Page 143 of 320 FirstFirst ... 4393133141142143144145153193243 ... LastLast
Results 1,421 to 1,430 of 3196

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

  1. #1421
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Kentucky
    Last Seen
    06-05-15 @ 07:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Communist
    Posts
    2,264

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

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Do you like that phrase? I thought it was so descriptive that I borrowed it from Justice Scalia.
    Awesome.

  2. #1422
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    03-17-17 @ 06:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    41,908

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

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    1.)The proponents of the homosexual agenda are free to sue under state public accommodations laws. They're free to lose, too, when those laws as applied violate a person's constitutional rights.
    2.) The Supreme Court has already held in at least two cases that a state public accommodations law did just that. This is a free country--no one can be forced by law to express his approval of homosexuality when he believes it is immoral and unacceptable.
    3.)That is just why the organizers of the Boston St. Patrick's Day Parade, which was a public accommodation under state law, did not have to let a homosexual group take part in the parade. That would in effect have amounted to a government-compelled endorsement of that group's views about Irish-Americans, which the organizers did not agree with. The First Amendment guarantees the freedom of speech, and the Court has made very clear that includes the freedom not to speak--not to be compelled to express or endorse views you do not agree with.
    4.)
    I think the same principle applies to the wedding photographer in the Elane case in New Mexico. The state supreme court got the decision wrong. She was not discriminating against homosexuals--she would gladly have taken other photos of the lesbian who sued her. But being forced by law to photograph the woman's homosexual wedding amounted to the state government compelling her to celebrate the event in her creatively arranged photographs--to make a personal expression, in artistic form, of a view she disagrees with. It's a short step from that to forcing a painter who considers homosexuality immoral to depict two homosexual clients in an erotically suggestive embrace, on the ground that because he occasionally sells a portrait he is a "business," and therefore a public accommodation.
    1.) lmao as soon as i hear this i always laugh my ass off. What is the homosexual agenda? please tell us what it factually is.
    also in the things that over step and try to give americans special tretment will fail and be removed, im all fine for protecting rights, just not special treatment which SOME religious people disgustingly want.
    2.) i agree good thing nobody antidscrimaitnion laws and equal rights and civil rights dont "force acceptance" another repeated and failed strawman. Saying its forced acceptance is always a false and dishonest statement.
    3.) im fine with that decision as its nothing like this on any level lol
    4.) i understand thats what you think but its simply wrong. She in fact was discriminating against gays just like the court case says she was. No gay in the wedding no discrimination. If you do WEDDING pics then you do wedding pics period. especially if the other wedding pics have been for other religions, nonreligious weddings and remarriages . . all things that could be loosely argued just as much as gay weddings as being wrong based on religion. But magical the line is drawn at GAY which shows the hypocrisy and bigotry.

    if the owner wanted to do things that were just subjectively based on heir religion they are free to do so but they dont get to have a public accommodation shop and serve OTHER things that violate the religion and its ok but then magically claim this thing is really wrong and not ok. Its a crock and complete BS.

    THis is why the laws are like they are because otherwise youll just have people making crap up like they are already doing. THe law should treat us all the same not special treatment for come people that can just make things up.

    the easy question that shows its a HORRIBLE idea to give special treatment is that many Christian dont see an issue at all with servicing gays or feel it violates thier religion that has ZERO to do with a bakery . .

    so that easy question is "who gets to determine what is a violation of thier religious feelings and why and when its acceptable?
    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. #1423
    Professor

    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Seen
    02-18-17 @ 10:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,828

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    good thing i never said that
    breaking the law, YES of course a person can be negatively affected in thier own subjective opinion based on their own CHOICE to break the law lol
    fact still remains i dont know one Christian affected negatively by equal rights and nondiscrimination laws
    I quoted you verbatim, so yes, you did say it

  4. #1424
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    03-17-17 @ 06:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    41,908

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Blemonds View Post
    I quoted you verbatim, so yes, you did say it
    again YOUR mistake i never said CRIMINALS werent punished by breaking the law lol which is what i was referring too
    what i never said is that "Is it your opinion that people are not negatively affected when they break the law?"

    thats what i was answering
    i stand my my actual statment this is why i repeated it, even though you conveniently left it out of my qoute so ill say it AGAIN

    fact still remains i dont know one Christian affected negatively by equal rights and nondiscrimination laws

    none, zero, nota
    Last edited by AGENT J; 03-29-15 at 10:35 PM.
    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. #1425
    Professor

    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Seen
    02-18-17 @ 10:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,828

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    again YOUR mistake i never said CRIMINALS werent punished by breaking the law lol which is what i was referring too
    what i never said is that "Is it your opinion that people are not negatively affected when they break the law?"

    thats what i was answering
    i stand my my actual statment this is why i repeated it, even though you conveniently left it out of my qoute so ill say it AGAIN

    fact still remains i dont know one Christian affected negatively by equal rights and nondiscrimination laws

    none, zero, nota
    Then I'll repeat my question. What do you call it when merchants are dragged into court, expensive legal proceedings by the way, and fined for not serving homosexuals that want products and services for their weddings? Is that not being negatively affected?

  6. #1426
    Bus Driver to Hell
    Thorgasm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    03-22-17 @ 10:25 AM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    67,157

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

    Can you refuse service on the mere suspicion of someone being gay?

    Say Larry Craig goes to a Christian bakery and orders urinal cakes?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry
    The Amish are light-years ahead of the rest of the human race.



  7. #1427
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles area
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,816

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    1.) lmao as soon as i hear this i always laugh my ass off. What is the homosexual agenda? please tell us what it factually is.
    also in the things that over step and try to give americans special tretment will fail and be removed, im all fine for protecting rights, just not special treatment which SOME religious people disgustingly want.
    A lot of people who are not proponents of the homosexual agenda would say it is homosexuals who want special treatment.

    2.) i agree good thing nobody antidscrimaitnion laws and equal rights and civil rights dont "force acceptance" another repeated and failed strawman. Saying its forced acceptance is always a false and dishonest statement.
    I don't know what you are agreeing with. Certainly not the Supreme Court in Hurley or Dale, the decisions I was referring to. In both cases, the Court held the state law unconstitutional for forcing the public accommodation involved to propound a point of view contrary to its beliefs. Apparently you think that in those decisions, the Court was not only making "failed strawman" arguments but also making a "false and dishonest statement." I'm sure the justices would give your opinion about that all the weight it deserves.

    3.) im fine with that decision as its nothing like this on any level lol
    You just finished saying how false and dishonest it was to argue that these laws unconstitutionally force people to propound points of view they do not believe. But that is exactly the basis--government-compelled speech--for the Court's decision in Hurley, which you say you are fine with. Which is it?

    4.) i understand thats what you think but its simply wrong. She in fact was discriminating against gays just like the court case says she was. No gay in the wedding no discrimination. If you do WEDDING pics then you do wedding pics period. especially if the other wedding pics have been for other religions, nonreligious weddings and remarriages . . all things that could be loosely argued just as much as gay weddings as being wrong based on religion. But magical the line is drawn at GAY which shows the hypocrisy and bigotry.
    Of course Elaine was not discriminating against this woman just because she was a lesbian. She would gladly have done other types of photographs for her. She simply disapproves of homosexual marriage, and if that makes a person a hypocrite or a bigot, then so are many millions of other Americans besides her. I suppose to a proponent of the homosexual agenda, anyone who dares disagree with their views is necessarily a bigot. I would say that kind of narrow-minded intolerance is itself bigotry.

    if the owner wanted to do things that were just subjectively based on heir religion they are free to do so but they dont get to have a public accommodation shop and serve OTHER things that violate the religion and its ok but then magically claim this thing is really wrong and not ok. Its a crock and complete BS.
    Oh, I see. You and people who agree with you think you should be the final arbiters of whose religious beliefs are sincere, and whose are not. The law doesn't work that way. The Court in discussed in Hobby Lobby discussed in detail how its inquiry into the sincerity of the religious belief works. In that case, it found it was irrelevant whether some other person might argue that the four contraceptives Hobby Lobby's owners objected to were not really abortifacients. All that mattered was that they believed that they were, and therefore violated their religious belief that abortion is immoral.

    so that easy question is "who gets to determine what is a violation of thier religious feelings and why and when its acceptable?
    That is anything but an easy question, and it will be up to the courts in the thirty-plus states that now have RFRA's to determine that in each case.

  8. #1428
    Battle Ready
    Grim17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Southwestern U.S.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    23,681
    Blog Entries
    20

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    We are having a reasonable conversation, I'm showing the influence religion has had, and continues to have on politics. Wait, because I am a communist, I am not rational? I'm getting tired of this one liner BS.
    You are letting your anti-religion beliefs dictate your responses and that's due to the communism you embrace...

    I explained why churches are tax exempt, and why it's a perfectly understandable and reasonable. It's a measure put in place tseparatete the government from religious establishments, mainly as a fail-safe to ensure that the government can't infringe on the religious freedoms established in the first amendment of the Constitution.

    You ignored that and claiming that the tax exempt status should forbid or prevent leaders of religious establishments from voicing political opinions, then transformed the conversation into a rant against religion and it's place in America's history and culture.

    Sorry, but I'm not going to have that conversation because it isn't appropriate to this thread, or one I signed up for....

  9. #1429
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,712

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Thorgasm View Post
    Can you refuse service on the mere suspicion of someone being gay?

    Say Larry Craig goes to a Christian bakery and orders urinal cakes?
    They can't refuse him because "he is not gay.....he never has been gay.....he loves his wife...."......LOL.....

  10. #1430
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    03-17-17 @ 06:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    41,908

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Blemonds View Post
    1.)Then I'll repeat my question.
    2.) What do you call it when merchants are dragged into court, expensive legal proceedings by the way, and fined for not serving homosexuals that want products and services for their weddings?
    3.) Is that not being negatively affected?
    1.) repeat it all you want the answer and the facts wont change
    2.) same thing i call it when ANYBODY is goes to court and fined for breaking the laws. Criminals getting caught
    3.) yes that is Criminals being subjectively negatively affected by thier own decisions
    thats not CHRISTIANS being negatively effected because of thier Chrisitianty

    i repeat because the facts havent changed:
    i dont know one Christian affected negatively by equal rights and nondiscrimination laws
    none, zero, nota
    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

Posting Permissions

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