Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

The problem with the poster who initiated this thread, and similar thinking posters, is that they dumb down a topic that is actually quite complicated and nuanced.

Posted

Maybe..we already have this:

[img=http://

Maybe..we already have this:

be-advised-no-shirt-no-shoes-no-service-

Never knew there was a Church of The Shirt and Shoes. How about that.

"Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC

Posted

The problem with the poster who initiated this thread, and similar thinking posters, is that they dumb down a topic that is actually quite complicated and nuanced.

Yes...there are many examples of legal discrimination in public accommodations. Nothing special about the "religious" version of same.

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted

Agreed....they have since added no "pulled down pants", discriminating against the hip-hop crowd.

Hygene could also have something to do with it.

"Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC

Posted

So I guess it will now be legal for Muslim and Jewish merchants to refuse sevice to Christians. Or will this just be a Christian "freedom"?

You really want to see some sparks flying? Just wait until some atheist insists on the right to refuse to service theists.

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted

You really want to see some sparks flying? Just wait until some atheist insists on the right to refuse to service theists.

That will be intersting, or will only religeous people be allowed to discriminate on religeous grounds.

"Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC

Posted

That will be intersting, or will only religeous people be allowed to discriminate on religeous grounds.

Religious people aren't the only ones. Looks like their just asking for the same privileges that the people who discriminate against white males regarding employment and education acceptance practices, weight loses and health clubs and liberal musicians already have and utilize on a regular basis.

Posted

You really want to see some sparks flying? Just wait until some atheist insists on the right to refuse to service theists.

It'd be hard to figure out on what basis, are they going to ask everyone their beliefs on tv issue? A kind of "let's see your papers" kind of thing? If the feel like it sure, but it would be a horrible business practice, especially if they wanted to actually make money.

Posted

It'd be hard to figure out on what basis, are they going to ask everyone their beliefs on tv issue? A kind of "let's see your papers" kind of thing?

How do we tell you're not gay?

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted

This is one of those tricky issues, where somebody's religious freedom collides with somebody else's rights. I'm not sure what the remedy is in these situations. Unless we want the state to use force and insist that a photographer MUST take pictures at a gay wedding. Anyways, I think this is moot because I don't the the governor will sign the law. But if the federal government can force religious institutions to provide contraception and abortion services, what goes around comes around.

It's only a tricky issue if you want to be a jerk to people because you don't like who they choose to be in a relationship with.
Posted (edited)

Freedom of religion applies to individuals as well as institutions.

How does a gay couple hiring a photographer stop that photographer from practicing their religion? Even if the religious person finds their lifestyle a "sin" perhaps the religious should remember that Jesus hung out with whores. Edited by cybercoma
Posted

Religious people aren't the only ones. Looks like their just asking for the same privileges that the people who discriminate against white males regarding employment and education acceptance practices, weight loses and health clubs and liberal musicians already have and utilize on a regular basis.

So more discrimination is a good thing.

"Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC

Posted

I don't think anyone should get all worked up over this type of thing. To begin with, very few businesses are going to say "we don't want to serve customers" - any customers. Businesses will generally go through a lot to gain an extra point or two of market share. Writing off whatever the percentage of gays and their supporters is in your population seems to be kind of dumb to me. Second, if someone doesn't want to do business with me, then barring there being NO alternatives, I don't want to do business with them. I imagine most gays feel the same way. I don't think you really need a law here. Just post a sign to the effect you hate gays and not too many will be calling you up to give you money. Third, most people aren't even going to know (barring the more flamboyant members of that community) the customer is gay except for things like weddings, further limiting its effect.

Add to that it probably won't be signed, and if it does it will likely be found unconstitutional.

Frankly, all this appears to be is advertising for the Republican Party. They could just as easily have taken out a billboard shouting "We hate fags! So vote for us!" but that would have cost money. This way, the taxpayer has to pay for their wasting the government and court's time while the media give them lots of free publicity as the "righteous family values" party.

By the way, that's not to say there isn't occasional cases where I believe it does violate the religious rights of believers to serve gays. I think there was a case out east here in Canada a few years back where a gay couple wanted to stay at a bed and breakfast - which was the home of the conservative Christian person running it. I can see they'd have a level of discomfort with gays fornicating around in their home.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
By the way, that's not to say there isn't occasional cases where I believe it does violate the religious rights of believers to serve gays. I think there was a case out east here in Canada a few years back where a gay couple wanted to stay at a bed and breakfast - which was the home of the conservative Christian person running it. I can see they'd have a level of discomfort with gays fornicating around in their home.

Maybe they shouldn't be in the hospitality industry if all their customers must ascribe to their version of Christianity.

"Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC

Posted

Maybe they shouldn't be in the hospitality industry if all their customers must ascribe to their version of Christianity.

Most religious groups and versions dislike unmarried sex, be it gay or otherwise. I think most religions are nuts, mind you, when it comes to sex, but to each his or her own. I'm willing to cut them some slack if it's their home.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted

Most religious groups and versions dislike unmarried sex, be it gay or otherwise. I think most religions are nuts, mind you, when it comes to sex, but to each his or her own. I'm willing to cut them some slack if it's their home.

So what if it is their home, they are renting part of it out for gain.

"Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC

Posted

Just wondering whether the folks who somehow need this right require a signed statement that a customer isn't gay whenever they sell something on eBay or Craigslist.

One thing for sure, this nonsense is going to make a lot of lawyers rich.

"Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC

Posted

One thing for sure, this nonsense is going to make a lot of lawyers rich.

Not the gay one's.

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted

Buy all those in Arizona who support this crap a ticket to Sochi. Putin will welcome them with open arms, well, OK, maybe not open arms, but proper Christian handshakes, well, maybe not Christian handshakes, well, OK with lot's of vodka. That way they can all get really drunk and celebrate their success. And the tea party will have lost a segment of their support, so it's a win/win for the live and let live version of humanity.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,906
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Henry Blackstone
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Doowangle earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Doowangle earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Barquentine went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dave L earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Ana Silva earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...