Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex mar

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

ludin said:

your right discrimination goes both ways. so if you want to play the discrimination game then you better be prepared for the consequences as the same laws affect you as well.

Click to expand...

That's fine if that's how it's going to be. What I object to is any idea that refusing service to a gay is OK, but not to a Republican politician.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

WCH said:

Not sure the Governor wants this cat cutting her hair at this point. He might throw a hissy.

Click to expand...

That wouldn't have to happen anyway. Once the individual is sued for failure to serve someone they don't have to provide the service.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

Reminds me a lot of a baker who was in the opposite situation.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

ludin said:

you are wrong. not believing in gay marriage very much so is a religious stance or can be depending on the person. you are not allowed to discriminate against religious people.

Click to expand...

Again the religious position means that you won't do something. Making it illegal for people who don't believe the way you do is political. For example. I am a kosher Jew. If I were to make bacon illegal it would be forcing my religion on others. That is what is going on here.

he is a business open to the public whether he likes those people's point of view or not does give him the right to discriminate against what someone's religious point of view.

Click to expand...

Ummmm no, again her position is not the problem it is her actions.

By refusing to cut her hair due to her possible religious view point he is violating state discrimination laws.

Click to expand...

Ummm nope...sorry it doesn't matter how many times you say it. It ain't so.

this is religious bigotry. that is illegal. just like you can't discriminate in hiring someone because they are catholic or muslim.

Click to expand...

Now you just sound silly.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

digsbe said:

Reminds me a lot of a baker who was in the opposite situation.

Click to expand...

It sure does. He went out of business.

it's social tyranny.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

WCH said:

It sure does. He went out of business.

it's social tyranny.

Click to expand...

I think the hairstylist should have every right to deny, but so should the baker. It's hypocrisy to only allow discrimination one way. It's also hypocrisy to say this is justified while someone doing the opposite isn't.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

Sababa said:

Again the religious position means that you won't do something. Making it illegal for people who don't believe the way you do is political. For example. I am a kosher Jew. If I were to make bacon illegal it would be forcing my religion on others. That is what is going on here.




Ummmm no, again her position is not the problem it is her actions.




Ummm nope...sorry it doesn't matter how many times you say it. It ain't so.



Now you just sound silly.

Click to expand...

good thing what you described didn't happen
deny it all you want he committed religious discrimination.

she is catholic which means that her religious views says marriage is between a man and a women. him denying her over this is religious discrimination which is illegal.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

Three times isn't much, so the governor wasn't some regular customer. Not much of a loss for the governor.

Surprised this made the news. Then again, what happens in New Mexico, anyway?

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

ludin said:

good thing what you described didn't happen
deny it all you want he committed religious discrimination.

she is catholic which means that her religious views says marriage is between a man and a women. him denying her over this is religious discrimination which is illegal.

Click to expand...

Who is arguing that the Catholic Church should be legally compelled to perform same sex marriages? (By the way, that would be completely unconstitutional. ) If you personally or for religious reasons do not believe that same sex couples should be married, or in the case of the Catholic Church receive the Holy Sacrament of Marriage, then you are free to always join a church that shares your views. However, whether or not the state recognizes that marriage is a political question - in the case one of equal rights - not a religious one.

So your point is irrelevant. That said, I think the hairdresser was being hypocritical.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

I have no problem with people discriminating based on political views. If someone wants to discriminate against people who support SSM, I have no problem with that, just as I have no problem with the opposite. I do have a problem with those who discriminate based on who someone is, their status and so forth. Being gay, is part of who a person is, and you shouldn't get to discriminate on that basis. Being Catholic is a status as a result of a choice, and a person shouldn't be discriminated against based on that choice. Being personally opposed to SSM is another status, and one for which a person should again be protected against discrimination. Being politically against SSM is not a status as such, it is a political position which is aimed at discrimination against others. Discriminating against those who wish to discriminate is justified in every sense.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

SouthernDemocrat said:

Who is arguing that the Catholic Church should be legally compelled to perform same sex marriages? (By the way, that would be completely unconstitutional. ) If you personally or for religious reasons do not believe that same sex couples should be married, or in the case of the Catholic Church receive the Holy Sacrament of Marriage, then you are free to always join a church that shares your views. However, whether or not the state recognizes that marriage is a political question - in the case one of equal rights - not a religious one.

Click to expand...

