believe, it's your exercise of your beliefs that isn't protected.

    Now, does that make sense to you?


    No. You do not have the right to force someone to violate their religious faith simply because you do not agree with it, or feel that it's effects are "mean".
    Last edited by cpwill; 03-02-14 at 05:31 PM.

  3. #1103
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451:959]

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    Seemingly unrelated but as I read cpwill's words I realised something, I find it funny - opinions may vary.

    Using cpwill's argument to the effect that a baker may be seen as "taking part" in an action he finds objectionable, therefore he/she refuses to make a cake for a gay wedding, one could say that a gun salesperson who sells a weapon to a shady buyer is thereby participating willingly in any criminal action the gun buyer instigates.
    That is incorrect, unless the purchaser of the gun makes clear that he intends to use the weapon for criminal action.

  4. #1104
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451:959]

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    The ones who got 'pissy' about it were the Gays. Instead of calling the owners idiots and going to another bakery, which most people would do when insulted, they got a fit and made themselves look even more petty and ridiculous. I still support Gay rights but, damn, the Gay militants are getting tiresome.
    As George Will put it, they are sore winners. Rather reinforcing my point that the stated goals do not fully align with the actual ones.

  5. #1105
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,849

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451:959]

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    As George Will put it, they are sore winners. Rather reinforcing my point that the stated goals do not fully align with the actual ones.
    Yeah. Instead of suing bakers over civil rights issues, those dang negroes gays should just go where they're wanted.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  6. #1106
    Bat Chain Puller
    beefheart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    The burning sands of the desert southwest.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    19,371

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451:959]

    It was a stupid, unnecessary bill, put up by the idjit legislators who listen to the talibornagains at the Center for Arizona Policy. We have some real theocratic idiots in our legislature, and they have been exposed...

    I am so happy that the people of AZ spoke up, the businesses spoke up, and the community leaders, left and right spoke up, and got this abomination killed.
    "Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it." George Santayana

  7. #1107
    Pragmatic Idealist
    upsideguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rocky Mtn. High
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,144

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451:959]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    And they shouldn't have the right to do make the claim that their religious convictions prevent them from baking a cake and selling it to a gay couple. That is just as ridiculous as making a claim that a person's religious convictions prevent them from baking a cake and selling it to a Jewish couple or a mixed race couple or an older couple. If that is a conflict for their convictions, then they need to find either a new job or a new way of doing business (perhaps referrals only). Businesses open to the public are subject to anti-discrimination laws. And in this case they are treating people differently based on their relative genders.

    I do wonder though why people get so pissy about such things. It would have been interesting to see someone turn down my grandparents for a cake because they wanted it to say something like "50 years Chuck and Bill" on it and it was either ordered over the phone or by only my grandfather or perhaps one of us younger ones.
    Just for the record, from a Christian perspective, objections to gay marriage (or second marriages) are not the equivalent to the other things you cite. The Bible is particularly clear on gay and 2nd marriages.... there is no biblical basis for any of the other things you cite, especially anything against the Jewish people.... actually quite the opposite.

    I do believe certain types of businesses should be able to exempt out of things they find immoral. The Catholic church and others are trying to do so regarding the mandate to include contraception in health care. We have long had a policy of exempting any consideration for medicaid or other government funding of abortion. The precedent for moral objections already exists. Somewhat similar, churches are allowed to discriminate on matters of religion when hiring.

    That all said, its pretty had to articulate effective legislation around such.

  8. #1108
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451:959]

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Yeah. Instead of suing bakers over civil rights issues, those dang negroes gays should just go where they're wanted.
    It's not a civil rights violation if someone doesn't want to participate in your wedding, and the comparisons to Jim Crow are ridiculous. Jim Crow was state enforced on the businesses, who could be punished if they served blacks.

  9. #1109
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451:959]

    Quote Originally Posted by beefheart View Post
    It was a stupid, unnecessary bill, put up by the idjit legislators who listen to the talibornagains at the Center for Arizona Policy. We have some real theocratic idiots in our legislature, and they have been exposed...

    I am so happy that the people of AZ spoke up, the businesses spoke up, and the community leaders, left and right spoke up, and got this abomination killed.
    Well you don't often get open celebration of the power of monied interests over that of the people and their representatives, but there you go.

  10. #1110
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451:959]

    Quote Originally Posted by upsideguy View Post
    That all said, its pretty had to articulate effective legislation around such.
    Which is precisely why no attempt should be made. This is best handled in the realm that gay activist Johnathan Rauch approvingly describes as hidden law.

    ...A soft communitarian is a person who maintains a deep respect for what I call "hidden law": the norms, conventions, implicit bargains, and folk wisdoms that organize social expectations, regulate everyday behavior, and manage interpersonal conflicts. Until recently, for example, hidden law regulated assisted suicide, and it did so with an almost miraculous finesse. Doctors helped people to die, and they often did so without the express consent of anybody. The decision was made by patients and doctors and families in an irregular fashion, and, crucially, everyone pretended that no decision had ever been made. No one had been murdered; no one had committed suicide; and so no one faced prosecution or perdition.

    Hidden law is exceptionally resilient, until it is dragged into politics and pummeled by legalistic reformers, at which point it can give way all at once. The showboating narcissist Jack Kevorkian dragged assisted suicide into the open and insisted that it be legalized (and televised). At that point, the deal was off. No one could pretend assisted suicide wasn't happening. Activists framed state right-to-die initiatives, senators sponsored bills banning assisted suicide, and courts began issuing an unending series of deeply confused rulings. Soon decisions about assisted suicide will be made by buzzing mobs of lawyers and courts and ethics committees, with prosecutors helpfully hovering nearby, rather than by patients and doctors and families. And the final indignity will be that the lawyers and courts and committee people will congratulate themselves on having at last created a rational process where before there were no rules at all, only chaos and darkness and barbarism. And then, having replaced an effective and intuitive and flexible social mechanism with a maladroit and mystifying and brittle one, they will march on like Sherman's army to demolish such other institutions of hidden law as they encounter....

Posting Permissions

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