• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

I see nothing creative about ignoring half of a sentence.
I don't follow. Any reference to the "commerce clause" would ignore more than 99% of the actual sentence. What part of do you think should not have been ignored?
 
The free market is a voluntary exchange of goods, services, and property. The government has no business interfering with such voluntary exchanges.

Exactly right. :applaud
 
GenCon, an annual $50 million gaming convention, is leaving the state.

Salesforce.com had this to say:

"We have been an active member of the Indiana business community and a key job creator for more than a decade," Scott McCorkle, CEO of the Salesforce Marketing Cloud division, wrote in a letter to Indiana lawmakers. "Our success is fundamentally based on our ability to attract and retain the best and most diverse pool of highly skilled employees, regardless of gender, religious affiliation, ethnicity or sexual orientation."

Multibillion dollar company.

The market speaks.
 
Healthcare is a service. A privately owned hospital is absolutely a business.

There are public hospitals.

thats not an answer LOL

what if the "private" hospital is the only one around for miles or at least within distance to save your life?

So if you were in a car accident, and needed treatment basically with in the next 1hour or you die but the only hospital withing the hour window wouldnt take you as a patient thats ok?
 
I don't follow. Any reference to the "commerce clause" would ignore more than 99% of the actual sentence. What part of do you think should not have been ignored?

This is the commerce clause:

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

This is what the government sees:

To regulate Commerce;
 
thats not an answer LOL

what if the "private" hospital is the only one around for miles or at least within distance to save your life?

So if you were in a car accident, and needed treatment basically with in the next 1hour or you die but the only hospital withing the hour window wouldnt take you as a patient thats ok?

That doesn't make a bit of difference.
 
That is exactly what is happening in America. If you want to run your business according to your Christian beliefs, you can literally be forced out of business. That form of discrimination is celebrated by liberals all across America

sorry but that is NOT happening in americ.
Im a christian and these things dont effect me in the least. WE ALL have to play by the same rules, being a Christian doesnt get me special treatment, allow me to break the law or infringe on others rights.
Please stop making stuff up lol
 
That doesn't make a bit of difference.

reality proves your opinions wrong as usual
it may not make a big a difference to your opinions and philosophies but those are meaningless and luckily, in this case, our country, rights, laws and freedom isnt based on such mentally retarded "ideas"
 
reality proves your opinions wrong as usual
it may not make a big a difference to your opinions and philosophies but those are meaningless and luckily, in this case, our country, rights, laws and freedom isnt based on such mentally retarded "ideas"

I welcome you to support it without falling into some retarded right to service argument. I have yet to someone manage to avoid that argument, but you're more than welcome to try.
 
This is the commerce clause:

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

This is what the government sees:

To regulate Commerce;

You know that most states have public accommodations laws, right? Where's your tenth amendment argument now?
 
Perhaps to someone who didn't read it...

Let me spoon feed it to you shall I? I've bolded the sections which clearly contradict your posts which simply parrots the far left false narrative.




The rest of the article outs the lie and sets the record straight. Sorry you don't like facts but hyper-partisans rarely do.

I am not Kramer.

I read the article.

I said:

Reagan ignoring AIDS until he absolutely couldn't anymore.

He first mentioned it when he was asked at a press conference. He couldn't ignore it anymore.

Who is the hyper-partisan?
 
You know that most states have public accommodations laws, right? Where's your tenth amendment argument now?

So what? That is an entirely different argument.
 
This is the commerce clause:

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

This is what the government sees:

To regulate Commerce;
Oh, lol.

Well, on the bright side, after Rehnquist it stopped being the Carte Blanche that it had morphed into under Roosevelt, but of course that still leaves fifty years of precedent.
 
It's all fruit to me, discrimination is discrimination. If you're open to the public then refusing business for reasons other than something which causes a demonstrable harm to your business shouldn't be allowed.

Yosemite Sam isn't a protected class.

Refusing service to gays isn't a safety/insurance issue.
 
1.)I welcome you to support it without falling into some retarded right to service argument.
2.)I have yet to someone manage to avoid that argument, but you're more than welcome to try.
1.)thats easy and already the basis of why its not run that way LMAO!
2.) you mean you have yet to no lie about what the basis is and claim its a right to service based on your options and ZERO facts.
yes we know we have read them and destroyed that failed argument many times.
You are welcome to hold on to that lost, failed and proven wrong "opinion" as its meaningless, also the country in this regard will continue to not be run in such a mentally inane way. Thank god.
 
91424-004-18004705.jpg


Can I get a witness?

Oh how nice. I see you drug out an old picture of Democrats in action. How nice. Thanks for that. ;)
 
I don't know what you're talking about.

You said it is within their rights to discriminate, but others are claiming the govt. is putting them out of business and jailing them.
 
Yosemite Sam isn't a protected class.
Neither is The Ambiguously Gay Duo. Part of the problem is that we even need 'protected classes' in the first place.

Refusing service to gays isn't a safety/insurance issue.
Neither is refusing service to a legally armed citizen. There are many who would point to credible data in support of a ban on various minorities based on crime rates of that demographic, yet we don't tolerate it, and those crime rates do not exist for legally armed citizens. Discriminating against whole groups hinders commerce, and so a business open to the public should have to demonstrate a need to remove a specific individual.
 
Last edited:
Then I have to patronize businesses that don't discriminate against me. Problem solved

And what if there aren't any?

Then I'll think any business that actually does so is run by a dickhead and I'll probably go on social media to complain about them.

And because you aren't a minority who is routinely discriminated against, it will only be this one business refusing you, rather than the majority of them. And someone might actually listen to you complain on the internet. That's not an option if you're in a small minority.

No one should be forced to sell anything to anyone. A free market is all about voluntary exchange.

We don't have a free market in this country. We have a regulated market. We're sensible that way.

For most businesses, the ones run by rational owners, the only color that matters is green.

And yet there were many many businesses throughout history who have been quite happy not to take money from a group they didn't like. The notion that everyone is driven solely by pecuniary gain is silly and has never reflected reality.

I am an atheist in a mixed race marriage and I think private, non-essential businesses should be able to discriminate for whatever stupid reason they want. And we have the right to publicly shame them out of business. I sure don't want a theocracy.

And what do you do when this discrimination is not something they're ashamed of? What if it is the consensus of the majority of society? It's easy to say you don't need the protection of the law when everyone around you will protect you without it, but what happens when they won't?

Yes,and if a business owner does not want to do business that facilitates what he considers wrong behavior, then he is discriminated against by the government.

What's odd here is that my argument favors allowing private parties, including businesses, to discriminate based on their personal beliefs. The opposing argument favors allowing government to discriminate. The real evil is when government discriminates

A belief is not an identity. Discrimination based on identity is prohibited. Opinions are not protected. Identity is. If every single Christian (or even the vast majority) held such a strong position against homosexuality, then you might have an argument that avoiding contact with gays might be an intrinsic part of the religion. But this is clearly not the case. That you or anyone else attributes their opinion on someone else to a religious origin does not grant them or their opinion special protection. The real evil, as you put it, is when society discriminates and ostracizes people merely over who they are. It doesn't matter whether it is backed with the force of law or simply popular consensus. It's still wrong and we do not permit it in our country.

I don't profess to be a US Constitution expert, but doesn't the Commerce Clause give government the right to do just that - determine the laws and regulations under which intrastate and interstate commerce may be conducted?

Only interstate. However, changes in technology since 1789 have made nearly all commerce interstate in nature. Even the smallest local business relies on a great deal of interstate (and often international) shipping and manufacturing.

Better yet, let's quit trying to pretend that the anti-discrimination laws are anything but intolerant bigotry

Spoken like someone who has never and will never suffer actual bigotry in their lives.

If I can get booted out simply for being legally armed, then others can get booted out simply for being gay. Isn't Equality™ grand?

Guns aren't people. You're quite free to go anywhere you want. You can't bring a horse into a business either. Is that discrimination against pro-horse people? No. Just leave your guns and your horse at home. A person can't leave their race, gender, or sexuality at home.
 
reality proves your opinions wrong as usual
it may not make a big a difference to your opinions and philosophies but those are meaningless and luckily, in this case, our country, rights, laws and freedom isnt based on such mentally retarded "ideas"
What are the specific "rights, laws and [LOL!] freedoms" that permit you to compel service from a private hospital?
 
Only interstate. However, changes in technology since 1789 have made nearly all commerce interstate in nature. Even the smallest local business relies on a great deal of interstate (and often international) shipping and manufacturing.

The commerce clause deals with trade between states, not trade between businesses and consumers across state lines. Also, considering that anti-discrimination laws affect trade within states that entire excuse of yours doesn't work even if you were right on the powers granted by the commerce clause.

If you ever took the time to notice all the members listed in the commerce clause are governments and that wasn't by mistake.
 
Last edited:
Oh how nice. I see you drug out an old picture of Democrats in action. How nice. Thanks for that. ;)

You're welcome. They're all Republicans now, so I'm glad you have some old pictures of your new friends.
 
You're welcome. They're all Republicans now, so I'm glad you have some old pictures of your new friends.

:lamo That myth will never die.
 
Back
Top Bottom