We're at the point, now, where a baker, a florist, a caterer, or what, can be compelled to provide services in direct support of a disgusting same-sex mockery of a wedding, even if he has religious or moral beliefs against it. Once this principle takes hold, it's really a very small step from that to compelling a church to allow such a sick mockery to take place on its property, and a minister of that church to officiate over that mockery. We've created a fictitious ”right” of sick perverts to force decent people to participate in and support their perversion, and are in the process of raising this “right” above the genuine, Constitutionally-affirmed freedom of religion.

If you don't believe that churches will be forced to support “gay marriage”, then just remember that only a decade ago, nobody would have believed that such a sick mockery would ever be given any legal standing at all, and certainly never believe that decent people would be forced—as they now are beginning to be—to support and participate in these mockeries.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

Bob Blaylock said:

We're at the point, now, where a baker, a florist, a caterer, or what, can be compelled to provide services in direct support of a disgusting same-sex mockery of a wedding, even if he has religious or moral beliefs against it. Once this principle takes hold, it's really a very small step from that to compelling a church to allow such a sick mockery to take place on its property, and a minister of that church to officiate over that mockery. We've created a fictitious ”right” of sick perverts to force decent people to participate in and support their perversion, and are in the process of raising this “right” above the genuine, Constitutionally-affirmed freedom of religion.

If you don't believe that churches will be forced to support “gay marriage”, then just remember that only a decade ago, nobody would have believed that such a sick mockery would ever be given any legal standing at all, and certainly never believe that decent people would be forced—as they now are beginning to be—to support and participate in these mockeries.

Click to expand...

Ok, depending on state and local laws a business cannot discriminate against same sex couples because a business gets a license in that state and thus agrees to abide by that states laws, including that state or locality's discrimination laws. Right or wrong, that is how it works.

This does not apply to a church, and since since there is a constitutional separation of church and state, any state or locality that tried to implement such a law would be challenged in the courts and quickly lose. So your fear is frankly absurd.

For example, the state recognizes interracial marriages. Businesses cannot discriminate against interracial couples. However, no church can be legally compelled to perform an interracial marriage. Constitutional law 101 here.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

SouthernDemocrat said:

Ok, depending on state and local laws a business cannot discriminate against same sex couples because a business gets a license in that state and thus agrees to abide by that states laws, including that state or locality's discrimination laws. Right or wrong, that is how it works.

This does not apply to a church, and since since there is a constitutional separation of church and state, any state or locality that tried to implement such a law would be challenged in the courts and quickly lose. So your fear is frankly absurd.

For example, the state recognizes interracial marriages. Businesses cannot discriminate against interracial couples. However, no church can be legally compelled to perform an interracial marriage. Constitutional law 101 here.

Click to expand...

The step from recognizing the religious and moral rights of an individual, to denying it in order to force them to cater to sick perverts, as is now happening, was a very big step. It's a very small step from there to deciding that the same religious freedom now being denied to individuals and their businesses must also be denied to churches.

If we continue in the current direction, then it will happen, repeatedly, within the next decade, that some homosexual couple will sue a church or a minister for refusing to perform a mockery of a wedding, and will win that lawsuit.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

I don't get denying services to anyone.

What the **** is the point?

Who's got time for that ****?

The only time I deny service (and I have) is if people become abusive or they don't have the money to pay for it.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

Bob Blaylock said:

The step from recognizing the religious and moral rights of an individual, to denying it in order to force them to cater to sick perverts, as is now happening, was a very big step. It's a very small step from there to deciding that the same religious freedom now being denied to individuals and their businesses must also be denied to churches.

If we continue in the current direction, then it will happen, repeatedly, within the next decade, that some homosexual couple will sue a church or a minister for refusing to perform a mockery of a wedding, and will win that lawsuit.

Click to expand...

The problem with this premise Bob is that you would have to allow the practice for everyone. So if for instance, I don't want to serve you because you are a christian then I can, if I don't want to serve you because I am a Muslim and you are woman who does not respect the laws of my faith I can deny you service and so on. I think we try to make choices on public policy that will serve the largest number of people. Therefore, being tolerant of other faiths, orientations etc with regard to who I do and do not best serves the majority.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

opendebate said:

The problem with this premise Bob is that you would have to allow the practice for everyone. So if for instance, I don't want to serve you because you are a christian then I can, if I don't want to serve you because I am a Muslim and you are woman who does not respect the laws of my faith I can deny you service and so on. I think we try to make choices on public policy that will serve the largest number of people. Therefore, being tolerant of other faiths, orientations etc with regard to who I do and do not best serves the majority.

