Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 70

Thread: Pending state religious freedom act a 'license to discriminate'

  1. #41
    Sage
    chromium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    06-05-17 @ 10:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,968

    Re: Pending state religious freedom act a 'license to discriminate'

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    exactly!

    and THIS christian simply isnt biased and or uneducated enough to think that i don't ALREADY have my rights protected because I do. Like I said in the end these things will get removed, challenged and thrown out also.

    Thats the best part, its poetic justice .... .the fact of the matter is equal rights pertaining to gays have made HUGE strides BECAUSE of the bannings, without them it would have been a harder path. The retards and bigots that put the bannings in place actually HELPED establish equal rights. Its hilarious.
    You know i never really thought of it from this angle, but when states like texas passed bans on gay marriage when there was NO push to make it an issue, they actually created the drive to make gay marriage a reality. No one wants to be treated as 2nd class under law. I think all the ballot drives helped to unite advocates towards this cause and awoke the younger generation to a need to support gays.

    I mean, who doesn't enjoy proving their elders wrong?

  2. #42
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,795

    Re: Pending state religious freedom act a 'license to discriminate'

    Quote Originally Posted by chromium View Post
    You know i never really thought of it from this angle, but when states like texas passed bans on gay marriage when there was NO push to make it an issue, they actually created the drive to make gay marriage a reality. No one wants to be treated as 2nd class under law. I think all the ballot drives helped to unite advocates towards this cause and awoke the younger generation to a need to support gays.

    I mean, who doesn't enjoy proving their elders wrong?
    thats exactly what it does
    not to mention when its obviously a direct violation of rights it now gives a very clear avenue to take to challenge the law.

    It was obvious once DOMA fell that this was gonna happen and i said many times. There are just literally 1000s of scenarios that end up violating rights that One couple married in this state but not in this one creates.

    If mental nonsense like this bill is allowed to pass the same thing will happen, violates of rights and new avenues to take to fight for equality.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  3. #43
    Sage
    JumpinJack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Last Seen
    05-12-17 @ 10:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,628

    Re: Pending state religious freedom act a 'license to discriminate'

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    Freedom of religion (“freedom of conscience” would be a better term, actually) does mean that if government is going to compel a citizen to act in a manner which violates that citizens religious or moral beliefs, that government had better have a very, very good reason for doing so.

    Obviously, human sacrifice would not be protected under freedom of religion. As Will Rogers famously observed, one's right to swing one's fist ends where someone else's nose begins. No right extends to the point of using it to violate someone else's right.

    Freedom of association (which isn't explicitly stated in the First Amendment, but is rather universally agreed to be implied by the freedoms of religion, speech, and assembly) means that government is (or should be) severely constrained against dictating to anyone with whom me may, or must associate, or for what reasons.

    Discrimination is nothing more than making a choice not to associate with certain individuals. As such, I think government is unjustified in interfering with this legitimate exercise of freedom of association.

    One has a right to associate or not with whom one will. One never has a right to have someone else be forced to associate with him against his will.
    Freedom of association does not mean serving the public at large. Freedom of association means "associating." You can start or join a club that excludes Jews. You don't have to invite the black neighbor to your neighborhood party. But if you open a business under the laws of the United States that is to serve the public, you are not allowed, under the law, to define what "public" means. You cannot choose to exclude some of the public for discriminatory reasons. That is the law.

    Hey, if you want to, you can make it a private club. That way, you can exclude people you object to. Old people, gay people, black people, Jewish people.

    That is the law. What is so hard to understand about that? You are not "associating" with the public. You are serving them, in order to make a profit.

    To understand the basis of the law, put yourself in, say, a Jewish person's place. Then imagine we are back in the 1950s, where businesses are allowed to discriminate.

    You get in your car with your family to go on a trip. Oops....don't forget to take your multiple cans of gas, because you can't be sure that gas stations will sell you gas.
    You have to pack enough food for your entire trip, since you can't be sure you'll be allowed to buy any.
    You will have to bring pillows & blankets, since you can't be sure you'll be allowed to stay in a hotel at the location you stop at. You may have to sleep in the car.
    You have to be prepared to use the bathroom on the road, including the kids....whatever arrangements you may want to make for that. You can't count on being allowed to use a public restroom.

    This means, then, that you really can't go very far or for very long.

    This would also affect what job you can have. Certainly not a job that involves much travel. Even if you get hired by a business in an office building, will you be allowed to eat in the restaurants in the building? Or use the restrooms? Does that depend on the building's owner? The restaurants' owners?

    I'm sure you can see the problem with this, from the other person's point of view, and our country's point of view. As a member of the public, you have the right to use facilities and businesses and services that are, in fact, intended for the public. It affects the public's ability to move around freely, their work, their income, their dignity. No member of the public is more or less than another one. The public has rights, too. Your rights end where another's rights begin.

    People still have the right to discriminate, if they want, by forming membership clubs or associations, or whatever they're called. They still have the right not to "associate" with those they don't want to. Serving the public is not "associating."
    ________________________________

  4. #44
    Why so un**great?
    DifferentDrummr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Facepalm Beach
    Last Seen
    06-04-17 @ 04:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,818
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Pending state religious freedom act a 'license to discriminate'

    Quote Originally Posted by JumpinJack View Post
    Freedom of association does not mean serving the public at large. Freedom of association means "associating." You can start or join a club that excludes Jews. You don't have to invite the black neighbor to your neighborhood party. But if you open a business under the laws of the United States that is to serve the public, you are not allowed, under the law, to define what "public" means. You cannot choose to exclude some of the public for discriminatory reasons. That is the law.

    Hey, if you want to, you can make it a private club. That way, you can exclude people you object to. Old people, gay people, black people, Jewish people.

    That is the law. What is so hard to understand about that? You are not "associating" with the public. You are serving them, in order to make a profit.
    Important point, actually. Which is why gyms for women only have a "membership" structure, and can legally do so. But other laws regarding doing business still apply, so for example, they can't discriminate against the people they hire based on gender.
    I fight against the ignorant, irresponsible, and/or closed-minded.
    This group is the worst enemy of America and its freedoms. It includes, but is not limited to, all Trump supporters.

  5. #45
    Sage
    JumpinJack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Last Seen
    05-12-17 @ 10:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,628

    Re: Pending state religious freedom act a 'license to discriminate'

    Quote Originally Posted by DifferentDrummr View Post
    Important point, actually. Which is why gyms for women only have a "membership" structure, and can legally do so. But other laws regarding doing business still apply, so for example, they can't discriminate against the people they hire based on gender.
    I didn't know that. Thanks for the info.
    ________________________________

  6. #46
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    Re: Pending state religious freedom act a 'license to discriminate'

    Quote Originally Posted by JumpinJack View Post
    Freedom of association does not mean serving the public at large. Freedom of association means "associating." You can start or join a club that excludes Jews. You don't have to invite the black neighbor to your neighborhood party. But if you open a business under the laws of the United States that is to serve the public, you are not allowed, under the law, to define what "public" means. You cannot choose to exclude some of the public for discriminatory reasons. That is the law.
    The Constitution is the highest law, and there is nothing in it that supports the idea that government can compel you to waive one right as a condition of being allowed to exercise another.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  7. #47
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,795

    Re: Pending state religious freedom act a 'license to discriminate'

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    The Constitution is the highest law, and there is nothing in it that supports the idea that government can compel you to waive one right as a condition of being allowed to exercise another.
    wait right are you claiming is being waived . . i cant wait to read this
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  8. #48
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    Re: Pending state religious freedom act a 'license to discriminate'

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    wait right are you claiming is being waived . . i cant wait to read this
    Freedom of association, not explicitly stated, but strongly implied by the First Amendment.

    Nothing in the Constitution supports the idea that government can compel anyone to waive this right as a condition of being allowed to make an honest living.
    Last edited by Bob Blaylock; 12-11-14 at 04:29 PM. Reason: May Laurence Tureaud have compassion on you. — http://tinyurl.com/LaurenceTureaud
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  9. #49
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,795

    Re: Pending state religious freedom act a 'license to discriminate'

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    Freedom of association, not explicitly stated, but strongly implied by the First Amendment.

    Nothing in the Constitution supports the idea that government can compel anyone to waive this right as a condition of being allowed to make an honest living.
    that right is not infringed on thank you for trying but do you have another? a FACTUAL one that you can back up with proof instead of using just your opinions and feelings?
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  10. #50
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    Re: Pending state religious freedom act a 'license to discriminate'

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    that right is not infringed on thank you for trying but do you have another? a FACTUAL one that you can back up with proof instead of using just your opinions and feelings?
    It absolutely is. To force someone to engage in an association in which he would not choose to engage is a violation of his freedom of association.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 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
  •