Court Infringes on Religious Beliefs Again!

[Cryptic]

No, excluding Jews would not be okay.

As a home based business where the customers are granted access to their home, they should be able decline a contract to anybody for any reason. That ability, of course, extends to the ability to decline a contract with me (straight, white Christian male).

 

[blarg]

The business is apparently ran from their home. As such, they should not have to answer to you, me, nor the State as to how they conduct their business and who they do, or do not allow to enter their home.


And a business run out of a home is pretty personal.


I agree completely. This is another junk ruling that violates the wisdom of the historical allowances of the Mrs. Murphy's Boarding House exemption. Basically, exemption is a victory for common sense where the State declines to get involved in home based boarding businesses via aplying the Fair Housing Act.

http://www.huduser.org/periodicals/cityscpe/vol4num3/mathias.pdf
At the end of the day, the last thing the State needs to get involved in is business decisions involving who does, or does not have access to private homes.



It does not matter whether sexual orientation is, or is not immutable. The business is home based, as such the owner should have the ability to reject anybody for any reason- or for no stated reason.

o why?

 

[Cryptic]

o why?

Because the government has no business regulating who is or is not given access to homes. The fact that the home is also a business, though noted, does not change that core concept. In earlier generations, the government affirmed that core concept and allows small scale boarding house owners to be exempt from certain portions of the FHA.

Likewise, in the past courts have affirmed the right of small scale business owners who worked on site to be exempt portions of the EEO act. The test case was an Orthodox Jew with alot of issues with women.

The court said the owners implied freedom of assosciation and freedom of religion extended to his small business (under 7 employees, owner worked on site). The owner was allowed to hire, or not hire whom he wanted. The court did not agree with his views regarding women outside the home, but decided that it was not worth the State getting involved.

 

[blarg]

“Apparantly” what?



Agreed but racism is not a factor here.



You are also being true to your beliefs by not allowing same-sex weddings on your property if you hold biblical beliefs.



This is a nonsensical statement.



There are differences between heterosexual marriages and homosexual “marriages”.



That’s very true. What the point?



That’s very true. What the point?



No. Race is immutable. Where you have your “wedding” is not.



Then why don’t you get it?

their apparently discriminating against peephole based on gender ( o no redundancy).

I know this story was not about racism but you claim their is no comparison between discrimination based on race and discrimination against same sex couples based on gender is obviously false and the fact the race is immutable is irrelevant.

theirs no reason to permit discrimination towards homosexuals bases on religion in business same with dicmrnation against people for race or religion.

your claim that discrimination against race was not comparable to discrimination against a gay couple because race cant be chosen was nonsensical considering the history of interracial marriage in this country.

what's the relevant difference between hetero sexual marriages we allow and homosexual marriages?

still not seeing how people who discriminate against a couple based on race are any worse then these business owners or why society should accept either kind of discrimination.

 

[Cryptic]

except business by its nature involves other people not sure how the location should effect the stranded your held to

Because homes in america have always been considered to sacrosanct. Thus, alot of leeway has been afforded people regarding their homes. That includes home based businesses as boarding houses are exempt important portions of the FHA.

 

[nota bene]

So wanting to live their lives according to their beliefs is "indecent"?

That's rather intolerant.

Not to mention intolerant.

 

[iguanaman]

The business is apparently ran from their home. As such, they should not have to answer to you, me, nor the State as to how they conduct their business and who they do, or do not allow to enter their home.


And a business run out of a home is pretty personal.


I agree completely. This is another junk ruling that violates the wisdom of the historical allowances of the Mrs. Murphy's Boarding House exemption. Basically, exemption is a victory for common sense where the State declines to get involved in home based boarding businesses via aplying the Fair Housing Act.

http://www.huduser.org/periodicals/cityscpe/vol4num3/mathias.pdf
At the end of the day, the last thing the State needs to get involved in is business decisions involving who does, or does not have access to private homes.



It does not matter whether sexual orientation is, or is not immutable. The business is home based, as such the owner should have the ability to reject anybody for any reason- or for no stated reason.

A "private" home that is rented out is not private it is a business. You may not refuse to rent to a SSM couple either.

 

[Cryptic]

A "private" home that is rented out is not private it is a business. You may not refuse to rent to a SSM couple either.

Actually, you can. Small scale property owners are exempt portions of the Fair Housing Act if they rent under certain conditions. Thus straights, gays, blacks and whites can all be legally refused.

 

[Kal'Stang]

Moderator's Warning:

This thread is more about politics than it is about religion. Moved. Here we go again! This time it’s a Christian couple that rent out their farm forweddings. A lesbian couple wanted to get married on their farm and the Giffords(the Christian couple) said no because they believe that marriage is betweenmen and women (which it is!). So the lesbian couple sue and a judge fines the Giffords $13,000 andthey have to “teach classes to their employees that impose the state’s view ofmarriage.” Un-freaking-believable! The state fines the Giffords for living by their beliefs and thenforces them to teach a belief they do not hold. How in the cornbread-hell this can be Constitutional I have no idea! What gives the state the right to order what someone's person beliefs are? And God bless the Giffords who have the courage of their convictions. They have decided not to have any moreweddings on their farm.

 

[DDD]

A "private" home that is rented out is not private it is a business. You may not refuse to rent to a SSM couple either.

To what degree does this holds? What if SSM ruins future business of the privately renting couple?

 

[The Baron]

easy they just do private ceramonies not open to the public.
but all we want is the right to marry lol. that is right up there with if you like your insurance you can keep it.

next stop churches will be sued and pastors. that is coming.

It’s already here.

 

[Paxaeon]

No comparison. Race is immutable. Behavior is not.

`
Being Gay is not a behavior. It's a sexual orientation.

 

[Paxaeon]

easy they just do private ceramonies not open to the public.but all we want is the right to marry lol. that is right up there with if you like your insurance you can keep it.next stop churches will be sued and pastors. that is coming.

`
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

 

[TobyOne]

Most sinners don't invite friends and have a celebration when they sin.

Do they rent their farm to other sinners?

Oh wait, we have all sinned and...

 

[The Baron]

their apparently discriminating against peephole based on gender ( o no redundancy).

No. They will marry either gender. It fact, that is preferred. What they won’t marry is homosexuals. You would be correct to say they are discriminating against homosexuals. They are certainly not discriminating against genders.

I know this story was not about racism but you claim their is no comparison between discrimination based on race and discrimination against same sex couples based on gender is obviously false and the fact the race is immutable is irrelevant.

Hardly! And this issue of race was already decided in Virginia vs. Loving. In that case, men and women of different races were getting married which changed nothing about marriage. It was still between men and women.

Homosexual marriage seeks to change the definition of marriage.

theirs no reason to permit discrimination towards homosexuals bases on religion in business

Not all businesses are run by atheist. Many are run by Christians and these Christians want to live their lives and run their businesses on Christian principles and in America you get to do that.

same with dicmrnation against people for race or religion.

Absolutely no comparison. See above.

your claim that discrimination against race was not comparable to discrimination against a gay couple because race cant be chosen was nonsensical considering the history of interracial marriage in this country.

Absolutely no comparison. See above.

what's the relevant difference between hetero sexual marriages we allow and homosexual marriages?

Worlds of difference! For a short list:

1. Marriage has always been between men and women regardless of time, geography, culture, religion, race, circumstances, etc.

2. Raising children takes both a mother and a father.

3. The last time people changed marriage (no-fault divorce) it harmed the institutions of marriage.

4. Marriage / family is the corner-stone of society. Change marriage and you fundamentally harm / change society.

5. Marriage helps to protect women from predatory men and tames men’s sexual appetite into a monogamous relationship.

still not seeing how people who discriminate against a couple based on race are any worse then these business owners or why society should accept either kind of discrimination.

Nobody is saying racism is cool. Get over yourself. What we are saying is that homosexual marriage is bad and if Christians wish to separate ourselves from it we should be free to do so. The state has no right to force it upon us.

 

[The Baron]

`
Being Gay is not a behavior. It's a sexual orientation.

So you"re saying their orientation does not affect their behavior?

Interesting.

 

[blarg]

No. They will marry either gender. It fact, that is preferred. What they won’t marry is homosexuals. You would be correct to say they are discriminating against homosexuals. They are certainly not discriminating against genders.



Hardly! And this issue of race was already decided in Virginia vs. Loving. In that case, men and women of different races were getting married which changed nothing about marriage. It was still between men and women.

Homosexual marriage seeks to change the definition of marriage.



Not all businesses are run by atheist. Many are run by Christians and these Christians want to live their lives and run their businesses on Christian principles and in America you get to do that.



Absolutely no comparison. See above.



Absolutely no comparison. See above.



Worlds of difference! For a short list:

1. Marriage has always been between men and women regardless of time, geography, culture, religion, race, circumstances, etc.

2. Raising children takes both a mother and a father.

3. The last time people changed marriage (no-fault divorce) it harmed the institutions of marriage.

4. Marriage / family is the corner-stone of society. Change marriage and you fundamentally harm / change society.

5. Marriage helps to protect women from predatory men and tames men’s sexual appetite into a monogamous relationship.



Nobody is saying racism is cool. Get over yourself. What we are saying is that homosexual marriage is bad and if Christians wish to separate ourselves from it we should be free to do so. The state has no right to force it upon us.

if you marry black people and if you marry white people but you wont marry a black person to a white person that's still racial discrimination opposition to homosexuality is still gender based and these people are still no better then racists

 

[mak2]

I dunno, I have been to some major gluttony fest after Church on Sunday.

Most sinners don't invite friends and have a celebration when they sin.

 

[blarg]

No. They will marry either gender. It fact, that is preferred. What they won’t marry is homosexuals. You would be correct to say they are discriminating against homosexuals. They are certainly not discriminating against genders.



Hardly! And this issue of race was already decided in Virginia vs. Loving. In that case, men and women of different races were getting married which changed nothing about marriage. It was still between men and women.

Homosexual marriage seeks to change the definition of marriage.



Not all businesses are run by atheist. Many are run by Christians and these Christians want to live their lives and run their businesses on Christian principles and in America you get to do that.



Absolutely no comparison. See above.



Absolutely no comparison. See above.



Worlds of difference! For a short list:

1. Marriage has always been between men and women regardless of time, geography, culture, religion, race, circumstances, etc.

2. Raising children takes both a mother and a father.

3. The last time people changed marriage (no-fault divorce) it harmed the institutions of marriage.

4. Marriage / family is the corner-stone of society. Change marriage and you fundamentally harm / change society.

5. Marriage helps to protect women from predatory men and tames men’s sexual appetite into a monogamous relationship.



Nobody is saying racism is cool. Get over yourself. What we are saying is that homosexual marriage is bad and if Christians wish to separate ourselves from it we should be free to do so. The state has no right to force it upon us.

how is marriage going to change if people from the same gender can marry one another?

 

[blarg]

No. They will marry either gender. It fact, that is preferred. What they won’t marry is homosexuals. You would be correct to say they are discriminating against homosexuals. They are certainly not discriminating against genders.



Hardly! And this issue of race was already decided in Virginia vs. Loving. In that case, men and women of different races were getting married which changed nothing about marriage. It was still between men and women.

Homosexual marriage seeks to change the definition of marriage.



Not all businesses are run by atheist. Many are run by Christians and these Christians want to live their lives and run their businesses on Christian principles and in America you get to do that.



Absolutely no comparison. See above.



Absolutely no comparison. See above.



Worlds of difference! For a short list:

1. Marriage has always been between men and women regardless of time, geography, culture, religion, race, circumstances, etc.

2. Raising children takes both a mother and a father.

3. The last time people changed marriage (no-fault divorce) it harmed the institutions of marriage.

4. Marriage / family is the corner-stone of society. Change marriage and you fundamentally harm / change society.

5. Marriage helps to protect women from predatory men and tames men’s sexual appetite into a monogamous relationship.



Nobody is saying racism is cool. Get over yourself. What we are saying is that homosexual marriage is bad and if Christians wish to separate ourselves from it we should be free to do so. The state has no right to force it upon us.

why should we let people discriminate against others in business based on their religion?

 

[blarg]

No. They will marry either gender. It fact, that is preferred. What they won’t marry is homosexuals. You would be correct to say they are discriminating against homosexuals. They are certainly not discriminating against genders.



Hardly! And this issue of race was already decided in Virginia vs. Loving. In that case, men and women of different races were getting married which changed nothing about marriage. It was still between men and women.

Homosexual marriage seeks to change the definition of marriage.



Not all businesses are run by atheist. Many are run by Christians and these Christians want to live their lives and run their businesses on Christian principles and in America you get to do that.



Absolutely no comparison. See above.



Absolutely no comparison. See above.



Worlds of difference! For a short list:

1. Marriage has always been between men and women regardless of time, geography, culture, religion, race, circumstances, etc.

2. Raising children takes both a mother and a father.

3. The last time people changed marriage (no-fault divorce) it harmed the institutions of marriage.

4. Marriage / family is the corner-stone of society. Change marriage and you fundamentally harm / change society.

5. Marriage helps to protect women from predatory men and tames men’s sexual appetite into a monogamous relationship.



Nobody is saying racism is cool. Get over yourself. What we are saying is that homosexual marriage is bad and if Christians wish to separate ourselves from it we should be free to do so. The state has no right to force it upon us.

being a bigot towards homosexuals because of religion is not nay different then being a racist or a bigot towards other religions because of your faith nothing you have posted changes that

 

[blarg]

No. They will marry either gender. It fact, that is preferred. What they won’t marry is homosexuals. You would be correct to say they are discriminating against homosexuals. They are certainly not discriminating against genders.



Hardly! And this issue of race was already decided in Virginia vs. Loving. In that case, men and women of different races were getting married which changed nothing about marriage. It was still between men and women.

Homosexual marriage seeks to change the definition of marriage.



Not all businesses are run by atheist. Many are run by Christians and these Christians want to live their lives and run their businesses on Christian principles and in America you get to do that.



Absolutely no comparison. See above.



Absolutely no comparison. See above.



Worlds of difference! For a short list:

1. Marriage has always been between men and women regardless of time, geography, culture, religion, race, circumstances, etc.

2. Raising children takes both a mother and a father.

3. The last time people changed marriage (no-fault divorce) it harmed the institutions of marriage.

4. Marriage / family is the corner-stone of society. Change marriage and you fundamentally harm / change society.

5. Marriage helps to protect women from predatory men and tames men’s sexual appetite into a monogamous relationship.



Nobody is saying racism is cool. Get over yourself. What we are saying is that homosexual marriage is bad and if Christians wish to separate ourselves from it we should be free to do so. The state has no right to force it upon us.

still a very strong comparison

 

[TobyOne]

In this case, its not discrimination against others its discrimination of the act. The owners were fine with having the reception on their property but not the ceremony. The courts decided that since it was a rental situation it fell under the state's anti-discrimination laws. So, for example it was treated the same way it would have been treated if someone had refused to rent an apartment to a black or gay couple.

The courts don't seem to differentiate between discrimination against an act and discriminating against people. Maybe there's been precedence that there is no difference but it seems to me a clear distinction.

why should we let people discriminate against others in business based on their religion?

 

[blarg]

No. They will marry either gender. It fact, that is preferred. What they won’t marry is homosexuals. You would be correct to say they are discriminating against homosexuals. They are certainly not discriminating against genders.



Hardly! And this issue of race was already decided in Virginia vs. Loving. In that case, men and women of different races were getting married which changed nothing about marriage. It was still between men and women.

Homosexual marriage seeks to change the definition of marriage.



Not all businesses are run by atheist. Many are run by Christians and these Christians want to live their lives and run their businesses on Christian principles and in America you get to do that.



Absolutely no comparison. See above.



Absolutely no comparison. See above.



Worlds of difference! For a short list:

1. Marriage has always been between men and women regardless of time, geography, culture, religion, race, circumstances, etc.

2. Raising children takes both a mother and a father.

3. The last time people changed marriage (no-fault divorce) it harmed the institutions of marriage.

4. Marriage / family is the corner-stone of society. Change marriage and you fundamentally harm / change society.

5. Marriage helps to protect women from predatory men and tames men’s sexual appetite into a monogamous relationship.



Nobody is saying racism is cool. Get over yourself. What we are saying is that homosexual marriage is bad and if Christians wish to separate ourselves from it we should be free to do so. The state has no right to force it upon us.

you need more of a difference then same gender marriages will have same gender couples

there are single parents and same sex parents raising kids all ready so need is not actually correct

how has marriage been harmed by no fault divorces? and how's 1 Change being bad mean that all changes would be bad?

laws taking down down race based bans on couples was a change for marriage why was that bad?

again with the change=harm how exactly would letting same sex couples marry change any ones family (other then perhaps letting some single parents get married and giving some kids 2 legal parents)

how's marriage protect women or make men only want to have sex with their spouse?

wouldn't gay marriage also promote monogamy?

 

[blarg]

No. They will marry either gender. It fact, that is preferred. What they won’t marry is homosexuals. You would be correct to say they are discriminating against homosexuals. They are certainly not discriminating against genders.



Hardly! And this issue of race was already decided in Virginia vs. Loving. In that case, men and women of different races were getting married which changed nothing about marriage. It was still between men and women.

Homosexual marriage seeks to change the definition of marriage.



Not all businesses are run by atheist. Many are run by Christians and these Christians want to live their lives and run their businesses on Christian principles and in America you get to do that.



Absolutely no comparison. See above.



Absolutely no comparison. See above.



Worlds of difference! For a short list:

1. Marriage has always been between men and women regardless of time, geography, culture, religion, race, circumstances, etc.

2. Raising children takes both a mother and a father.

3. The last time people changed marriage (no-fault divorce) it harmed the institutions of marriage.

4. Marriage / family is the corner-stone of society. Change marriage and you fundamentally harm / change society.

5. Marriage helps to protect women from predatory men and tames men’s sexual appetite into a monogamous relationship.



Nobody is saying racism is cool. Get over yourself. What we are saying is that homosexual marriage is bad and if Christians wish to separate ourselves from it we should be free to do so. The state has no right to force it upon us.

yes racisms is wrong not saying you thick its ok but still not seeing how your any better then they are when it comes to how you treat homosexuals and I don't see why you religion should be used to justify such discrimination