• 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

Sorry, no. Words have meaning and the term "protected class" has a solid legal meaning and the classes are defined in law. It is not an all inclusive term.

Yes, it is.


You haven't thought that through yet, have you?

Yes, it's true.

To wit: race, color, creed, sex, or national origin and even *if* sexual preference were added ---

...we're all members of those protected groups.
 
Looks like you can't do it either.

Been explained too many times before and a waste of time to continually repeat it every time someone carts out the cold bull**** and reheats it hoping folks will go for it this time around.
 
Do you have a race?

Check

Do you have a color"

Check.

Do you have a sex?

Check.

Do you have a creed?

Check.

Do you have a national origin?

Check.

Do you have a sexual preference?

Check (well, most do...;0)
 
I don't believe a movie was made about the Foundation Trilogy, which actually has 2 sequels and 2 prequels not to mention a continuation trilogy by David Brin, Grear Bear and Gregory Benford along with countless books related to the Foundation Universe. My favorite being Psychohistorical Crisis by Donald Kingsbury.

The did make a movie about I Robot starring Will Smith, perhaps you have heard of him.

Yeah, but you said there was an actor who played Hari. In what?
 
Been explained too many times before and a waste of time to continually repeat it every time someone carts out the cold bull**** and reheats it hoping folks will go for it this time around.

No, you haven't pointed out where I was wrong.

Your opinions on things of how this law works are your opinion. You haven't shown where I was factually wrong.

You might disagree with my opinion - when I state it, of how I think it works.

But on the factual matters -- I'm not wrong.
 
For not having someone sell them something they don't sell? No one, Christian, Muslim, atheist, Jew, other would be able to require those bakers to make them a cake/cookie that said something hateful or that they didn't agree on it. Most offered to sell him a cake that he could decorate on his own. And if he hadn't been so rude and obnoxious to them, insisting that they weren't standing for equality or they weren't being fair to him, etc., then all of them likely would have offered to sell him a cake that he could have added the exact words he wanted to them. He wasn't turned away for being Christian, or even really being against gays, but denied service on a type of cake those bakers didn't actually make, one with what they considered "hateful" message on it. So long as they wouldn't sell such a cake to anyone, there was no discrimination.

I believe 3 out of all the bakeries he spoke with offered to bake a cake but not decorate it with the words "Gay Marriage is Wrong". They just outright refused and found it offensive. But you seem to miss the irony completely. The one asking for the cake doesn't see the phrase "Gay Marriage is Wrong" to be offensive as it is part of his religious beliefs that traditional marriage is holy matrimony and some faiths believe it to be one of the sacraments. He was denied a service over his religious beliefs. Yet a person whose moral conscience doesn't want to do gay wedding cakes is forced to under fear of jail, fines etc.

While surfing the web today, I discovered there are lawsuits against gay bakers who refused to provide a cake that did not support gay marriage.

One such case was an order for an open Bible with this symbol placed on the cake.

no-gay-marriage.png


The gay baker refused to do it. Now there are cases in our court system of gay bakers being sued for denying a cake with a Scripture pertaining to sexual sin or symbolism

You see, I think the gay baker has the right to deny a service that offends them. But I also believe those of religious convictions where gay marriage is an abomination to their faith should not be forced to create something for a person that they find offensive.
 
The legal meaning is exactly as I said. Show me differently. Prove that a person could refuse to serve a white person or man or Christian just because of those factors without violating the public accommodation laws.

I see your point and cede it. I was thinking of the reality that it is always one group of people that cause a particular class to be created in law.
 
Funniest clip of the month:



"George, ..."

"George, ..."

"George, ..."

"George, ..."

"George, ..."

"George, ..."

"George, ..."

"George, ..."

Ouch.

:lol:
 
You said the guy who "plays" Hari Seldon was gay in real life. I asked you what film/series he played Hari Seldon in and you had no idea.

For crying out loud are you both being purposefully dense?

Clown boy, you said you watch Big Bang theory, so you should know who Sheldon is.

HarinSeldon, YOU should know what the Foundation series is.

Jesus.
 
I believe 3 out of all the bakeries he spoke with offered to bake a cake but not decorate it with the words "Gay Marriage is Wrong". They just outright refused and found it offensive. But you seem to miss the irony completely. The one asking for the cake doesn't see the phrase "Gay Marriage is Wrong" to be offensive as it is part of his religious beliefs that traditional marriage is holy matrimony and some faiths believe it to be one of the sacraments. He was denied a service over his religious beliefs. Yet a person whose moral conscience doesn't want to do gay wedding cakes is forced to under fear of jail, fines etc.

While surfing the web today, I discovered there are lawsuits against gay bakers who refused to provide a cake that did not support gay marriage.

One such case was an order for an open Bible with this symbol placed on the cake.

no-gay-marriage.png


The gay baker refused to do it. Now there are cases in our court system of gay bakers being sued for denying a cake with a Scripture pertaining to sexual sin or symbolism

You see, I think the gay baker has the right to deny a service that offends them. But I also believe those of religious convictions where gay marriage is an abomination to their faith should not be forced to create something for a person that they find offensive.

Doesn't matter if the baker finds it offensive to sell a wedding cake to a same sex couple or not. They bake wedding cakes. They cannot therefore offer them just to opposite sex couples.

There is still no evidence that anyone asked by that guy (who was a douche and acted completely rude and disrespectful over the phone, which would have been enough to deny service to him by itself) denied him his cake due to his religion, rather than what he wanted written on the cake. You don't have to be Christian to be against same sex marriage. There are people of every belief system, including atheists and agnostics who are against same sex marriage. So long as they would not make a cake with the words "gay marriage is wrong" on it for anyone, then they are not discriminating.
 
Show us exactly where a baker was sued and punished (fined, lost the case, etc.) for refusing to bake a cake they wouldn't make for anyone? Those bakers who refused made wedding cakes. They weren't being asked to write anything on the cake, as far as we know, nor were they even asked to place a "him/him" or "her/her" topper on the cake. They were asked to bake and decorate a cake they actually do make, advertise that they make.

You missed my point-shouldn't tolerance be a two way street? Why shouldn't gay bakery owners have to bake anti-gay marriage cakes? Aren't you for consistency?
 
No, you haven't pointed out where I was wrong.

Your opinions on things of how this law works are your opinion. You haven't shown where I was factually wrong.

You might disagree with my opinion - when I state it, of how I think it works.

But on the factual matters -- I'm not wrong.

Nonsense, and one AgentJ is enough for any forum. You weren't bandying about any facts, or even talking about this bill. I'll refresh your memory:

Originally Posted by Paperview View Post

It's pretty hypocritical for you and the other cons to complain about doing business with communists - when just about everything you're touching right now comes from there.

The businesses here have a much great affect on what happens in their own country and employees than purchasing good from the world's largest exporter of goods.
 
You said the guy who "plays" Hari Seldon was gay in real life. I asked you what film/series he played Hari Seldon in and you had no idea.

Sorry but I didn't say that. Perhaps if you go back and reread the thread.
 
Show us exactly where a baker was sued and punished (fined, lost the case, etc.) for refusing to bake a cake they wouldn't make for anyone? Those bakers who refused made wedding cakes. They weren't being asked to write anything on the cake, as far as we know, nor were they even asked to place a "him/him" or "her/her" topper on the cake. They were asked to bake and decorate a cake they actually do make, advertise that they make.

Greetings, Roguenuke. :2wave:

I'm sorry, but that sounds like a story made up by someone with a grudge against that bakery. It doesn't make sense for any business to turn down a paying customer if the facts are as you relate. Something else must have happened that hasn't been told. How did the baker know their sexual leanings? Had the baker previously told them they were not welcome in his bakery because of obnoxious behavior on their part in the past? Were they demanding, rude and/or nasty in their attitude? There are always two sides to every story. Lots of people think they are entitled to act any way they like - we see them all the time at the mall, for instance. I just don't know what to believe here.
 
For crying out loud are you both being purposefully dense?

Clown boy, you said you watch Big Bang theory, so you should know who Sheldon is.

HarinSeldon, YOU should know what the Foundation series is.

Jesus.

Thank you Guy. I saw his nick and misunderstood. Btw, is it any surprise that the actor who plays Sheldon is gay? :mrgreen:
 
Doesn't matter if the baker finds it offensive to sell a wedding cake to a same sex couple or not. They bake wedding cakes. They cannot therefore offer them just to opposite sex couples.

There is still no evidence that anyone asked by that guy (who was a douche and acted completely rude and disrespectful over the phone, which would have been enough to deny service to him by itself) denied him his cake due to his religion, rather than what he wanted written on the cake. You don't have to be Christian to be against same sex marriage. There are people of every belief system, including atheists and agnostics who are against same sex marriage. So long as they would not make a cake with the words "gay marriage is wrong" on it for anyone, then they are not discriminating.
RFRA doesn't change that, as anti discrmination laws have always been held to be a compelling state interest.
 
You missed my point-shouldn't tolerance be a two way street? Why shouldn't gay bakery owners have to bake anti-gay marriage cakes? Aren't you for consistency?

So long as those bakers did not write those messages on cakes for anyone, then they are being "tolerant". Did they refuse to bake him a cake or cookie for his opposite sex wedding? Did they tell him that they were refusing his requested item because of his religion? No. There is no intolerance there. Taken the other way. Has a baker (in the US) been taken to court or fined or even accused of discrimination due to refusing to bake a cake with the words "gay marriage is okay" or "support gay/same sex marriage" on it?
 
Thank you Guy. I saw his nick and misunderstood. Btw, is it any surprise that the actor who plays Sheldon is gay? :mrgreen:

Ha, I can see how you made that mistake, I am kind of surprised Hari didn't pick up on your reference to Foundation.
 
RFRA doesn't change that, as anti discrmination laws have always been held to be a compelling state interest.

And the point is that Indiana does not include LGBT in its antidiscrimination laws, not statewide anyway.
 
I see your point and cede it. I was thinking of the reality that it is always one group of people that cause a particular class to be created in law.

Is this the part of the thread where the republicans will tell you proudly -- it was THEY who help push the CRA of 1964 law through and champion with glee it was they who get to take credit for it?

Oh yeah, that happens in the other threads.
 
Doesn't matter if the baker finds it offensive to sell a wedding cake to a same sex couple or not. They bake wedding cakes. They cannot therefore offer them just to opposite sex couples.

There is still no evidence that anyone asked by that guy (who was a douche and acted completely rude and disrespectful over the phone, which would have been enough to deny service to him by itself) denied him his cake due to his religion, rather than what he wanted written on the cake. You don't have to be Christian to be against same sex marriage. There are people of every belief system, including atheists and agnostics who are against same sex marriage. So long as they would not make a cake with the words "gay marriage is wrong" on it for anyone, then they are not discriminating.

He made it perfectly clear that the cake was for an upcoming celebration of traditional marriage. The bakers who stated they did not do same sex wedding cakes and had never done one before were considered discriminating. You can't have your cake and eat it too!
 
Sorry but I didn't say that. Perhaps if you go back and reread the thread.

You could have just told me you were talking ABOUT Sheldon, a character on BBT, when I first QUOTED your post.
 
Back
Top Bottom