• 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!

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

Re: The Other Side of the Coin

rathi said:
The liberal idea that "all opinions are equally valid" is nonsense. The people against homosexuality cannot provide any evidence of why it is objectively harmful. By contrast, I can provide tangible examples of the harm caused by people discriminating against homosexuals. My arguments based on facts and logic do in fact trump irrational blind prejudice.
Click to expand...

All opinions are not equally valid, and anyone who thinks that is a "liberal idea" is delusional.
 
Re: The Other Side of the Coin

Chocolate said:
Sue him if he wants to be treated equelly and fairly by people who are against his lifestyle, he should then treat those with a lifestyle or opinion he is against equally as the children in the USA say the golden rule? I'm gay and I think this guy is an idiot and he is one of the many reasons that kind of slow down progress in the LGBT community
Click to expand...

He did not drop her as a client because she was a woman, hispanic, straight, a republican[she was his client before], her relgious beliefs...on what grounds would she sue? How did he violate her civil rights? Is a bleach job and a blow out a right?

Why did he slow down progress?
 
Re: The Other Side of the Coin

Deuce said:
All opinions are not equally valid, and anyone who thinks that is a "liberal idea" is delusional.
Click to expand...

Plenty of your fellow liberals espouse that particular belief. I am aware its not universal, but it was specifically brought up in this thread by a liberal poster.
 
Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

tech30528 said:
Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex marriage* - NY Daily News

Soooo, here it is, the other side of the coin. For all of you who cheered the veto of the Arizona protection of religion bill, we now have the flip side. Governor Martinez' hairdresser refuses to do business with her any more because of her views on gay marriage. Anyone want to try to defend this bigotry? After all the claims of Equality, it seems that equality really ISN'T the point after all.

Personally, I'd sue his panties off just to make a point.
Click to expand...
which of her civil rights did he violate?
 
Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

>


Just wanted to point out I was mistaken (i.e. wrong). This thread's state location is New Mexico not Arizona, homosexuals are covered under NM's Employment and Public Accommodation laws, but of course politicians are not.


I'll now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.


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

1750Texan said:
which of her civil rights did he violate?
Click to expand...

He discriminated against her because of her creed.
 
Re: The Other Side of the Coin

apdst said:
She's being discriminated against, because of her sexuality.
Click to expand...


No she's not, the hairdresser has plenty of female clients and will provide services to them. Therefore it's not the sexual orienation (or gender either) that is the basis of the refusal.

Remember the claim from the bakers? To paraphrase: They sell baked goods to gay people all the time, it was the event, not the person to which they objected". So in this case it's not the sexual orientation nor the sex of the Governor which is the factor, the it is her political position they they find offensive and therefore refused service.

It's very hypocritical to say a photographer or baker can refuse to service a customer because they don't believe in Same-sex Civil Marriage and to then turn around and say that a hairdresser can't refuse service they do believe in Marriage Equality.


>>>>
 
Re: The Other Side of the Coin

apdst said:
She's being discriminated against, because of her sexuality.
Click to expand...

Unless I missed something, being against gay marriage isn't in any way related to ones sexuality.

There are plenty of straight people who are for gay marriage.

She's being discriminated against for her political views. And I have no issue with that.

Then again, I don't really have an issue with a cater discriminating against a same sex wedding, because a wedding is an event and I have no issue with discriminating against events.
 
Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

apdst said:
He discriminated against her because of her creed.
Click to expand...


"Creed" isn't mentioned in the New Mexico law. Creed to some means a set of fundamental beliefs - that is not protected. You can have a fundamental belief that blacks are bad, you still can't discriminate them as Public Accommodation subject business. Now one could argue that creed is synonymous with "religion" and that would be true.

28-1-7. Unlawful discriminatory practice.
F. any person in any public accommodation to make a distinction, directly or indirectly, in offering or refusing to offer its services, facilities, accommodations or goods to any person because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, spousal affiliation or physical or mental handicap, provided that the physical or mental handicap is unrelated to a person's ability to acquire or rent and maintain particular real property or housing accommodation ;​

However the hairdresser would be able to show that he serves many Christians and therefore doesn't discriminate against customers based on religion. The fact that she is a politician though, and that he objects to her position on secular law, is not a protected status.


