Page 100 of 320 FirstFirst ... 50909899100101102110150200 ... LastLast
Results 991 to 1,000 of 3196

Thread: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

  1. #991
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:01 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,656

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    It's the same definition used

    here's from Title II of CRA

    Civil Rights Act 1964
    No, it's not. You'll notice that the majority of the list you originally posted doesn't apply:

    (D) an auditorium, convention center, lecture hall, or other place of public gathering;
    (E) a bakery, grocery store, clothing store, hardware store, shopping center, or other sales or rental establishment;
    (F) a laundromat, dry-cleaner, bank, barber shop, beauty shop, travel service, shoe repair service, funeral parlor, gas station, office of an accountant or lawyer, pharmacy, insurance office, professional office of a health care provider, hospital, or other service establishment;
    (G) a terminal, depot, or other station used for specified public transportation;
    (H) a museum, library, gallery, or other place of public display or collection;
    (I) a park, zoo, amusement park, or other place of recreation;
    (J) a nursery, elementary, secondary, undergraduate, or postgraduate private school, or other place of education;
    (K) a day care center, senior citizen center, homeless shelter, food bank, adoption agency, or other social service center establishment; and
    (L) a gymnasium, health spa, bowling alley, golf course, or other place of exercise or recreation.
    Leaving, of course, restaurants, theatres, hotels and gas stations - just like I said.

  2. #992
    Randian PUA
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,476

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    No, it's not. You'll notice that the majority of the list you originally posted doesn't apply:



    Leaving, of course, restaurants, theatres, hotels and gas stations - just like I said.
    And every other place of entertainment, which you left out
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  3. #993
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:01 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,656

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    And every other place of entertainment, which you left out
    If you don't like theatre, switch it to "entertainment venue" or simply post the full text. I'm not trying to hide anything or mislead anyone.

    Just don't post the full text of a completely innappropriate section of the law and highlight a bunch of things that are irrelevant and claim that it's the same thing.

  4. #994
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,921

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by maxparrish View Post
    You mean he was persecuted for his beliefs. Thank you for confirming my point; mere criticism or discrimination is not sufficient to claim persecution. "Persecution only occurs when someone repeatedly harasses or punishes another in a manner designed to injure, grieve, or afflict; to make someone suffer because of their belief. You know, like a founder of Mozilla "getting whacked (hounded into resigning) by the gay mafia" (Bill Mahr) .".
    No, he was persecuted for his ACTS, donating money to a Constitutional Amendment to codify forever his personal beliefs and apply them to the entire state.

    A "world of difference" for whom, compared to what? We all have personal and privately held views (that is as true of the people of Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union as it is here) but no one would suggest that their dissidents should have been persecuted merely because they wanted to "impose" their view of a free society on others.
    I don't understand that analogy. I'm making a distinction between having a belief and imposing it on others.

    So perhaps what you actually mean is that 'it is different' because anyone who is not willing to extend the "right" of marriage to same sex couples is supporting the continued denial of a liberty right to a group; and anyone who says or does anything to politically support and deny a liberty should be persecuted and driven from their jobs? Really?
    No, not at all, but what I know is if your CEO supported denying YOU a cherished liberty - say gun ownership if you're a 1st Amendment supporter - you WOULD object and so would customers and suppliers of your company who also cherished that liberty, and a CEO takes a huge risk by taking a position that would strip that liberty from important constituencies. It's nothing more than stating the obvious. The CEO is the public face of the company. When he takes on that role, his personal views on such issues ARE relevant.

    If so, then in your "moral" and "tolerant" world more than half the voters who supported and actually voted for Proposition 8 should also be targets of persecution, and hounded from employment...correct? Just as anyone who supports anything less than pro-choice should be persecuted and hounded from their employment, yes? And for some let us not forget the Communists and the Jews, they too need to be persecuted and driven from employment, (Oh wait, we have been here before, have we not?).
    Covered above.... The CEO is unique.

    You offer us a too obvious nonsensical analogy because...? The actual question is "would a software maker in California employ a founder and CEO who privately donated money to a Constitutional amendment that has NOTHING to do with their software products (banned or otherwise)? Unless you think that Mozilla's real business purpose is to politically advance gay marriage rights, your analogy is more than daft - its bizarre. (And, by the way, 'that hounded person' in Mozilla did not 'publicly advertise' his personal view. It was private until the self-appointed 'gay brownshirts' researched, targeted, publicized, and then persecuted a private person.
    What more can I say - he expressed his views on gay marriage, which would deny the benefits of marriage to lots of his employees/suppliers/customers/users and they objected. I think your problem is you don't care about those rights and can't imagine anyone has a legitimate basis to object, but to those affected it is simply a big deal - marriage is a big deal.

    A reminder - we have been here before. Salem, the Hollywood 10, Red Channels, and black lists (employment persecution) are very familiar theme to those of us who have learned from history. And to those who remain historically benighted, and would enjoy a rebirth of such persecution, I can think of nothing more appropriate than to suggest they (you) read about another who held similar views: Senator Joseph McCarthy.
    A bit dramatic aren't we?

    And when they are hunting for todays "communists" (traditional marriage supporters) before these folk find a private citizen who has "sinned", expose and publicly denounce their prior affiliation, and then destroy them I hope someone whispers in their the words of Joseph Welch:
    Oh please, give me a break. First of all nobody condemns people who support traditional marriage. I support traditional marriage - I've been married 23 years, my parents for 55, my inlaws 58. I also support SSM. I also don't think anyone who disagrees with me should be "destroyed" but, again, like it or not, a CEO's views on RIGHTS important to constituents MATTER to those constituents.

  5. #995
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    34,661

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    And your reason for this is? Why do you desire to force people to trade with others?
    if someone is being a complete asshole in your restaurant, i have no problem with you asking them to leave. but you shouldn't be allowed to kick out racial minorities or gay people just for being racial minorities or gay people. we tried it that way for a while, and it was a ****ing disaster.

  6. #996
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,921

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    The behavior you describe would be unlawful under both Indiana and federal statutes.
    Right, that was the point of me saying "it depends" etc. in response to your blanket and unqualified statement. The law sometimes specifically forces some individuals to act contrary to their "consciences."

  7. #997
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    58,134

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    if someone is being a complete asshole in your restaurant, i have no problem with you asking them to leave. but you shouldn't be allowed to kick out racial minorities or gay people just for being racial minorities or gay people. we tried it that way for a while, and it was a ****ing disaster.
    So was anyone harmed by being denied service? If not, what is the grounds for government action?

    The point of my earlier post was that when someone says no the answer is no and you're supposed to walk away. People don't like to just deal with such realities though so they ignore consent and they use force to get their way. All I hear is screw relying on consent to trade with others because we have force and we aren't scared to use it. You're NOT harmed because of the reason someone refuses to trade with you, so why should the reason matter? It shouldn't logically speaking, but no we can't have people not agreeing with us, so **** them they will obey our opinions. It emotional idiotic nonsense.
    Last edited by Henrin; 03-28-15 at 01:18 AM.

  8. #998
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,921

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by Blemonds View Post
    A law that forces a person to act against his religious faith is a bigoted law. Pence corrected that error with the stroke of his pen. Chalk one up for liberty
    I just have to point out that there is a big disconnect somewhere about the effect of this law. If you're right, then Pence is actually wrong, because he's claiming the law does NOT allow for discrimination, what you're calling "forcing a person to act against his religious faith" such as bake wedding cakes for a SSM.

  9. #999
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    58,134

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Public accommodations prevent acts of discrimination
    By forcing people into commerce.

  10. #1000
    Sage
    chromium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,852

    Re: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

    Quote Originally Posted by eohrnberger View Post
    Hmm
    Protected class - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    In a Ven diagram (remember those from high school) each of the above groups is a subset of the total population. The one group that doesn't seem to be represented would be White Males from birth to age 40.
    Race and sex are protected groups, so no you are wrong about that. Besides that, white males under 40 are the least likely to ever face discrimination, especially compared to homosexuals. I fall into all 4 groups, and let me tell you the "white male under 40" part is *never* a concern in terms of being refused service, certainly not compared to being a sexual minority.

    White hetero male under 40 persecution complex, that must be so difficult

Posting Permissions

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