• 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!

Lesbian couple turned away by Indiana tax preparer ...

Taylor said:
That might be true in "Chitown" - but as a blanket statement applying to Indiana or other states, it is false.
Click to expand...

It is, but honestly, if you don't research it, it sounds...reasonable.....but it's not true, everyone thinks it is, but nationally, it's race, color, religion or origin, that's it. Certain states have gone further with sexual orientation etc, some have not.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
From The Independent

Lesbian couple turned away by Indiana tax preparer four years after Mike Pence signed anti-LGBTQ law
​
Click to expand...

This case has nothing to do with the Law signed by Pence and is instead the result of Indianas basic discrimination law that mirrors the Federal law. Public accommodation laws apply to


Race
Color
National origin
Ancestry
Religion
Sex
Familial status (having children under 18); and
Disability

Not sexual orientation
 
HenryChinaski said:
Easy to say, Yeah why would they want to give a backwards bigot their business? But on the other hand, if I were in there shoes, I'd be hell bent on teaching the idiot a valuable lesson focusing on the fact that this is no longer 1963.
Click to expand...

You "teaching them a lesson" is no better than them "teaching you a lesson". It doesn't help anyone and merely breeds hate.
 
sjmay said:
It is, but honestly, if you don't research it, it sounds...reasonable.....but it's not true, everyone thinks it is, but nationally, it's race, color, religion or origin, that's it. Certain states have gone further with sexual orientation etc, some have not.
Click to expand...
For something like tax prep, it's not even that... Federal law is very limited in scope.
 
sjmay said:
?? Marriage rights? Please cite this, I believe nationally protected rights are race, color, religion, and origin. Nothing to do with marriage rights....
Click to expand...
seems you completled dodged my questions, VERY telling

are you unaware that gay marriage is national legal recognize and protected? Who mentioned race, color, religion and origin? not me LOL
Are you claiming that a legal marriage in PA is not recognized in every other state and states can deny you marriage benefits or discriminate against your marriage?

Ill ask you again says who? you? and based on what facts?
like i said i hope this or something like it goes to federal court because it wont survive
 
Mongidig said:
When this becomes a significant problem we can talk. Right now these little once in while things are nothing burgers.
Click to expand...

The current progressive thought guidance is that if one white person is a bigot then all white people are bigots. Same goes for religious people, Conservatives, basically anyone who isn't a progressive....and any progressives that don't strictly adhere to the party canon.
 
RetiredUSN said:
I'm curious as to where you and a few other respectful liberals on here stand on this one.....

Muslim man wins lawsuit for getting fired for refusing to deliver beer even though he knew the company delivered beer before he took the job.

Jury Awards $240,000 to Muslim Truck Drivers In* EEOC Religious Discrimination Suit
Click to expand...

this is NOT the same as refusing service at all and I would need to know way more about it but it "seems" on the surface it was a crap decision IMO but i know nothing about it

BUT i could easily make up scenarios where they Muslims are being discriminated against and worthy of a settlement but again im simply ignorant of this specific case
 
AGENT J said:
100% correct it does not work that way but there is an issue where sexual orientation is NOT nationally protected yet in all cases. Now in this case its about marriage discrimination and that is protected nationally so even in places that dont protect sexual orientation this would be a grey area IMO that would the discriminator would probably lose in court.
Click to expand...

Nope. Nationally under Federal laws Public accommodation laws only apply to "race, color, religion, or national origin". Sex isn't even included.

SEC. 201. (a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.
 
AGENT J said:
seems you completled dodged my questions, VERY telling

are you unaware that gay marriage is national legal recognize and protected? Who mentioned race, color, religion and origin? not me LOL
Are you claiming that a legal marriage in PA is not recognized in every other state and states can deny you marriage benefits or discriminate against your marriage?

Ill ask you again says who? you? and based on what facts?
like i said i hope this or something like it goes to federal court because it wont survive
Click to expand...

Didn't doge any question,

Marriage rights are not legally protected nationally, neither is sexual orientation, that is all up to the states.

Why some businesses can deny you service - but others can't - CNN
 
dixon01767 said:
Nope. Nationally under Federal laws Public accommodation laws only apply to "race, color, religion, or national origin". Sex isn't even included.

SEC. 201. (a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.
Click to expand...
nope what?
whats that have to do with what i said?
 
AGENT J said:
nope what?
whats that have to do with what i said?
Click to expand...

Maybe everyone read you wrong,

You are contending that the couple was refused based on their same-sex marriage, and that their marriage is a nationally protected right.....isn't that your argument?
 
sjmay said:
1.) Didn't doge any question,

2.) Marriage rights are not legally protected nationally,
3.) neither is sexual orientation, that is all up to the states.

4.) Why some businesses can deny you service - but others can't - CNN
Click to expand...

1.)yes you factually did and you did it again LMAO why lie about it when its easily proven otherwise?
ill ask you my questions again and watch you dodge and run again

are you claiming that a legal marriage in PA is not recognized in every other state and states can deny you marriage benefits or discriminate against your marriage? yes or no
says who? you? and based on what facts?

2.) yes they factually are. Again with the question you dodged. Are you claiming that a legal marriage in PA is not recognized in every other state and states can deny you marriage benefits or discriminate against your marriage? yes or no?
3.) yes i know in fact i stated that else where but thanks for the random strawman lol
4.)) nothing in this link says anything against what i actually said you get that right? like i said i hope this stuff is challenged especially for states like Indianan because it would never survive in federal court.

try sticking to things i actually said and try to answer my questions this time, thanks!
 
AGENT J said:
seems you completled dodged my questions, VERY telling

are you unaware that gay marriage is national legal recognize and protected? Who mentioned race, color, religion and origin? not me LOL
Are you claiming that a legal marriage in PA is not recognized in every other state and states can deny you marriage benefits or discriminate against your marriage?
Click to expand...

You can discriminate on the basis of marriage all you like under federal and Indiana law. California might be the only state where that might be a problem. Although, I suspect they wouldn't have a problem if it was discrimination against the married, as opposed to unmarried.
 
AGENT J said:
nope what?
whats that have to do with what i said?
Click to expand...

Your statement-

"Now in this case its about marriage discrimination and that is protected nationally"

is false.
 
AGENT J said:
1.)yes you factually did and you did it again LMAO why lie about it when its easily proven otherwise?
ill ask you my questions again and watch you dodge and run again

are you claiming that a legal marriage in PA is not recognized in every other state and states can deny you marriage benefits or discriminate against your marriage? yes or no
says who? you? and based on what facts?

2.) yes they factually are. Again with the question you dodged. Are you claiming that a legal marriage in PA is not recognized in every other state and states can deny you marriage benefits or discriminate against your marriage? yes or no?
3.) yes i know in fact i stated that else where but thanks for the random strawman lol
4.)) nothing in this link says anything against what i actually said you get that right? like i said i hope this stuff is challenged especially for states like Indianan because it would never survive in federal court.

try sticking to things i actually said and try to answer my questions this time, thanks!
Click to expand...

Sorry, I didn't think you were serious with that question as it really has zero to do with what happened,

Are you saying they got married in another state other than Indiana and therefore the tax preparer isn't recognizing their marriage? Because then, you would be correct, that can't happen.

But I don't think there is any argument that she recognizes or does not recognize their marriage, nor does it matter.

What you are trying to cite is government from one state, let's say Texas, refusing to recognize a same sex marriage from say, California and thereby not giving the same benefits in TX that heterosexual marriages get, that is protected nationally, what is not protected is PRIVATE BUSINESS saying no.
 
sjmay said:
1.) Maybe everyone read you wrong,
2.)You are contending that the couple was refused based on their same-sex marriage
3.)and that their marriage is a nationally protected right.....
4.) isn't that your argument?
Click to expand...

1.) everyone? LMAO who is everyone :lamo
2.) yes that what the article points out
3.) yes equal rights for marriage is national protected on a federal level (hence why i would love to see this go to federal court and establish precedence on it for the benefit of america an places like Indiana)
4.) what argument? i stated facts then i gave my opinion that i hope this and stuff like it gets challenged cause IMO it will fail at the national level.

again focus on what i said and maybe not what is in your head
 
What is with all the homophobes out there?
 
AGENT J said:
1.) everyone? LMAO who is everyone :lamo
2.) yes that what the article points out
3.) yes equal rights for marriage is national protected on a federal level (hence why i would love to see this go to federal court and establish precedence on it for the benefit of america an places like Indiana)
4.) what argument? i stated facts then i gave my opinion that i hope this and stuff like it gets challenged cause IMO it will fail at the national level.

again focus on what i said and maybe not what is in your head
Click to expand...

Except, you are wrong, equal rights for marriage is not nationally protected, not in the way you are trying to use it in this case.
 
sjmay said:
1.)Sorry, I didn't think you were serious with that question as it really has zero to do with what happened,
2.)Are you saying they got married in another state other than Indiana and therefore the tax preparer isn't recognizing their marriage? Because then, you would be correct, that can't happen.
3.) But I don't think there is any argument that she recognizes or does not recognize their marriage, nor does it matter.
4.)What you are trying to cite is government from one state, let's say Texas, refusing to recognize a same sex marriage from say, California and thereby not giving the same benefits in TX that heterosexual marriages get, that is protected nationally, what is not protected is PRIVATE BUSINESS saying no.
Click to expand...

1.) translation: you dodged it
ill ask them AGAIN and youll probably doge them AGAIN

are you claiming that a legal marriage in PA is not recognized in every other state and states can deny you marriage benefits or discriminate against your marriage? yes or no
says who? you? and based on what facts?

2.) nope, didnt say that at all. Simply pointed out an example that shows the fact gay marriage is nationally protected at the federal level
3.) their marriage is what she is discriminating against, hence AGAIN which i said many times even in places that do not protect sexual orientation this creates a grey area and i would love for this to go to court at the federal level because IMO it would lose and lose big
4.) nope thats the retarded strawman YOU made up and not what I said. again a simply matter of what i actually wrote and said verse what you made up in your head.
 
sjmay said:
Except, you are wrong, equal rights for marriage is not nationally protected, not in the way you are trying to use it in this case.
Click to expand...

again, what i said and what you are claiming is not the same and its why your post and claims keep failing LOL keep trying though its entertaining!
 
AGENT J said:
again, what i said and what you are claiming is not the same and its why your post and claims keep failing LOL keep trying though its entertaining!
Click to expand...

So then, you aren't saying marriage rights are nationally protected?

No wonder you are confused...... you really should CITE what you are talking about.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
From The Independent

Lesbian couple turned away by Indiana tax preparer four years after Mike Pence signed anti-LGBTQ law
​

A married lesbian couple in Indiana were turned away by a tax preparer when they attempted to file their taxes jointly last week, making them one of many victims of the state’s anti-LGBTQ laws.

Bailey and Samantha Brazzel got married last July and decided to file their taxes jointly for the first time.

The couple went to Carter Tax Service in Russiaville to meet with Nancy Fivecoate, a tax preparer Ms Bailey used for the last four years.

“We went in there and sat down just like we always would, and then she said, ‘How are you filing this year?,’ and I said ‘married joint,’ and that’s when it went downhill,” Ms Bailey Brazzel said.

When Ms Fivecoate discovered that the same-sex couple will be filing jointly, she refused to file their taxes based on religious grounds.

COMMENT:-

I'm waiting for the day when a Jew who is a cashier at a supermarket refused to ring a customer's grocery order through on the grounds that that would entail them handling both "meat" and "milk" without having a chance to "cleanse" themselves between the items or when a Christian refuses to take an order for "Surf & Turf" on the grounds that The Bible prohibits eating shellfish.

I don't really expect that I'll have to wait all that long for either to happen.

In fact, I encourage people to set up just such cases. (They might even want to toss in refusing to serve "Inter-racial" couples because "mixing races is contrary to God's Law".)
​
Click to expand...
First question: Were there any other preparers available that would have done the couple's taxes? Or is this a company policy?
 
Bodhisattva said:
What is with all the homophobes out there?
Click to expand...
its sad
like racism its all based on a foundation of ignorance . . on tope there are many different bricks and boards made up of hate, fear, jealous, denial but the foundation is always ignorance.
 
americanwoman said:
I can't help but think she probably helps many divorced or remarried couples without blinking an eye.
Click to expand...

That's DIFFERENT!!!

But, I'll bet that she eats "Surf & Turf" and mixes natural and artificial fibres.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom