Page 11 of 23 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 224

Thread: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex...

  1. #101
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 10:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

    Thanks to WorldWatcher, I am now convinced that all the baker had to do was say to the gay couple, "I do not agree with your support of same sex marriage, therefore I refuse to sell you this cake". Not because they're gay, but because the baker doesn't support same sex marriage.

    There. Now it's based on political belief. Throw the gay couple out of your bakery.

  2. #102
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    03-22-18 @ 02:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

    Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    Thanks to WorldWatcher, I am now convinced that all the baker had to do was say to the gay couple, "I do not agree with your support of same sex marriage, therefore I refuse to sell you this cake". Not because they're gay, but because the baker doesn't support same sex marriage.

    There. Now it's based on political belief. Throw the gay couple out of your bakery.
    That would require you to ask your customers their political leaning (or in this case their support for Same-sex Civil Marriage). If you turned away homosexuals that supported SSCM but did not turn away heterosexuals that supported SSCM then the basis of your discriminatory acts was not based on "liberal" it was based on sexual orientation. If you asked ONLY the homosexual customers and not the heterosexual customers that would show an attempted ruse to circumvent the law by targeting homosexual. So if you want to ask all your customers whether they support SSCM before giving them service and then denying service equally based on the answer - knock yourself out.


    >>>>

  3. #103
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 10:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    That would require you to ask your customers their political leaning (or in this case their support for Same-sex Civil Marriage). If you turned away homosexuals that supported SSCM but did not turn away heterosexuals that supported SSCM then the basis of your discriminatory acts was not based on "liberal" it was based on sexual orientation. If you asked ONLY the homosexual customers and not the heterosexual customers that would show an attempted ruse to circumvent the law by targeting homosexual. So if you want to ask all your customers whether they support SSCM before giving them service and then denying service equally based on the answer - knock yourself out.


    >>>>
    We all circumvent - the same way you did when you said "politician" isn't protected, essentially trying to compare apples and oranges.

    I could've easily tried to dig up what the gay couple did for a living and say "<enter name of two professions here> are not protected".

  4. #104
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 01:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: The Other Side of the Coin

    Quote Originally Posted by rathi View Post
    Depends on the circumstances, but discriminating on irrational prejudice is definitely bad.
    Why? If I prefer to sleep with brunettes and redheads turn me off, why should I subject myself to the "horror" of sleeping with a redhead simply to claim the "prize" of not being an irrational discriminator?

    I have no duty to "harm" myself in order to make someone else feel good about themselves.

    The amount of real-life suffering caused by anti-discrimination laws in the 50 years of their existence is absolutely negligible.
    Oh, is that the relevant metric? I don't imagine that forcibly converting everyone in America to Catholicism or Scientology would produce any measurable harm either. It's not like people are going to develop cancer or have to have a limb amputated as a result of being forcibly converted to a religion that they don't believe.

    Here's the point - it's not up to YOU to decide for ME what level of harm I must endure in order to fulfill your ideological goals.

    Not being able to refuse service to a black client at your hotel doesn't make your quality of life worse.
    For someone like you, who doesn't care, then yeah, this doesn't make your quality of life any worse. For someone who does object, forced servitude is a huge deal. Think of it like this - prostitutes don't care who they have sex with so long as they are paid. People who are not prostitutes seem to get really upset about the idea of being forced to have sex with someone that they don't want to have sex with. There's this little matter of personal freedom that is a wrench in the works and screwing up your great design. You may think that the person that you assign to have sex with Woman #1 is a mighty attractive fellow. What you think though is irrelevant. It's what Woman #1 thinks that is important. Whether you agree with her assessment or not is irrelevant. Whether you would sleep with the man that she rejects is also irrelevant.

    The point here is that your values on the issue of how people choose to form associations is irrelevant to their exercise of their own freedom.

  5. #105
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:11 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    34,133

    Re: The Other Side of the Coin

    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    Nope.

    Public Accommodation laws do not require the sale of any goods and services not normally offered to the public. If a Muslim business does not normally sell kosher food they are not required to add it to their menu. However if a Muslim does decide to add it to their menu, they cannot refuse to sell it to a Japanese person based on race.




    Wrong again.

    Nazi is not a class of person protected under race, religion, ethnicity, gender or age (Federal and NM law) or in addition a sexual orientation (NM Law).



