• 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

So now your premise is that despite them being longtime customers, (and gay), only now when a wedding cake was requested did the bakery suddenly decide to discriminate against the couple?

Thats makes sense. :roll:

Yes, although I would say that the information I have does not say that either couple was actually "frequent customers". The mother of one of the gay men said that they heard about the shop through their planner, and one of the lesbians had picked up her mother's birthday cake from the other shop a year or more before. But this still comes down to they, the bakers, didn't feel the couples were "worthy", the "right kind of couple" for a wedding, for marriage. This is no different than if someone did the same thing to an interracial or interfaith couple.
 
No, they actually saw a threat to their businesses and their employees.

Another person at a place I also post at did a very good job of explaining it:

"Really, lets see, lets walk you through how a corporation could bolt.

I am a design sheet metal company specializing in high end artistic sheet metal fabrication. I have a staff of 100 employees, 10 of my employees happen to be gay. I'm going to expand my business and I'm looking for States that have attributes: low taxes, good labor pool, cheap cost of living, decent living standards...

oh, wait a minute. If I move my business to Indiana, my 10 gay employees are going to face State Sanctioned discrimination. Realtors can legally refuse to sell them a house, Apartment owners can refuse to lease to them, restaurants can legally refuse to serve them food. In fact, because I harbor these "gays" my business can legally be discriminated against. Suppliers in Indiana can legally choose to not sell to me.

So why would I move my Business to Indiana? I guess I could move then cross my fingers and "hope" no one discriminates against my business or my employees because if they do I'd have no recourse under Indiana law."

Except you aren't a design sheet metal company with a staff of 100, 10 of which are gay, are you?

NONE of this logic works as this is NOT the priority of companies.

IN FACT, companies flocked to the South when discrimination against blacks were rampant and essentially legal - and nearly all those companies had black employees. Normal companies are not focused on whether their employees can find a good restaurant or are treated fairly in society. That's not what companies are about.
 
Yeah i used to have a modicum of respect for libertarians, but no more

Um ouch...not all libertarians are the same. There are those who place property as equivalent to liberty and those who view property as antithetical of liberty. Quite a broad spectrum, but the basis of libertarian ideology is liberty, and personal choice and responsibility in particular.
 
That's an event. Thanks for that admission. And that the couple had purchased products there before, it obviously has nothing to do with the persons

Actually, there is little information suggesting that these couples, either of them, had actually frequently purchased products from either shop before. The only confirmed purchase we know of was actually the one lesbian woman (no mention of her identifying herself either directly or indirectly as a lesbian) picked up a cake from the bakery for her mother at least a year prior.

And no, it was not the "event". The bakery made wedding cakes. It was the sexes/sexual orientations of the people involved in the event that was the problem, that was the reason for the discrimination. That is what makes it illegal, just as much as if the people were refused because they were an interracial couple getting married ("we don't make interracial wedding cakes") or an interfaith couple getting married ("we don't agree with interfaith weddings").
 
How often does that San Francisco company send people to Indiana? This is just nothing. Other companies will gladly pick up their customers in Indiana.

this **** is out of control already. we can't afford a national outrage here in Indiana. there are too many people already struggling.

this law was completely unnecessary, and it was a response to gay marriage being made legal. i shouldn't have to waste time swatting off right wingers who want to die on the hill of gay marriage or left wingers who seem to feel like boycotting the entire state will do anything other than hurting the very Hoosiers that they are pretending to want to help.
 
this **** is out of control already. we can't afford a national outrage here in Indiana. there are too many people already struggling.

this law was completely unnecessary, and it was a response to gay marriage being made legal. i shouldn't have to waste time swatting off right wingers who want to die on the hill of gay marriage or left wingers who seem to feel like boycotting the entire state will do anything other than hurting the very Hoosiers that they are pretending to want to help.

Relax. Pence "clarified" the bill to remove the ability to discriminate based on sexual orientation.
 
And both are based on discrimination based on the intended use of the product, not the person

Not true. The intended use of a cake is to eat it. So what makes a same sex couple eating a cake "dangerous"?

The person was the problem, or rather the people. The people made wedding cakes. They made cakes to be used to celebrate a commitment between two people, to celebrate marriages. They disapproved of the people involved in this particular marriage. That means it was the people.
 
I'm absolutely amazed at the unforced errors of the GOP since they won the election.
It's clear to me that the executive order by Obama completely unnerved the GOP--you're astute enough to see this.

The Coats seat is certainly up for grabs in Indiana now.

DEMs have two problems in my mind right now, besides the swift-boating of Hillary.
1. How to sort out all the GOP guffaws since the election.
2. Beginning early on with their bash ads, just as the Kochs did in the summer of 2013 .

That would depend on the political situation in Arkansas. I have been to SW Missouri and NW Arkansas which IIRC is where Walmart is based. They likely hold significant power there, and the state is not consistently Republican or Democrat, so that would be up to him.
 
this **** is out of control already. we can't afford a national outrage here in Indiana. there are too many people already struggling.

this law was completely unnecessary, and it was a response to gay marriage being made legal. i shouldn't have to waste time swatting off right wingers who want to die on the hill of gay marriage or left wingers who seem to feel like boycotting the entire state will do anything other than hurting the very Hoosiers that they are pretending to want to help.

Actually I totally agree with you even if I don't live there. I feel personally that the boycotts of the state, as a whole, are uncalled for. A better thing to do would be to support the businesses that say openly "we serve everyone", that have no discriminatory practices. And boycott the government if you must. Now, I personally have no reason to travel to Indiana, so I won't likely be going there any time soon enough to put these into practice myself. Now, this all being said, I can understand the businesses though that have halted their plans to expand into Indiana due to this law. They seem to be trying to protect their employees, rather than to make a political statement. This type of law could cause issues with their employees who are gay, to the point where they lose talented professionals simply because others aren't treating them fairly within the community.
 
The surprising part to me is how many GOP-supporting corporations and businesses WITHIN the state of Indiana are against the law.
When NASCAR speaks, who's next--Country Music stars.

yes, yes i am.... and you're entitled to support idiocy like boycotting an entire state over fear of a bogeyman.

Btw, I see Bundy is back at it in Nevada .
 
It's hard to believe, but these Neanderthals actually believe that. No right is more sacred to them than property rights.

I'm 100% against economic discrimination, yet 100% supportive of property rights....which are 2 reason I can never be a lefty/progressive.

but to your point about property rights, why would we not all hold property rights as sacred?... we'd most certainly be a third world dump without them.
 
The surprising part to me is how many GOP-supporting corporations and businesses WITHIN the state of Indiana are against the law.
When NASCAR speaks, who's next--Country Music stars.
which makes boycotting the entire state extremely childish.... i mean, who the hell boycotts businesses they agree with?... dumb dumb dumb.

in any event, I think this whole thing is way overblown.... people are acting as if the entire state is going to magically start discriminating against gays, which is bull**** of the highest order.
fearmongering of the rabid works, though..



Btw, I see Bundy is back at it in Nevada .
good on him... .somebody had to get out in front and lead a battle with the feds over lands...I'd much rather have a different character out in front, but i'll take what I can get.

the feds have been screwing over Nevada for decades and decades, and corrupt officials keep getting rich off that screwing (like the dishonorable Harry Reid)
 
Actually I totally agree with you even if I don't live there. I feel personally that the boycotts of the state, as a whole, are uncalled for. A better thing to do would be to support the businesses that say openly "we serve everyone", that have no discriminatory practices. And boycott the government if you must. Now, I personally have no reason to travel to Indiana, so I won't likely be going there any time soon enough to put these into practice myself. Now, this all being said, I can understand the businesses though that have halted their plans to expand into Indiana due to this law. They seem to be trying to protect their employees, rather than to make a political statement. This type of law could cause issues with their employees who are gay, to the point where they lose talented professionals simply because others aren't treating them fairly within the community.

if you travel here, go to the dunes in Chesterton. that is one of my favorite places in the world. as for all of this other bull****, it is mostly just making me tired. i have to fight off idiots on both sides who want to bend this into their go team two party worldview. it's just so ****ing stupid. there are actually a lot of cool things to do here, and pretty things to see.
 
I'm absolutely amazed at the unforced errors of the GOP since they won the election.
It's clear to me that the executive order by Obama completely unnerved the GOP--you're astute enough to see this.

The Coats seat is certainly up for grabs in Indiana now.

DEMs have two problems in my mind right now, besides the swift-boating of Hillary.
1. How to sort out all the GOP guffaws since the election.
2. Beginning early on with their bash ads, just as the Kochs did in the summer of 2013 .

Nimby, you thought the dems were going to win the last mid terms and we saw how that turned out.
 
Actually I totally agree with you even if I don't live there. I feel personally that the boycotts of the state, as a whole, are uncalled for. A better thing to do would be to support the businesses that say openly "we serve everyone", that have no discriminatory practices. And boycott the government if you must. Now, I personally have no reason to travel to Indiana, so I won't likely be going there any time soon enough to put these into practice myself. Now, this all being said, I can understand the businesses though that have halted their plans to expand into Indiana due to this law. They seem to be trying to protect their employees, rather than to make a political statement. This type of law could cause issues with their employees who are gay, to the point where they lose talented professionals simply because others aren't treating them fairly within the community.

are there any business that are actually discriminating against gays in Indiana.. or fighting for the right to?

are there any who discriminate and are planning to move to Indiana?

I think people in haste to argue that this law is going to make the gay sky fall forgot to check if there is actually a problem afoot.
personally, I'd wager about 99.99999999999999999% of Indianans would act correct, regardless of this law....I can't fathom that whole state being chock full of anti-gay bigots just chomping at the bit waiting for a "permit" to discriminate.
 
if you travel here, go to the dunes in Chesterton. that is one of my favorite places in the world. as for all of this other bull****, it is mostly just making me tired. i have to fight off idiots on both sides who want to bend this into their go team two party worldview. it's just so ****ing stupid. there are actually a lot of cool things to do here, and pretty things to see.

hogwash... you're state is full of anti-gay bigots who want nothing more than to deny services to gays... admit it.. ADMIT IT!!


:lol:
 
hogwash... you're state is full of anti-gay bigots who want nothing more than to deny services to gays... admit it.. ADMIT IT!!


:lol:

my state is full of folks who mostly just want to come home from work and have a beer with you at the bar. if you're ever around here, i can tell you about some cool places to check out.
 
my state is full of folks who mostly just want to come home from work and have a beer with you at the bar. if you're ever around here, i can tell you about some cool places to check out.

wierd... normal people live in Indiana.. whodathunkit? ;)

that's kinda my point here... this **** is getting blown waaay out of proportion... it's pretty ridiculous.
 
The only GOP Presidential not "standing his ground" behind Pence is Kasich--still with 75/1 odds.

Why do you discount the reaction of corporations and businesses WITHIN the state of Indiana?
Those that have long stood with and donated to the GOP.

Considering how many jobs Illinois has lost to the right-to-work-for-less Indiana, we'll gladly take some of them back.

Elections have consequences--Indiana voters (and non-voters) chose these clowns.

are there any business that are actually discriminating against gays in Indiana.. or fighting for the right to?

are there any who discriminate and are planning to move to Indiana?

I think people in haste to argue that this law is going to make the gay sky fall forgot to check if there is actually a problem afoot.
personally, I'd wager about 99.99999999999999999% of Indianans would act correct, regardless of this law....I can't fathom that whole state being chock full of anti-gay bigots just chomping at the bit waiting for a "permit" to discriminate.
 
this **** is getting blown waaay out of proportion.

By corporations and businesses WITHIN Indiana.
Not to mention WAL-MART (hobby lobbying) the governor of Arkansas to veto the Indiana bill.
GOPs knew they were in trouble today when NASCAR came out against them.
 
A religious freedom law was passed to protect religious liberties that were never endangered and that sparked a protest of people concerned about discrimination that has not and likely will not occur.

It sounds to me like everyone got what they wanted.
 
I got another lefty dream case for you-physician who refuses to write a script for abortifacients to straight people but will to gay couples.

How would you guys handle that one?

Doctors' faith must yield to gays' rights, court says - latimes

Doctors may not discriminate against gays and lesbians in medical treatment, even if the procedures being sought conflict with physicians' religious beliefs, the California Supreme Court decided unanimously Monday.

The state high court said the doctors' constitutional rights to freedom of religion did not trump the state antidiscrimination law because the state has a compelling interest in ensuring full and equal access to medical care.

Benitez v. North Coast Women's Care Medical Group | Lambda Legal

For nearly a year starting in August of 1999, Guadalupe "Lupita" Benitez was denied infertility treatment by the North Coast Women's Care Medical Group because she is a lesbian. Her former doctors are conservative Christians who claim their religious beliefs give them a right to withhold care from Benitez that they routinely provide to heterosexual patients. With Lambda Legal's help, Benitez has been fighting this injustice. The case is currently before the California State Supreme Court The highest state court in the state court system on the question whether individual antigay religious beliefs allow doctors to violate the state civil rights law that applies to commercial businesses, including for-profit medical clinics like North Coast Women's Care.

Don't you "practice" in California? You probably "practice" in Baja California because the issue of sexual orientation as it concerned abortificients was settled in California 7 years ago. Unless of course you believe this ruling means that doctors can still discriminate against straights, which is laughably absurd, doctor.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom