Page 9 of 23 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 224

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

  1. #81
    Guru
    the_recruit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,177

    Re: The Other Side of the Coin

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    We already had that conversation in the 1950's and 1960's. Your side lost.
    Different time, different place.

  2. #82
    Sage
    blackjack50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:52 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,299

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

    I think this guy has a right to turn away the customer. But if a wedding cake maker can't...I suppose he can't either.
    The Crowd is not the sum of its parts.

  3. #83
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

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

    Quote Originally Posted by 1750Texan View Post
    The comment was that business should be able to refuse service to whom they wish too...that may be so for No Shirt, No Shoes, No Sevice, but not if your gay, or Black, or blind, don't ask for service.

    so yes is part of the discusion. Because you are unable to decern it as so, does not disqualify my comment.
    This is like pointing to Hitler whenever a political discussion arises. Point to discrimination and it always comes back to Alabama of the 50's.

    That period is done, and a good thing too.. Now we are telling businesses to serve anyone no matter how they feel about it, and we have to understand that this would include very few businesses because it goes against their own self interest.

    Try reading just a few paragraphs of this article to get a broader perspective. The Ingrained Intolerance of Liberal Tolerance | The American Spectator

  4. #84
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

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

    Quote Originally Posted by stonewall50 View Post
    I think this guy has a right to turn away the customer. But if a wedding cake maker can't...I suppose he can't either.
    There will be selective turnaways, depending on who has the greater political clout of the day.

  5. #85
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: The Other Side of the Coin

    Quote Originally Posted by opendebate View Post
    The principal here is that we practice acceptance, tolerance and understanding.
    Don't you mean that we all practice communion, confession, reciting the Lord's Prayer, reciting our Hail Mary prayer and heeding the words of the Pope? What's that you say, some people don't believe in that Catholic jazz?

    You're treating your issues of acceptance, tolerance and understanding as though they are a universal religion. What of the people who don't want to practice acceptance, tolerance and understanding, especially when being forced to worship these liberal commandments conflicts with their human rights to free speech and free association?

    Why should your religious views be pushed down the throats of unwilling people?

  6. #86
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: The Other Side of the Coin

    Quote Originally Posted by rathi View Post
    Discriminating against homosexuals based on irrational prejudice hurts innocent people.
    So discriminating on the basis of rational prejudice is good?

    What don't you understand about the immorality of using government threats of violence to force people into unwilling and unwanted associations? The very fact that shopkeepers are forced into such associations meets your test of hurting innocent people. These shopkeepers have done no wrong and Totalitarian Liberalism is hurting them.

  7. #87
    Minister of Love
    PoS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Oceania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,944

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

    Here's a good article on the hypocrisy in all of this:

    One Nazi Wedding Cake to Go, Please - Taki's Magazine

    Last Wednesday, Arizona’s lizard-skinned Governor Jan Brewer vetoed what had largely been described as an “anti-gay bill,” even though the bill’s text doesn’t mention homos at all.


    The luridly self-righteous cultural left, which long ago eclipsed social conservatives in their unhinged sense of shirt-rending, chest-thumping moral hyperbole, had described the law as shameful, disgraceful, horrifying, and hateful. Fanning the faggoty flames of fear, they warned that if the bill passed, it would usher in a new era of “Jim Crow for gays” and possibly even a homosexual Holocaust.


    As far as I can tell, the bill only intended to allow business owners to refuse service to anyone if it violated their religious convictions. And as far as I feel, anyone should be able to deny service to anyone for whatever reason pleases them. If you only want to bake cakes for Filipino Satanists, that should be your choice. Some might think it’s a bad business decision, but a possible upside is that you’d corner the coveted Filipino Satanist cake market.


    It is thought that the bill was inspired by a recent rash of high-profile cases in other states spurred by gays and lesbians who’d been denied service and decided to take the matter into court rather than to another shop down the block. This included a New Mexico wedding photographer who’d declined to shoot a lesbian couple’s commitment ceremony, as well as bakers in Oregon, Colorado, and Iowa who said their religious beliefs prevented them from baking gay-marriage wedding cakes in good conscience.
    “Why would you want to buy a cake from someone who doesn’t like you?”


    I was reminded of a 2008 case in New Jersey involving one Heath Campbell, a self-described Nazi festooned in swastika tattoos. The case involved not a wedding cake, but rather a birthday cake for his three-year-old son, cuddly little Adolf Hitler Campbell. A worker at a ShopRite supermarket refused to squeeze out the words “Adolf Hitler” onto the cake in sugared frosting, leading Campbell to get his Hitler birthday cake at a local Walmart, which subsequently promised to review its “cake policy.”


    Shortly after the Nazi cake hubbub, authorities seized his newborn daughter Eva Braun Campbell. At last count, Campbell has fathered nine children with five different women but has custody of none of them. Campbell insists that authorities keep seizing his kids because he’s a Nazi, while authorities claim it’s due to reports of family violence.

    Campbell is also reportedly unemployed and receiving disability, so it’s doubtful that were he alive, Adolf Hitler would consider him a role model. And that recalls an exceedingly tasteless joke I once heard where Mussolini shows up unexpectedly at Hitler’s doorstep, at which point Der Führer says, “If I knew you were coming, I would have baked a kike!”

    I don’t see any difference in refusing to bake a cake for a Nazi or a turd-tapper. It should be the baker’s decision alone. And religious convictions shouldn’t be the sole criterion. You should be able to refuse service to anyone merely because you don’t like their face or the way they smell. You should be able to tell them to get lost merely because you’re in a bad mood.


    On the flip side of the equation, why would you want to buy a cake from someone who doesn’t like you? Better yet, why would you eat a cake baked by someone who doesn’t like you? Food tampering is not an urban legend, my friends.


    Why be a noodge and go where you’re not wanted? Is there no end to such incivility?

    What if I went into a sign-making shop in San Francisco’s Castro District and ordered a 20-x-10-foot sign that said SODOMY IS AN ABOMINATION? I’d be a jerk, that’s what.
    What about the comedian who went into a black dry cleaner’s shop in Los Angeles and asked him to clean his Klan outfit?

    What if an Orthodox Jewish caterer was asked to spit-roast a pig?

    A case in Canada pitted a Muslim barber who refused to cut a lesbian client’s hair due to Islamic proscriptions against touching lesbians…or something. Rather than seeking out a willing lesbian barber—this is Toronto, after all, and I’m sure it’s filled with eager lesbian barbers willing to make a honest buck shearing their cohorts—she went crying to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.


    In the mid-1960s, future Georgia Governor Lester Maddox—who truly has the perfect name for a segregationist—shut down his Atlanta restaurant rather than serve blacks. Does this make him a bigot, a man of conscience, or both?


    I know someone who works in a sushi restaurant, and she says she dreads black customers because they are routinely rude, loud, and they never tip. Doesn’t forcing her to serve them violate the 13th Amendment’s clause against involuntary servitude?
    In my years working as a Philadelphia cabdriver, I received a grand total of $1 in tips from my innumerable black customers. Even the black cabbies would complain about black customers’ stinginess. Why does their “right” to not be discriminated against trump my “right” to make money?

    Because, I fear, “rights” are a zero-sum game, and the spoils usually go to whoever is pushiest.
    And these days, the gays are pushing harder than a steroidal muscle fag mounting a bony twink from behind.


    From the Civil Rights movements of the 1960s up to the ceaseless modern minoritarian onslaughts against the unwilling, the principle of “freedom of association” has been fairly stomped to death. Freedom of association involves the consent of both parties, because forcing someone to schmooze with someone with whom they have zero desire to engage is not freedom—it’s coercion.
    The US Constitution makes no explicit mention of “freedom of association,” although the First Amendment mentions “the right of the people peaceably to assemble.”


    But what about the right to avoid people? For a misanthrope such as myself, that should be the crown jewel of human rights, the one that supersedes and undermines all others. If society refuses to acknowledge a fundamental right to be left alone, we are headed pell-mell into a Dictatorship of the Pushy.

    Its funny that the government steps in and takes a kid's children away because he's a neo Nazi who just wanted a swastika themed cake while it forces religious people to to service other minorities.
    Last edited by PoS; 03-11-14 at 03:55 AM.

  8. #88
    Sage
    shrubnose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Europe
    Last Seen
    11-29-17 @ 03:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    18,851
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: The Other Side of the Coin

    Quote Originally Posted by the_recruit View Post
    Sure.
    I think private businesses should be able to decide whom to do business with according to whatever grounds they see fit.



    You're entitled to your opinion, but the USA's 1964 Civil Rights Act doesn't agree with you.

    Try to deny anyone a seat at your lunch counter and wait and see what happens.

  9. #89
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: The Other Side of the Coin

    Quote Originally Posted by shrubnose View Post
    You're entitled to your opinion, but the USA's 1964 Civil Rights Act doesn't agree with you.

    Try to deny anyone a seat at your lunch counter and wait and see what happens.
    So Muslims will now be forced to sell Kosher food and Jews will be forced to design Swastika inspired wedding cakes, while people are still locked in 1964 where there was just one issue at play.

  10. #90
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: The Other Side of the Coin

    Quote Originally Posted by shrubnose View Post
    You're entitled to your opinion, but the USA's 1964 Civil Rights Act doesn't agree with you.

    Try to deny anyone a seat at your lunch counter and wait and see what happens.
    Do you understand the difference between not serving someone and not selling something?

Page 9 of 23 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... 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
  •