Page 130 of 320 FirstFirst ... 3080120128129130131132140180230 ... LastLast
Results 1,291 to 1,300 of 3196

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

  1. #1291
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,815

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    I do not lie, so you can be sure that everything that I post is the truth or something that I believe. In this case, I am being factual by telling you that you didn't tell me what rights anti-discrimination laws protect.
    so its slimpy a mistake instead of dishonest, that works to either way the fact remains the claim made was false whether there is a "belief" in it or not
    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

  2. #1292
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,833

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

    Quote Originally Posted by maxparrish View Post
    Anyway, at the same time, two gay application developers (a couple) also fanned Eich outrage in their blog: "Today we were shocked to read that Brendan Eich has been appointed Mozilla CEO. As a gay couple who were unable to get married in California until recently, we morally cannot support a Foundation that would not only leave someone with hateful views in power, but will give them a promotion and put them in charge of the entire organization.
    I skipped some because how the controversy arose is irrelevant. And what you're pointing out is people have a choice with whom they do business. Corporations spend $10s of billions annually cultivating their public image, they release statements, shoot commercials, make strategic donations, to indicate that they're nice people over there and their values align with ours and we should do business with them. This is just obvious stuff - if you watch a Sunday news show, there's about a 100% chance you'll see one of these ads. BP is 'green' - they PROMISE!! Etc.

    Now you're whining that public opinion works the other way. Doesn't matter if it's fair or not, it's how it works. Here's a discussion of boycotts of companies that donate to Planned Parenthood:

    https://www.catholicvote.org/boycott...omment-page-3/

    As they (and OkCupid) made clear: he had to be persecuted and driven from employment because he held "hateful views" contrary to their views.
    But OKCupid isn't the market, they have no power over Mozilla.

    Poppycock. I have worked the majority of my life for people who support the denial of my liberties. I (I'm white) have worked for bigoted and sexist black city managers, feminist bosses, and affirmative action (hire by your race) mongers. It has been one of the 'privileges' of working for 17 years in a deep blue California City near Berkeley, controlled by and run by a black majority city civil service and City Council, that has bathed me in the views of every anti-liberty (and anti-white) nostrum imaginable.
    OK, I live in the racist and homophobic South. I'm not sure what your point is.

    None the less, we don't persecute bosses for their private views nor for their private life - regardless of what 'executive' position they hold (at least, not since McCarthy). We don't make them sign gay-marriage loyalty oaths, try to humiliate them publicly, or politic to get them fired for a donation to a state ballot initiative.
    It's just a fact of life that the CEO IS the face of the company and his or her personal views are rightly or wrongly associated with those of the company they head. It comes with the job and it doesn't matter whether you think it should or not. It just does. No one would argue that it shouldn't matter if the CEO of Mozilla donated to a cause to reinstate mixed race marriage bans, even if his company by all accounts treated blacks just fine in the workplace before he was appointed CEO. It would be nearly unthinkable for such a person to have an executive position and no board anywhere would elevate him to CEO. So this issue isn't about whether we should hold the person or company accountable for personal views, you just think holding anyone accountable for their opposition to gay marriage bans is unfair.

    I'd just say that to some gay couples, this is a big deal. You're saying to them - it's NOT a big deal - get over it. That's not how it works.

    Be reminded, everyone at Mozilla agrees that Eich was completely supportive of employees of every race, sex, and sexual orientation. Nothing in his work conduct evenly remotely suggested the vicious demonization of him as a human being...unless, of course, more than 1/2 of California voters are also "demons". (Continued)
    That's just not true - there was intense internal pressure against him in Mozilla. And what he apparently did do was support their employment rights, but on his off time he worked against them obtaining rights to marriage, and wanted that denial of rights enshrined in the Constitution of California. The latter was and is important to gays. It's not to you. Well, when your constituents include a great number of gays, don't be surprised that when you oppose them being able to obtain fundamental (in their view) rights, they'll object and if there is an option in the market, they will often choose companies more aligned with their values. It's life in the market.

    And you're failing to distinguish between "demonization of him as a human being" versus "opposed him as the public face of Mozilla." There is a difference. His opposition to SSM was known no later than 2012. He remained CTO....

  3. #1293
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles area
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 01:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,868

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter King View Post
    Sorry, but cost of defense is irrelevant IMHO. That is an issue of that particular state and as said, I disagree with some things being called a public accommodation.
    What you disagree with does not matter. The people of each state--not you--get to decide what things they want to make public accommodations in their laws. Many states go far beyond the easy, obvious applications you mentioned. Even federal public accommodations law prohibits, for example, refusing to serve blacks in a restaurant--and has for half a century now.

  4. #1294
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,815

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

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Where in the bible does it say whites can lynch blacks or that being black is somehow a sin?
    where in the bible does it say I have to open a store and then violate the rights of other Americans?
    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

  5. #1295
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,815

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

    Quote Originally Posted by freeRadical View Post
    Forcing someone to provide goods and services to people they don't want to is not liberty either.
    nobody is forcing that
    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

  6. #1296
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,815

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

    Quote Originally Posted by vesper View Post
    Neither is denying a citizen the basic religious rights afforded them in the Constitution.
    good thing thats not happening
    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

  7. #1297
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,833

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Blemonds View Post
    Forcing someone to act against their conscience is indeed tyranny
    Well, OK, but there are billions of people living in actual tyrannical regimes and they'd laugh if someone tried to claim that our experience is similar because businesses in the U.S. are forced to treat all customers equally, and with respect. You're trivializing the word IMO.

  8. #1298
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,833

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    The claims you cite have not been made.
    Yeah, they were. E.g. Advance America Blog Archive VICTORY AT THE STATE HOUSE!

    Churches, Christian businesses and individuals deserve protection from those who support homosexual marriages and those who support government recognition and approval of gender identity (men who dress as women). SB 101 will help provide the protection!
    AFA of Indiana was also at the bill signing. You can google them if you want their views on SSM, and their support of this bill.

    And as someone else pointed out above, when Utah passed their version of this bill, they engaged with the LGBT community and wrote into the law protections for them in employment and housing, and there was little controversy when that bill passed. Obviously, Utah refused to include measures that would address some of the other "hard" issues, like when does a restaurant have to host a reception for a SSM or when does a florist have to provide services etc. But there was a compromise.

    Indiana did none of that. The business community warned them of the message they were sending, they gave opponents the finger, and are unsurprisingly paying a price. Boo hooo.....

  9. #1299
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,833

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Simpleχity View Post
    Pence did not answer directly when asked six times on This Week with George Stephanopoulos whether under the law it would be legal for a merchant to refuse to serve gay customers.
    That's hilarious and shows what a bind he's in. If he says, sure, it will be legal, then the bill IS about legalized discrimination against gays. If he says it will remain illegal, he's contradicting what the bill supporters were saying to their anti-SSM base. He wants it both ways like some posters on this thread.

  10. #1300
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    It looks like there are some business owners who see the various Religious Freedom bills as expanding business opportunities
    I get that businesses want to point out that they serve everyone, but why would businesses actually oppose a law that provides them greater freedom? It's one thing to not practice a right, but it's highly illogical to oppose that right being protected.

Posting Permissions

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