    >>>>
    you are not correct on this either. eharmony is the perfect example. they do not sell services for gay people to find relationships yet that didnt' stop them from being sued and losing over it. their services were directly offered to straight people.

  6. #106
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    03-22-18 @ 02:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

    Re: The Other Side of the Coin

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    you are not correct on this either. eharmony is the perfect example. they do not sell services for gay people to find relationships yet that didnt' stop them from being sued and losing over it. their services were directly offered to straight people.
    Sorry your faulty assumption is that different-sex dating services are different than same-sex dating services. The services offered were dating services. Eharmoney provided dating services. Just as a baker sells wedding cakes and can't say "I sell white wedding cakes for white people" but don't make "Jewish wedding cakes for Jews". The product is still a wedding cake. In eHarmony's case their service was a dating service. Some states provide that businesses can't discriminate based on race, or religion, or sexual orientation.

    If eHarmony had offerred "whites only dating services" it would have run afoul of the law in New Jersey and California (two state where they were sued).

    Even though they were sued, eHarmony still doesn't provide services for same-sex matching directly. They setup a separate site to provide those services called "Compatible Partners" and provide a link to it on their site.



    eHarmony - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    >>>>

  7. #107
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 10:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: The Other Side of the Coin

    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    Sorry your faulty assumption is that different-sex dating services are different than same-sex dating services. The services offered were dating services. Eharmoney provided dating services. Just as a baker sells wedding cakes and can't say "I sell white wedding cakes for white people" but don't make "Jewish wedding cakes for Jews". The product is still a wedding cake. In eHarmony's case their service was a dating service. Some states provide that businesses can't discriminate based on race, or religion, or sexual orientation.

    If eHarmony had offerred "whites only dating services" it would have run afoul of the law in New Jersey and California (two state where they were sued).

    Even though they were sued, eHarmony still doesn't provide services for same-sex matching directly. They setup a separate site to provide those services called "Compatible Partners" and provide a link to it on their site.



    eHarmony - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    >>>>
    Care to tell me about your outrage over sites like JDate and BlackPeopleMeet.com?

  8. #108
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:11 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    34,133

    Re: The Other Side of the Coin

    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    Sorry your faulty assumption is that different-sex dating services are different than same-sex dating services. The services offered were dating services. Eharmoney provided dating services. Just as a baker sells wedding cakes and can't say "I sell white wedding cakes for white people" but don't make "Jewish wedding cakes for Jews". The product is still a wedding cake. In eHarmony's case their service was a dating service. Some states provide that businesses can't discriminate based on race, or religion, or sexual orientation.

    If eHarmony had offerred "whites only dating services" it would have run afoul of the law in New Jersey and California (two state where they were sued).

    Even though they were sued, eHarmony still doesn't provide services for same-sex matching directly. They setup a separate site to provide those services called "Compatible Partners" and provide a link to it on their site.



    eHarmony - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    >>>>
    you are not correct.

    there is a difference in heterosexual dating sites and gay sites. they go after a different market and there is nothing until someone files a lawsuit that requires gay sites to offer services to straight people.

    their software was tailored to heterosexual relationships. they did not offer services to gays. yet now they are forced to by threat of law.
    there are a ton of dating sites out there that cater to specific criteria. they do not offer all solutions to everyone so it is you that have the faulty assumption.

  9. #109
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:11 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    34,133

    Re: The Other Side of the Coin

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    Care to tell me about your outrage over sites like JDate and BlackPeopleMeet.com?
    exactly the problem is no one has sued them yet. i think people should start playing their own game and start sueing these gay only businesses and sites for discrimination.
    if they want to play the discrimination game then lets play the discrimination game.

  10. #110
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    03-22-18 @ 02:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

    Re: The Other Side of the Coin

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    Care to tell me about your outrage over sites like JDate and BlackPeopleMeet.com?
    1. I'm not "outraged", personally I don't have a problem with any business tailoring it's business model as they see fit. My opinion of what the law should be and how the law functions are two different things.

    2. You don't have to be Jewish to use JDate (You Don't Have to Be Jewish to Love JDate - NYTimes.com).

    3. And one would have to assume that one doesn't have to be black to use BlackPeopleMeet.com., however BPM is owned by Match.com and provides multiple services "targeted" at different demographics - same company, just different marketing.


    >>>>

Page 11 of 23 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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