>>>>
 
Last edited:
Re: The Other Side of the Coin

Zyphlin said:
apdst said:
She's being discriminated against, because of her sexuality.
Click to expand...
Unless I missed something, being against gay marriage isn't in any way related to ones sexuality.
Click to expand...


One would think that a hairdress is going to be able to line up a string of witness that are female to show he doesn't just to male haircuts.


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

apdst said:
He discriminated against her because of her creed.
Click to expand...

SSM is banned in New Mexico so it is opposition to the law and her stance on the law and not her..."creed".
 
Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

apdst said:
She's being discriminated against, because of her sexuality.
Click to expand...
apdst said:
He discriminated against her because of her creed.
Click to expand...


Could you make up your mind? Looks like you are just trying to throw one liners out there hoping that something - anything - will stick.


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

WorldWatcher said:
"Creed" isn't mentioned in the New Mexico law. Creed to some means a set of fundamental beliefs - that is not protected. You can have a fundamental belief that blacks are bad, you still can't discriminate them as Public Accommodation subject business. Now one could argue that creed is synonymous with "religion" and that would be true.

28-1-7. Unlawful discriminatory practice.
F. any person in any public accommodation to make a distinction, directly or indirectly, in offering or refusing to offer its services, facilities, accommodations or goods to any person because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, spousal affiliation or physical or mental handicap, provided that the physical or mental handicap is unrelated to a person's ability to acquire or rent and maintain particular real property or housing accommodation ;​

However the hairdresser would be able to show that he serves many Christians and therefore doesn't discriminate against customers based on religion. The fact that she is a politician though, and that he objects to her position on secular law, is not a protected status.


>>>>
Click to expand...

So then a business owner who discriminates against a gay person who supports gay marriage would be ok as long as they refuse service based on that persons support of gay marriage?
 
Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

tech30528 said:
Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex marriage* - NY Daily News

Soooo, here it is, the other side of the coin. For all of you who cheered the veto of the Arizona protection of religion bill, we now have the flip side. Governor Martinez' hairdresser refuses to do business with her any more because of her views on gay marriage. Anyone want to try to defend this bigotry? After all the claims of Equality, it seems that equality really ISN'T the point after all.

Personally, I'd sue his panties off just to make a point.
Click to expand...

Apparenbtly you missed the boat on the difference between what some one is and what they do. It is an important distinction legally. So good luck with that lawsuit.
 
Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

Kreton said:
So then a business owner who discriminates against a gay person who supports gay marriage would be ok as long as they refuse service based on that persons support of gay marriage?
Click to expand...

A business is free to refuse to serve people unless the reason is that the people are part of a protected class under the law. What those protected classes are varies in different states and localities.
 
Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

WorldWatcher said:
"Creed" isn't mentioned in the New Mexico law. Creed to some means a set of fundamental beliefs - that is not protected. You can have a fundamental belief that blacks are bad, you still can't discriminate them as Public Accommodation subject business. Now one could argue that creed is synonymous with "religion" and that would be true.

28-1-7. Unlawful discriminatory practice.
F. any person in any public accommodation to make a distinction, directly or indirectly, in offering or refusing to offer its services, facilities, accommodations or goods to any person because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, spousal affiliation or physical or mental handicap, provided that the physical or mental handicap is unrelated to a person's ability to acquire or rent and maintain particular real property or housing accommodation ;​

However the hairdresser would be able to show that he serves many Christians and therefore doesn't discriminate against customers based on religion. The fact that she is a politician though, and that he objects to her position on secular law, is not a protected status.


>>>>
Click to expand...

Great post.

Moreover, if the Governor were to change her opposition to SSM, I'm sure she would be welcomed back for service.

"No shoes, no service"
 
Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

tech30528 said:
Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex marriage* - NY Daily News

Soooo, here it is, the other side of the coin. For all of you who cheered the veto of the Arizona protection of religion bill, we now have the flip side. Governor Martinez' hairdresser refuses to do business with her any more because of her views on gay marriage. Anyone want to try to defend this bigotry? After all the claims of Equality, it seems that equality really ISN'T the point after all.

Personally, I'd sue his panties off just to make a point.
Click to expand...
the governor should just go across the street and give her money to someone else. hair stylists come a dime a dozen anyway.
 
Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

Redress said:
A business is free to refuse to serve people unless the reason is that the people are part of a protected class under the law. What those protected classes are varies in different states and localities.
Click to expand...

So then yes. You'd be fine with businesses discriminating based on ones "beliefs".
 
Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

Kreton said:
So then yes. You'd be fine with businesses discriminating based on ones "beliefs".
Click to expand...

As long as it's done in a legal manner, absolutely.
 
Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

Kreton said:
So then yes. You'd be fine with businesses discriminating based on ones "beliefs".
Click to expand...

What part of "under the law" confused you? Let me slow this down a bit for you: People are free legally to discriminate against others unless the reason is based on whatever protections the state or locality provides. Frequently this is for good reasons, such as stores refusing to serve people without shirts or shoes.
 
Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

WorldWatcher said:
"Creed" isn't mentioned in the New Mexico law. Creed to some means a set of fundamental beliefs - that is not protected. You can have a fundamental belief that blacks are bad, you still can't discriminate them as Public Accommodation subject business. Now one could argue that creed is synonymous with "religion" and that would be true.

28-1-7. Unlawful discriminatory practice.
F. any person in any public accommodation to make a distinction, directly or indirectly, in offering or refusing to offer its services, facilities, accommodations or goods to any person because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, spousal affiliation or physical or mental handicap, provided that the physical or mental handicap is unrelated to a person's ability to acquire or rent and maintain particular real property or housing accommodation ;​

However the hairdresser would be able to show that he serves many Christians and therefore doesn't discriminate against customers based on religion. The fact that she is a politician though, and that he objects to her position on secular law, is not a protected status.


>>>>
Click to expand...

Kreton said:
So then a business owner who discriminates against a gay person who supports gay marriage would be ok as long as they refuse service based on that persons support of gay marriage?
Click to expand...

The sexuality of the person is irrelevant so long as that refusal of service is to all that oppose SSM. If the owner only choses gays, or blacks, or the disabled to ban...then the reasoning for the ban is moot and the group he is excluding from service is now the issue.

The hair dresser chose the Governer to ban...not all persons that oppose SSM, or All governors that oppose SSM. One person.
 
Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

Kreton said:
So then a business owner who discriminates against a gay person who supports gay marriage would be ok as long as they refuse service based on that persons support of gay marriage?
Click to expand...

It's a tricky concept because there are competing liberties at work.

Say you owned a bar. A group of skinheads moves in and wants to make your bar their neighborhood bar. It's fairly likely that a constant skinhead presence at your bar is going to negatively affect other customers, harming your business. It would seem obvious that a business should be well within their rights to kick the skinheads out. But can a business owner kick someone out because they suspect someone may be racist? Put another way, a bar is going to be equally adverse to being frequented by black gang members. But can they deny someone entrance because they're black and wear saggy pants. Wouldn’t that likely be racial discrimination?

What we're really asking is where my right to be included meets your right to exclude me. And I don't think that line is very clear.
 
Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

1750Texan said:
The sexuality of the person is irrelevant so long as that refusal of service is to all that oppose SSM. If the owner only choses gays, or blacks, or the disabled to ban...then the reasoning for the ban is moot and the group he is excluding from service is now the issue.

The hair dresser chose the Governer to ban...not all persons that oppose SSM, or All governors that oppose SSM. One person.
Click to expand...

It goes a bit further than that. Political stance on an issue is not protected. The hair dresser could legally refuse service to any one who opposed SSM. Not a good idea from a business sense, but legal.
 
Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

Kreton said:
So then yes. You'd be fine with businesses discriminating based on ones "beliefs".
Click to expand...

Your question is too open ended? Discrimination how...What belief?

if you wore a T-shirt into my restuarant saying..."I believe in raping babies"...Can I ban you from my restuarant or does your 1st amendment right trump?
 
Last edited:
Re: Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex

Mithros said:
It's a tricky concept because there are competing liberties at work.

Say you owned a bar. A group of skinheads moves in and wants to make your bar their neighborhood bar. It's fairly likely that a constant skinhead presence at your bar is going to negatively affect other customers, harming your business. It would seem obvious that a business should be well within their rights to kick the skinheads out. But can a business owner kick someone out because they suspect someone may be racist? Put another way, a bar is going to be equally adverse to being frequented by black gang members. But can they deny someone entrance because they're black and wear saggy pants. Wouldn’t that likely be racial discrimination?

What we're really asking is where my right to be included meets your right to exclude me. And I don't think that line is very clear.
Click to expand...

Both would be legal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom