Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed[W:1581]

sangha · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

Grim17 said:
I posted this on another thread and nobody disputed it:

The legalization of gay marriage gave homosexual people the right to marry each other over the objections of both the religious, and non-religious, who believe that marriage should remain as it has throughout human history, as the joining of one man, to one woman. Having that right to marry, should not be a licence to force the participation of those who in doing so, would violate the tenets of their religion. In other words, the obtaining of a right by one group, shouldn't result in the sacrificing of a right by another group.

But there's more...

A gay couple having a formal ceremony with food, a photographer, a cake, music, etc... is a 100% optional activity and totally unnecessary to exercise their right to become a legally married gay couple. How can anyone justify that a person be legally compelled to defy their religious beliefs and participate in an event/ceremony that has no effect what so ever on the rights of gay people to wed?

It's clear that choosing not to cater to a gay wedding based on religious grounds, is not discrimination against gay people, but discrimination against a ceremony that has been deemed sacrilegious for thousands of years. Laws have been passed so that nobodys religious rights can infringe on a homosexual's right to engage in a same-sex marriage, so why shouldn't there be laws passed that assure that a homosexuals rights to wed, doesn't infringe on anyones religious rights and beliefs?

Isn't that not only fair, but the way it should be?

The response is "None of your post matters"

The constitution gives the govt the power to regulate commerce and if chooses to exercise that power, it is constitutional for it to do so. Whether or not it chooses to exercise that power is up to the people. In the case of banning discrimination against LGBT's, the people of a number of states, cities, and counties have chosen to ban it.

Hatuey · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

humbolt said:
The law didn't receive criticism that I know of prior to passage.

That would be relevant if simply passing a law meant much. Once it became obvious that it would be passed (40-10, thanks to Republicans) people shifted on Pence vetoing the bill.

Governor under pressure to veto controversial religious freedom bill | MSNBC

And yet the attention paid was precisely because a reporter went out specifically looking for a business that might have reservations and highlighting that business even though no gay couple had approached that business for a service. Welcome to Politics 102.

Absurd at best and refuted by the actual sequence of events. The law itself merited attention. The business with reservations was a sideshow.

I would agree, but I was referring to a contrived event - not what you're claiming.

Again, you're answering something I didn't claim. I don't care whether the law was changed or not. I don't think there was anything wrong with the law as it was originally written. If the state of Indiana feels it will suffer harm, whether through lost business or by subjecting some of it's citizens to possible discrimination, then they can and perhaps should've changed the law. I simply maintain that the reporter asked a speculative question of no substance intentionally to create a false narrative which would inflame some people. This is not new, but it's not ethical either. There have been a lot of fabricated stories of late.

Good grief, you've been arguing that people twisted this and if it wasn't for some reporter then NOTHING would have happened. That is patently absurd given the fact that the law itself ALLOWED for discrimination and everyone from corporations to private citizens noticed from the beginning. Hell, before Pence even signed the bill into law, people were already calling the law into question. Claiming the reporter created a false narrative about a law that the people who put it into law ADMITTED allowed for discrimination (by changing it) just makes you look dishonest at this point. Do you have anything but your sour grapes to add?

Blemonds · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

Mithros said:
So religion trumps law?

The free exercise of religion IS the law

humbolt · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

Hatuey said:
That would be relevant if simply passing a law meant much. Once it became obvious that it would be passed (40-10, thanks to Republicans) people shifted on Pence vetoing the bill.

They were elected. If you don't like that, maybe you should examine exactly how you would select leaders.

Governor under pressure to veto controversial religious freedom bill | MSNBC

I don't view MSNBC as a credible source for much of anything except liberal opinion.

Absurd at best and refuted by the actual sequence of events. The law itself merited attention. The business with reservations was a sideshow.

It did? Not before the reporter did her schtick.

Good grief, you've been arguing that people twisted this and if it wasn't for some reporter then NOTHING would have happened. That is patently absurd given the fact that the law itself ALLOWED for discrimination and everyone from corporations to private citizens noticed from the beginning. Hell, before Pence even signed the bill into law, people were already calling the law into question. Claiming the reporter created a false narrative about a law that the people who put it into law ADMITTED allowed for discrimination (by changing it) just makes you look dishonest at this point. Do you have anything but your sour grapes to add?

And you maintain that the fix to the law eliminated discrimination? That's absurd, and I pointed this out to you earlier in our discussion. As much as you wish to disregard it, the fact is that nothing did in fact happen. Nothing. And changing the law did absolutely nothing to change the view of those who run Memories Pizza. You've been around the planet long enough to realize that, whether you care to admit it or not.

clownboy · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

prometeus said:
No, it means that next time you are in need of emergency care some asshole can and will say that you do not meet his moronic criteria and you can die.

No, police, medical and fire services are controlled by a whole different set of laws and standards and you should know this.

Hatuey · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

humbolt said:
They were elected. If you don't like that, maybe you should examine exactly how you would select leaders.

Yes, they were elected, however that is irrelevant to the reaction of folks.

I don't view MSNBC as a credible source for much of anything except liberal opinion.

And yet there they are, reporting on the bill before it was made into law, which goes against your narrative about the issue coming into question because of some pizza joint.

It did? Not before the reporter did her schtick.

Utter nonsense. The story was posted on May 31st, people had been calling on Pence to veto the bill since AT LEAST May 25th.

Source for dates: RFRA: Michiana business wouldn't cater a gay wedding - ABC57 News - See the Difference Michiana

And you maintain that the fix to the law eliminated discrimination?

Nope, I maintain that it ensured gays would not be discriminated against while people hide behind their religious beliefs to do so. :shrug:

clownboy · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

Cardinal said:
So you agree then that not following EPA codes or filing 1099's by Feb 2 is acceptable because they go against my personal beliefs? You agree I shouldn't be legally compelled to do them?

*bump*

Absurd strawman. We're not talking about EPA codes or IRS filings. We're talking about a First Amendment right stacked up against a law made to ensure that black folks would be able to get service. That condition no longer exists, thus there is no longer need for these laws that restrict the constitutional right.

clownboy · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

sangha said:
The response is "None of your post matters"

The constitution gives the govt the power to regulate commerce and if chooses to exercise that power, it is constitutional for it to do so. Whether or not it chooses to exercise that power is up to the people. In the case of banning discrimination against LGBT's, the people of a number of states, cities, and counties have chosen to ban it.

No it doesn't, it grants the government power to regulate only INTERSTATE commerce.

Gimmesometruth · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

clownboy said:
Absurd strawman. We're not talking about EPA codes or IRS filings. We're talking about a First Amendment right stacked up against a law made to ensure that black folks would be able to get service. That condition no longer exists, thus there is no longer need for these laws that restrict the constitutional right.

It has already been found in multiple rulings that refusal to accommodate is not justified by a reliance on "free speech" in relation to religion. Judge Spencer found this in CO 2 years ago. A justification for discrimination cannot be based upon an idea that widespread discrimination is not in vogue. Your arguments are just nutty nonsense .

Gimmesometruth · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

clownboy said:
No it doesn't, it grants the government power to regulate only INTERSTATE commerce.

The misunderstanding of public accommodation law is the basis of the confusion in your arguments.

prometeus · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

Grim17 said:
The legalization of gay marriage gave homosexual people the right to marry each other over the objections of both the religious, and non-religious, who believe that marriage should remain as it has throughout human history, as the joining of one man, to one woman.

The objection of any group is really irrelevant when it comes to equal rights and protections. That mostly if not only fundamentalist Christians are objecting is also very telling but really irrelevant also. Regardless of what they view marriage to be, they still can not claim a monopoly to it.
History has also no relevancy, since it can also be claimed that slavery has been legal through most of human history and ending it was a welcomed change even over the objections of many.

Having that right to marry, should not be a licence to force the participation of those who in doing so, would violate the tenets of their religion.

No one is forcing anyone into anything. People choose to go into business of their own free will. They can also choose what type of business it will be and most importantly WHO they will serve. If they freely choose to open their business to the public they take on the obligation to SERVE THE PUBLIC. It is actually that simple.

In other words, the obtaining of a right by one group, shouldn't result in the sacrificing of a right by another group.

And it is not.

A gay couple having a formal ceremony with food, a photographer, a cake, music, etc... is a 100% optional activity and totally unnecessary to exercise their right to become a legally married gay couple.

How is that relevant to anything. Back in the days of Christ there were no wedding planers or caterers everyone organized their own wedding.
The one that exist to day exist because their respective owners decided that that is the type of business they want to open and open it to the public.

How can anyone justify that a person be legally compelled to defy their religious beliefs and participate in an event/ceremony that has no effect what so ever on the rights of gay people to wed?

Sure it has an effect, discrimination. No one would ask them to plan, cater, etc. a gay wedding if their business was named 'Eternal Bonds Fundamental Christian Weddings' but by choosing to cater to the public they do take on the obligation to serve the public.

It's clear that choosing not to cater to a gay wedding based on religious grounds, is not discrimination against gay people

No the exact opposite is clear, that not only some so called Christians are bigots, but hypocrites too.
Picking and choosing which sinner to accommodate is anything but what Christianity is about.

but discrimination against a ceremony that has been deemed sacrilegious for thousands of years.

And anyone who holds such depply bigoted and hypocritical views has the legal means to not get involved. The price is not having a business that is open to the public.

Laws have been passed so that nobodys religious rights can infringe on a homosexual's right to engage in a same-sex marriage

And that is a good thing. Equal rights are the bedrock of liberty and our nation.

so why shouldn't there be laws passed that assure that a homosexuals rights to wed, doesn't infringe on anyones religious rights and beliefs?

Because it does not.

prometeus · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

clownboy said:
No, police, medical and fire services are controlled by a whole different set of laws and standards and you should know this.

Are you saying that they are all atheists and have no religion, or that their religious convictions do not matter because you may need them some day?

Mithros · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

Kal'Stang said:
Rights trump law. Our Right to Freedom of Association trumps anti-discrimination laws. And the funny thing about that....religion doesn't even have to be a factor in the least for it to apply.

However I am wondering how you got what you said here from what you are responding to. Which was of a poster attempting to deny that something is religious just because it wasn't always a part of that religions doctrine. He doesn't seem to realize that not everything religious has always been a part of that religions doctrine. This applies to MANY things and not just cakes. Ex: Christmas.

This entire discussion is entirely on the question, "should people of faith gain exceptions to laws that apply to everyone else if it violates a deeply held religious belief"? (At least the intelligent discussions)

If the answer is no then we have no rights. If the answer is yes, then we have anarchy. And if the answer is sometimes, then we need some sort of test. Rights can trump laws, but rights don't always trump laws. Free speech doesn't legalize libel.

So someone can say that their religion is anything they want. But that doesn't give them the right to exercise that religion.

Grim17 · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

sangha said:
The response is "None of your post matters"

The constitution gives the govt the power to regulate commerce and if chooses to exercise that power, it is constitutional for it to do so. Whether or not it chooses to exercise that power is up to the people. In the case of banning discrimination against LGBT's, the people of a number of states, cities, and counties have chosen to ban it.

Actually, what your post says is "I refuse to give my opinion because it might incriminate me"

Mithros · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

matchlight said:
"The principle that government may not enact laws that suppress religious belief or practice is so well understood that few violations are recorded in our opinions." That is how the Supreme Court began its opinion in Church of the Lukumi Babablu Aye v. City of Hiahleah.

It should be obvious that any right guaranteed in the Bill of Rights may trump a law that restricts that right too far. Laws that discriminate against certain religions will violate the right to free exercise, for example, just as the city ordinances in Lukumi Babalu did.

Any beliefs or practices?

roguenuke · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

Grant said:
According to the First Amendment it does. The Law has to reflect freedom of religion.

Actually, this is not true. The Freedom of Religion found in the First Amendment does not give religion a trump card on laws.

Grant · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

roguenuke said:
Actually, this is not true. The Freedom of Religion found in the First Amendment does not give religion a trump card on laws.

No mention that it trumps any laws. I said the law has to reflect freedom of religion.

matchlight · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

Mithros said:
Any beliefs or practices?

I don't understand your question.

Grim17 · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

prometeus said:
No one is forcing anyone into anything. People choose to go into business of their own free will. They can also choose what type of business it will be and most importantly WHO they will serve. If they freely choose to open their business to the public they take on the obligation to SERVE THE PUBLIC. It is actually that simple.

Yes they are being forced to abandon their religious beliefs, or face legal action.

So your position is, that a person must give up their religious freedom, their beliefs, and their moral conscience to open a bakery?

And it is not.

Certainly it is. Forcing a Muslim, Christian or Jewish bakery owner to provide goods or services for a ceremony that violates their religious beliefs, is asking them to give up their right to believe in the tenets of their religion.

How is that relevant to anything. Back in the days of Christ there were no wedding planers or caterers everyone organized their own wedding.
The one that exist to day exist because their respective owners decided that that is the type of business they want to open and open it to the public.

Refusal to take part in the wedding ceremony, in no way abridges their right to get married. Forcing people to abandon their religious beliefs for someones party, is the height of intolerance.

Sure it has an effect, discrimination. No one would ask them to plan, cater, etc. a gay wedding if their business was named 'Eternal Bonds Fundamental Christian Weddings' but by choosing to cater to the public they do take on the obligation to serve the public.

Who are they discriminating against? The answer is "nobody".

Who is in attendance is absolutely irrelevant... It's the event they object to.

No the exact opposite is clear, that not only some so called Christians are bigots, but hypocrites too.
Picking and choosing which sinner to accommodate is anything but what Christianity is about.

It is?

Then please tell me when any of these businesses that have been discussed in the last week, have said they will not serve gay people? Every single one of them have made it clear that they will not refuse service to gay people and have not done so.

And anyone who holds such depply bigoted and hypocritical views has the legal means to not get involved. The price is not having a business that is open to the public.

You are a bigot. You have just displayed your intolerance for the beliefs of others.

And that is a good thing. Equal rights are the bedrock of liberty and our nation.

But it doesn't work both ways... That is the stance of a bigot.

Because it does not.

Because religious people are the scum of the earth in your eyes, that do not have rights and do not deserve to be treated equally.

Your position is one of intolerance and pure bigotry.

Mithros · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

matchlight said:
"The principle that government may not enact laws that suppress religious belief or practice is so well understood that few violations are recorded in our opinions." That is how the Supreme Court began its opinion in Church of the Lukumi Babablu Aye v. City of Hiahleah.

It should be obvious that any right guaranteed in the Bill of Rights may trump a law that restricts that right too far. Laws that discriminate against certain religions will violate the right to free exercise, for example, just as the city ordinances in Lukumi Babalu did.

matchlight said:
I don't understand your question.

Does every religion or religious practice trump a law that restricts it?

sangha · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

clownboy said:
No it doesn't, it grants the government power to regulate only INTERSTATE commerce.

Wrong, it also gives the states the power to regulate INTRASTATE commerce

Grant · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

Grim17 said:
Yes they are being forced to abandon their religious beliefs, or face legal action.

So your position is, that a person must give up their religious freedom, their beliefs, and their moral conscience to open a bakery?

Certainly it is. Forcing a Muslim, Christian or Jewish bakery owner to provide goods or services for a ceremony that violates their religious beliefs, is asking them to give up their right to believe in the tenets of their religion.

Refusal to take part in the wedding ceremony, in no way abridges their right to get married. Forcing people to abandon their religious beliefs for someones party, is the height of intolerance.

Who are they discriminating against? The answer is "nobody".

Who is in attendance is absolutely irrelevant... It's the event they object to.

It is?

Then please tell me when any of these businesses that have been discussed in the last week, have said they will not serve gay people? Every single one of them have made it clear that they will not refuse service to gay people and have not done so.

You are a bigot. You have just displayed your intolerance for the beliefs of others.

But it doesn't work both ways... That is the stance of a bigot.

Because religious people are the scum of the earth in your eyes, that do not have rights and do not deserve to be treated equally.

Your position is one of intolerance and pure bigotry.

As someone else mentioned, it will be interesting to watch a Gay owner of a pizzeria being forced to deliver a pizza to the Westboro Church if personal discretion is made illegal. It's anything goes and the police will be watching to ensure that everyone's right to pizza delivery is being maintained. The lawyers will certainly be supporting this law.

sangha · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

Grim17 said:
Actually, what your post says is "I refuse to give my opinion because it might incriminate me"

Actually, I'm not surprised that the only way you can even attempt to refute me is by making up stuff.

Bodi · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

j-mac said:
So is homosexuality now a race?

No. Why would you ask such a silly question?

bigot
noun big·ot \ˈbi-gət\
: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group

Grim17 · Apr 7, 2015

Re: Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed

sangha said:
Actually, I'm not surprised that the only way you can even attempt to refute me is by making up stuff.

I asked a few questions in there and you failed to address them... It's obvious to me why you didn't, because if you did it would either contradict your stance, or make you look like a fool.

The inability for a person to answer questions that address their morals and beliefs, is the unfortunate reality those who embrace progressivism must live with. They know that answering such questions can very easily destroy the credibility of their beliefs and completely invalidate them. But you already understand this perfectly, as you make it a practice to avoid such questions at all costs.

Just a thought, but you might want to give some consideration to embracing beliefs that actually do stand up to scrutiny, because you have no idea just how good it feels to answer any question, any time, without any fear of being exposed or having to run away.

Indiana's 'No Gay Wedding' Pizzeria Has Closed[W:1581]

sangha

Hatuey

Rule of Two

Blemonds

humbolt

clownboy

Hatuey

Rule of Two

clownboy

clownboy

Gimmesometruth

Dr. Tongue’s Evil House of Pancakes

Gimmesometruth

Dr. Tongue’s Evil House of Pancakes

prometeus

prometeus

Mithros

Grim17

Battle Ready

Mithros

roguenuke

Grant

matchlight

Grim17

Battle Ready

Mithros

sangha

Grant

sangha

Bodi

Just waiting for my set...

Grim17

Battle Ready