Page 36 of 50 FirstFirst ... 26343536373846 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 360 of 494

Thread: Gov. Mike Pence: Change RFRA law to make it clear discrimination won't be allowed

  1. #351
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,038

    Re: Gov. Mike Pence: Change RFRA law to make it clear discrimination won't be allowed

    You know what is the most obvious part about the bakery that makes it pure bigotry and ignorant vile disrespect . . . . .

    its the dishonesty and hypocrisy of the whole thing

    Im a christian and now where ever in my life has it been taught to me, mentioned in any of my churches etc etc that selling food to "deh gays" is a sin or violation of some sort . . .

    but for the sake of argument lets say a person believes it is (even though that belief is meaningless to rights and laws) how many wedding cakes were made for people:
    of OTHER religions?
    a wedding with NO religion?
    a 2nd, 3rd, 4th wedding after divorce?
    or food for OTHER religious events?
    etc etc
    but not "deh Gays"!!!!

    Now i do freely admit i am GUESSING with the bakery that these services were provide, though loigically we all would guess its a sure thing. But in other cases those exact things did happen. there have been venues etc that denied deh gays based on religions claims but then allowed other religions access to the venue or service to do thier own sacred events . . . what obvious transparent crap. SO hard not to laugh at it when its so blatantly dishonest in a lot of cases. Its like when a little kid tells on themselves and doesnt even realize it . . . .

    also the asinine claim of the bakery "served" gays but it wouldnt make them a wedding cake so thats not bigotry or discrimination? what? LMAO

    so when restaurants didnt let blacks in the front door and made them get thier food in the back or in the alley that wasnt discrimination or bigotry? you know cause they did serve them just not in the front. You know cause thier conscience just couldn't handle that.

    if i own a company and I hire women but they can only be cleaning ladies and secretaries thats not bigotry and discrimination? you know, cause i do hire them I just dont promote them and they cant be a boss even if qualified, my conscience just cant handle that

    Sorry but honest, educated and objective people will NEVER buy outrageous, mentally retarded, dishonest 100% grade A bull**** like that lol its like some of them arent even really trying anymore.
    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. #352
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Over the edge...
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,761

    Re: Gov. Mike Pence: Change RFRA law to make it clear discrimination won't be allowed

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    In almost all case I think you are right. But not in absolutely all.
    NOBODY is right all the time, I have been wrong before and am sure will be again...
    Quote Originally Posted by WCH View Post
    Of course the third world dregs are breeding like rabbits.

    Quote Originally Posted by WCH View Post
    ...these people have no responsibility for their own actions. [like third world dregs]

  3. #353
    Sage
    Anthony60's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Northern New Jersey
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,041

    Re: Gov. Mike Pence: Change RFRA law to make it clear discrimination won't be allowed

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    Meaningless post where you didnt say anything....well, I knew you'd be confused...thanks for confirming it.

    You couldnt refute it with actual discussion.... (Amusing, your removing the bold below, lol...too confusing eh? Well, hypocrisy often is)
    And yet, you continue to post nothing. Well, at least you are easily amused.
    "We have met the enemy and they are ours..." -- Oliver Hazard Perry
    "I don't want a piece of you... I want the whole thing!" -- Bob Barker

  4. #354
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    56,624

    Re: Gov. Mike Pence: Change RFRA law to make it clear discrimination won't be allowed

    Quote Originally Posted by Gina View Post
    That statement was made in general, not against you.
    ....that doesn't really absolve you of assuming that those who oppose you are doing so from evil motives. The "you" and "me" in there can be general as well.

    There is plenty of evidence on this board alone, that Christians who reject LGBT persons are doing so because they are sinners and then they add the part about hellfire. It's the kind of thing that LGBT individuals are likely to have heard. The Phelps are pretty widely distributing that sentiment as well. So when someone who is LGBT hears, even in the most polite language (if they are lucky) "We cannot in good faith provide you with service", that is what is behind it and what is communicated.
    1. Christians who reject LGBT persons are not doing so because the LGBT persons are sinners, but rather because the Christians are sinners. Christ died for us while we were yet sinners and came to seek the lost, not the found. The only time that Christians would be justified in "rejecting" a homosexual is the narrow case wherein A) he or she was a member of the church B) they were actively practicing and C) they refused on multiple occasions, after multiple counseling sessions and attempts to reach them, to repent. And even then, it's not rejecting the person, but rather their membership in an organization that is based around beliefs which that individual apparently does not share.

    1.a. However, in today's intellectual climate where we are more likely to instinctively reject the doctrine of sin, there is widespread inability on the part of the non-Christian community to mistake the belief that homosexual activities are sinful with the rejection of homosexuals themselves.

    2. The Phelps are a perfect example of the people in #1, and no, did not "spread that sentiment widely", they acted wickedly and thus were widely rejected. Accusing the broader Christian community of being represented by the Phelps because you may have heard their language is akin to accusing the Pro-Life community of being represented by the people who argued that we should kill more black babies to cut down on crime and get rid of the "socially undesirable portions of our society".

    3. It is still quite possible that the individual, no matter how soft the let down, will still feel hurt and rejected. That's human. Assigning the intent to make someone feel hurt and rejected in retrospect, however, due to that effect, is a logical fallacy.

    3.a. As a strict rights issue, you do not have the right to have society order itself so that you do not feel rejected. Otherwise there would be quite a few women from High School (and College, come to think) who owe me restitution. You do have First Amendment Rights. Homosexuals can't use government to deny you the right to speak out or vote against SSM, and Christians can't use government to deny them the ability to advocate for SSM or petition for redress of grievances. The same level of protection extends to Religion - I cant' use the government to force you to participate in my belief system, and you shouldn't be able to use the government to force me to participate in yours.

    The response is that we have already recognized that we can override First Amendment objections in order to create public accommodation laws - but look at the reasoning behind that move. We didn't create public accommodation laws during the Civil Rights era because blacks felt hurt and rejected (though they were), we did it because State Enforced Systemic Bans were denying blacks the ability to access goods and services. The Impact was enough to justify overriding the individual First Amendment Rights of those who would disagree. There are no such comparable bans today regarding homosexuals - the Impact on blacks in the 50s was that you couldn't travel because you couldn't stay in hotels. The Impact on homosexuals today is that you have to go to the baker down the street or call the next wedding planner on the google search page instead. That does not meet the threshold that we have established for justifying overriding people's right to First Amendment protections.

    Nobody enjoys being rejected, for any reason, but being rejected because of who you are, is hurtful and unkind. Nothing stops me from being kind to people patronizing my services, short of someone being a jerk to me and I have trouble being unkind then.
    and you can refuse to take part in a ceremony in a kind way that is neither rude nor cruel.

    If you were asked in your profession to do something that you found violated your deepest belief system, what would you do?
    “In America we have a two-party system,” a Republican congressional staffer told a visiting group of Russian legislators. “There is the stupid party. And there is the evil party. I am proud to be a member of the stupid party. Periodically, the two parties get together and do something that is both stupid and evil. This is called: bipartisanship."

  5. #355
    Sage
    Anthony60's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Northern New Jersey
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,041

    Re: Gov. Mike Pence: Change RFRA law to make it clear discrimination won't be allowed

    The crazies on the left, you know who you are, (we all know) have tried to pervert this law into an anti gay law, when of course it's not. My understanding is that it gives people in business the right to go to court and make their case as to why it is an infringement on their rights to be forced to do something that is against their own rights.

    So, if a Christian couple goes to a gay baker and asks for a cake, and are refused, the baker must show why this is a violation and he's not just simply refusing because he is a bigot and hates Christians.

    But, as usual, the left have distorted and mislead to the point that you have idiots on the left, like the governor of Connecticut, protesting this as they have virtually the same law on the books for years! This really exposes the lack of thought and the willingness to go ahead with anything as long as someone with a "D" next to their name said it.
    "We have met the enemy and they are ours..." -- Oliver Hazard Perry
    "I don't want a piece of you... I want the whole thing!" -- Bob Barker

  6. #356
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,554

    Re: Gov. Mike Pence: Change RFRA law to make it clear discrimination won't be allowed

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    No, but a wedding ceremony is. And it doesn't have to be a religious ceremony to violate your faith.
    Many weddings are not religious and besides a baker is not taking part in it anyway. Cakes are part of the reception. There is nothing worse than faux indignation used to excuse hatred and bigotry.

  7. #357
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    27,647

    Re: Gov. Mike Pence: Change RFRA law to make it clear discrimination won't be allowed

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony60 View Post
    And yet, you continue to post nothing. Well, at least you are easily amused.
    This was/is my post and it contains a good deal of content relevant to this discussion:

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    There's no difficulty with the signage...it serves both bigot and bigotee. It also protects both, even tho only one might desire it (those being informed before they have to deal with the bigots). The govt is actively protecting their right to association there, even if the business owners prefer to 'protect' their own right to association by associating with (personally informing) those it desires not to associate with. (yup, still funny).

    Still confusing for you, I know but basically it means that the govt involvement protects both's rights, one side that would desire it and one side that may or may not. And I agree with the govt protecting people's rights.
    If you cannot form a reasonable response to it, then I suggest you stop bringing that fact to our attention, lol.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Jerkoffness is protected by The Constitution. That's what makes America great.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  8. #358
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    56,624

    Re: Gov. Mike Pence: Change RFRA law to make it clear discrimination won't be allowed

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    Many weddings are not religious and besides a baker is not taking part in it anyway. Cakes are part of the reception.
    when you support the wedding with your products or services, you are taking part. Nor is it your job to define others faith. People have the right not to be forced to take part in ceremonies that violate their Religion, absent overwhelming need.

    There is nothing worse than faux indignation used to excuse hatred and bigotry.
    That's funny. That's pretty much what I've been thinking.
    “In America we have a two-party system,” a Republican congressional staffer told a visiting group of Russian legislators. “There is the stupid party. And there is the evil party. I am proud to be a member of the stupid party. Periodically, the two parties get together and do something that is both stupid and evil. This is called: bipartisanship."

  9. #359
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    30,881

    Re: Gov. Mike Pence: Change RFRA law to make it clear discrimination won't be allowed

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    ....that doesn't really absolve you of assuming that those who oppose you are doing so from evil motives. The "you" and "me" in there can be general as well.
    I stand by my assertion. If you wish to take offense though I have been clear I was making a general statement, that's not on me.

    1. Christians who reject LGBT persons are not doing so because the LGBT persons are sinners, but rather because the Christians are sinners. Christ died for us while we were yet sinners and came to seek the lost, not the found. The only time that Christians would be justified in "rejecting" a homosexual is the narrow case wherein A) he or she was a member of the church B) they were actively practicing and C) they refused on multiple occasions, after multiple counseling sessions and attempts to reach them, to repent. And even then, it's not rejecting the person, but rather their membership in an organization that is based around beliefs which that individual apparently does not share.
    Despite the wordplay, this only supports my point.

    A) You won't permit LGBT persons in church because of who they are.
    B) You won't permit them to actively practice their faith, because of who they are.
    C) You think they have something to repent for.

    Any or all three of these are representations of what I said earlier and this is why I stand by it. Especially C). I won't derail the thread with a religious discussion. If a Christian refuses service in the most flowery terms, A-C are behind it. They are being denied service for who they are, because that is how they see themselves and millions of others who accept that LGBT is how they are born, see it. It's who they are and that is unkind/rude/cruel.


    1.a. However, in today's intellectual climate where we are more likely to instinctively reject the doctrine of sin, there is widespread inability on the part of the non-Christian community to mistake the belief that homosexual activities are sinful with the rejection of homosexuals themselves.
    There is no mistaking, "Love the sinner, hate the sin". They are being rejected by Christians, for being who they are, no matter the nuanced language.

    2. The Phelps are a perfect example of the people in #1, and no, did not "spread that sentiment widely", they acted wickedly and thus were widely rejected. Accusing the broader Christian community of being represented by the Phelps because you may have heard their language is akin to accusing the Pro-Life community of being represented by the people who argued that we should kill more black babies to cut down on crime and get rid of the "socially undesirable portions of our society".

    I used Phelps as an example that there are those who shout ugly things about LGBT persons. Remove them from the discussion, there are still plenty on this board and in out in the world who say awful things about the LGBT community. Jerry Falwell and Pat Roberson partially blaming 9/11 on "gays and lesbians". I don't even have to go that far back to find hateful comments about LGBT persons. He makes them almost daily and with the controversy in Indiana, he's said them yesterday and today. I'll post them if you would like, but I don't want to take up the space.

    Then there is The American Family Associate, a lobbying group, said this:
    So what is this mark of the beast today? That’s easy. It’s the gay rainbow.

    This is the rainbow Big Gay has stolen from the Bible and from the church and turned into its own twisted symbol of perversion.
    The Mark of the Beast is Here

    They have a page of links to their views on homosexuality, including the belief that homosexuals are broken people.

    I could go on and on, but these are people and groups that are not outliers in the Christian community, making these reprehensible statements about LGBT persons and repeating what you have said about "Loving the sinner, hating the sin" (paraphrasing).


    Hit the character limit.
    Ricky John Best and Taliesin Myrddin Namkai-Meche
    Micah David-Cole Fletcher
    I have no personal connection to these men. Ricky and Taliesin died and Micah was severely injured because they chose not to sit by silently, instead, they chose to confront hate. My condolences to their families for their tremendous loss and my best wishes to Micah for a full recovery and long, fruitful life.

  10. #360
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    30,881

    Re: Gov. Mike Pence: Change RFRA law to make it clear discrimination won't be allowed

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    .

    3. It is still quite possible that the individual, no matter how soft the let down, will still feel hurt and rejected. That's human. Assigning the intent to make someone feel hurt and rejected in retrospect, however, due to that effect, is a logical fallacy.


    [indent]3.a. As a strict rights issue, you do not have the right to have society order itself so that you do not feel rejected. Otherwise there would be quite a few women from High School (and College, come to think) who owe me restitution. You do have First Amendment Rights. Homosexuals can't use government to deny you the right to speak out or vote against SSM, and Christians can't use government to deny them the ability to advocate for SSM or petition for redress of grievances. The same level of protection extends to Religion - I cant' use the government to force you to participate in my belief system, and you shouldn't be able to use the government to force me to participate in yours.
    I wasn't saying that society has to order itself so that no one feels rejected. I was explaining in the least and most human terms what, "We in good conscience cannot provide service" means to an LGBT person, to refute the innocence of that statement. My first point in all of this was that some Christian business owners want the right to discriminate against people for being who they are. You minimized it by saying you didn't understand why they just couldn't move on to the next google result.


    The response is that we have already recognized that we can override First Amendment objections in order to create public accommodation laws - but look at the reasoning behind that move. We didn't create public accommodation laws during the Civil Rights era because blacks felt hurt and rejected (though they were), we did it because State Enforced Systemic Bans were denying blacks the ability to access goods and services. The Impact was enough to justify overriding the individual First Amendment Rights of those who would disagree. There are no such comparable bans today regarding homosexuals - the Impact on blacks in the 50s was that you couldn't travel because you couldn't stay in hotels. The Impact on homosexuals today is that you have to go to the baker down the street or call the next wedding planner on the google search page instead. That does not meet the threshold that we have established for justifying overriding people's right to First Amendment protections.



    and you can refuse to take part in a ceremony in a kind way that is neither rude nor cruel.

    If you were asked in your profession to do something that you found violated your deepest belief system, what would you do?
    Cakes and photography are only examples. I don't see how either violates one's religious conscience. When any business is permitted to discriminate against an individual for their religious beliefs, then any service or product can be denied on that basis. And for small town people, there may not be alternatives.
    Ricky John Best and Taliesin Myrddin Namkai-Meche
    Micah David-Cole Fletcher
    I have no personal connection to these men. Ricky and Taliesin died and Micah was severely injured because they chose not to sit by silently, instead, they chose to confront hate. My condolences to their families for their tremendous loss and my best wishes to Micah for a full recovery and long, fruitful life.

Page 36 of 50 FirstFirst ... 26343536373846 ... 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
  •