Click to expand...

I think there's a very clear line that is being crossed, that should not be.

If I own a bakery, and someone walks into my shop to buy some generic item off the shelf, then it's none of my business what his religion is, what his race is, what his political views are, or what sexual perversions, if any, he engages in. None of that has anything to do with the transaction of him buying an item, and me selling that item.

However, if he wants me to make a custom “wedding” cake, with two “grooms”, and the names of two men to be “married”, I'm not going to do it. Marriage is very sacred to me, and “same sex marriage” is a disgusting, sick mockery of it. I will not participate in or in any way support such a mockery; and I do not recognize any authority to force me to do so or to punish me for declining to do so. I think that my right not to participate in something that is so blatantly immoral, and so far against my moral and religious values, is greater than the “right” of any sick pervert to force me to participate in such a thing.


Perhaps a good analogy would be a halal butcher shop. I am perfectly free to walk into such a shop, and buy any product that it offers for sale, even though I am not a Muslim. I'm even OK with the law prohibiting the Muslim butcher from discriminating against me for being a Christian—that he must sell to me any item that he offers for sale just as he would sell it to a fellow Muslim. If I go into such a shop, and demand that the butcher sell me pork chops or bacon, how should this demand be met? If he refuses, should l I have a right to sue him for religious discrimination, to win such a suit, and possibly drive him out of business? Or should I just accept that if I want to buy non-halal meat, that perhaps I should go to a non-halal butcher?

I say that if anyone wants products or services that directly support a sick mockery of a wedding, he should go to a merchant that is willing to support such a thing; and not expect or demand that anyone in the business of supporting genuine marriages must also support his sick mockery thereof.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

ludin said:

Governor should file a discrimination suit it is illegal to discriminate against religious views.

isn't that what these people pull? he is a public business and open to the public he cannot discriminate based on sex, sexual orientation, religious view points and several other things.

Click to expand...

Haha get real, the governor should be sued by the stylist if anything since separation of church and state precludes bans on same sex marriage. Not to mention if you can't even agree to give your stylist basic human rights, *don't* expect them to continue cutting your hair!

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

Bob Blaylock said:

................

Click to expand...

However, if he wants me to make a custom “wedding” cake, with two “grooms”, and the names of two men to be “married”, I'm not going to do it. Marriage is very sacred to me,

Click to expand...

I hear you and honestly, I think that is lovely (your sentiment about marriage). However, I don't see providing service to someone as a statement of support for their sexual orientation.

Perhaps a good analogy would be a halal butcher shop. I am perfectly free to walk into such a shop, and buy any product that it offers for sale, even though I am not a Muslim. I'm even OK with the law prohibiting the Muslim butcher from discriminating against me for being a Christian—that he must sell to me any item that he offers for sale just as he would sell it to a fellow Muslim. If I go into such a shop, and demand that the butcher sell me pork chops or bacon, how should this demand be met? If he refuses, should l I have a right to sue him for religious discrimination, to win such a suit, and possibly drive him out of business? Or should I just accept that if I want to buy non-halal meat, that perhaps I should go to a non-halal butcher?

Click to expand...

That's interesting. My first instinct was to say that the flaw in your analogy is that the baker sells wedding cakes so you are not asking for something they do not already sell. But you seem to be making the distinction that a "gay" wedding cake is somehow a different product. Is that correct?

I can't say that I agree with that, a cake is a cake.

I say that if anyone wants products or services that directly support a sick mockery of a wedding, he should go to a merchant that is willing to support such a thing; and not expect or demand that anyone in the business of supporting genuine marriages must also support his sick mockery thereof.

Click to expand...

The issue here of course that THEY are asking for services they understand to be defined in this way. This is YOUR definition. They are just asking for a wedding cake for all the same reasons you usually provide one.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

I hear you and honestly, I think that is lovely. However, I don't see providing service to someone as a statement of support for their sexual orientation.[/QUOTE]

I cannot see producing a custom product or service that is specific to a particular event as not being supportive of that event.

Suppose the Ku Klux Klan still existed in any meaningful form, and they wanted to hold some gathering. If you're a caterer, and they want to hire you to cater that gathering, should you have a right to refuse? What if you're a print shop,and they want you to print up posters advertising that gathering, or T-Shirts commemorating it? Or perhaps you're a baker, and they want you to make a big cake to serve at the event, decorated with images of burning crosses and hooded Klansmen, and scenes of black people being hung from trees. Should you have a right to refuse to make such a cake?

opendebate said:

That's interesting. My first instinct was to say that the flaw in your analogy is that the baker sells wedding cakes so you are not asking for something they do not already sell. But you seem to be making the distinction that a "gay" wedding cake is somehow a different product. Is that correct?

I can't say that I agree with that, a cake is a cake.

Click to expand...

If it's a generic, off-the-shelf cake, then I'd agree. But wedding cakes are not usually generic, off-the-shelf products, but custom works of art, specific to the one wedding for which they are made. They are an expression of that wedding, and what it is held to stand for. This gets to another aspect of the First Amendment. Surely, along with a right to freely express your beliefs and values, there is also a right not to be compelled to express something that is contrary to your beliefs and values.

opendebate said:

The issue here of course that THEY are asking for services they understand to be defined in this way. This is YOUR definition. They are just asking for a wedding cake for all the same reasons you usually provide one.

Click to expand...

What if I disagree with a halal butcher's definition of what halal means? What if MY definition of “halal” includes pork? Should I be able to force that halal butcher to go along with my definition of “halal”, and to provide me a product that meets my definition, even if doing so violates his definition of halal, along with the sincerely-held religious and moral beliefs that underlie his understanding of the term?

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

chromium said:

Haha get real, the governor should be sued by the stylist if anything since separation of church and state precludes bans on same sex marriage. Not to mention if you can't even agree to give your stylist basic human rights, *don't* expect them to continue cutting your hair!

Click to expand...

wrong. public business must serve any person regardless of their sex, sexual orientation, or religious views.
she has a right to her religious views.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

WCH said:

Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex marriage* - NY Daily News

New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez needs a new hairdresser — or a new stance on gay marriage.

Martinez was recently dropped by her hair stylist, Antonio Darden, who is gay.

Darden told a local news station that he cut the governor’s hair three times, but won’t do it again as long as she continues to oppose gay marriage.

Click to expand...

Sue him out of buisness for religious discrimination.

Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

WCH said:

I doubt the Governor was telling him to his face that she didn't approve of his lifestyle or anything about SSM.

Click to expand...

...so? Wouldn't change the fact the governor supports discrimination against him.

She actually believes that people should vote on gay marriage, not leave it to Court. (Dec 2013) She is Catholic and believe marriage is between a man and a woman.

Click to expand...

She opposes same-sex marriage, which means she supports discrimination. If her hair stylist decides to get married to someone of the same sex, that has absolutely nothing to do with her.

ludin said:

you are wrong. not believing in gay marriage very much so is a religious stance

Click to expand...

Only when it applies to you, not when applied to others. When you're discussing same sex marriage as a legal concept, it's a political stance.

you are not allowed to discriminate against religious people.

Click to expand...

Nor are you to pass any laws respecting the establishment of religion. So those are tied. So what it comes down to is the simple fact that outlawing same-sex marriage is discriminatory.

he is a business open to the public whether he likes those people's point of view or not does give him the right to discriminate against what someone's religious point of view.

Click to expand...

He's not, he's discriminating against her political stance.

I know many people who believe homosexuality is wrong, but recognizes it's not their place to tell people what to do. There's a difference in what one believes and what one tries to force on others. Allowing two homosexuals to marry each other has absolutely nothing to do with you.

this is religious bigotry.

Click to expand...

No, it's not. Now, I'm not saying he should be allowed to discriminate against her because of her political views, because I honestly don't know how I feel about that. I see both sides of the argument there. But opposing same sex marriage is not a religious view. One person not engaging in same sex relations can be a religious view...seeking legal courses to discriminate against a class of individual is not a religious view.

VanceMack said:

The difference is one position is built on a religious and moral values base and the other is built on a pissy attitude because someone dares to not agree with them.

Click to expand...

Why does your religious and morals value base trump mine? Why does what you think is "moral" get more weight than mine?

Sorry, your argument is asinine. The religious viewpoint on same sex marriage is not "correct". There is no "correct" viewpoints, just differing ones. But only one view point is seeking legal discrimination against an entire class of individuals, and it's not the attitude of the hair stylist I'm talking about.