RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone

RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

slvemike4u -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/30/2015 8:02:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr I've been trying (desperately) to come up with an analogy that the opposition to this law might understand. I realize that there's a whole lot of anti-Semites around here, lately but this would be tantamount to me, walking into a kosher deli, demanding a ham sandwich, not getting it and deciding to either bring suit or get the government involved with me, claiming that I was discriminated (ETA: Oooops! On this thread, that should be "discriminanted") against because I'm a gentile. It allows the deli to say: "It's not that he's a gentile. It's that what he is asking would force us to violate our religious tenet(s)" Michael Seems,despite your desperate attempt ,you failed at your search for an analogy. The only way your analogy can fit is if that Jewish Deli owner sells the ham to his Jewish friends but refuses to sell it to you. And we both know that doesn't work,so epic fail on the analogy .

JVoV -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/30/2015 8:07:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr I've been trying (desperately) to come up with an analogy that the opposition to this law might understand. I realize that there's a whole lot of anti-Semites around here, lately but this would be tantamount to me, walking into a kosher deli, demanding a ham sandwich, not getting it and deciding to either bring suit or get the government involved with me, claiming that I was discriminated (ETA: Oooops! On this thread, that should be "discriminanted") against because I'm a gentile. It allows the deli to say: "It's not that he's a gentile. It's that what he is asking would force us to violate our religious tenet(s)" Michael I agree with this. And taking it back to the bakery scenario, at what point does baking a wedding cake go against the religion of the owner?

crazyml -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/30/2015 8:12:22 PM)
I think the concern that people have is that the refusal to print something, be it rape porn or anything else for that matter, is based on discrimination against the person making the request, not the request itself. It is ok for a printing house to refuse to print rape porn if they refuse to print it for everybody. It isn't ok if they refuse to print it for a black person, a transgendered person, a gay person, a man, an atheist, a catholic or a jew.

MercTech -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/30/2015 8:15:31 PM)
A legal onus of a business to provide service to customers regardless of who they are actually varies in state laws. But there are federal laws regarding to housing and medical service that will trump state laws in those specifics. Yes, you can reserve the right to refuse service if you operate a business in most states. And, yes, you might be sued in civil court for refusing service based on race, gender, or national origin. Unless your refusal of service can be proven to be a denial of civil rights; there would be no criminal penalties. There are laws ad court precedent for prosecution for refusal to rent an apartment based on race. To my knowledge; there are as yet no laws on the books regarding criminal penalties for refusal to rent based on sexual orientation. Does anyone know of any court precedents of prosecution for refusal of housing due to religious affiliation?

DaddySatyr -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/30/2015 8:16:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV I agree with this. And taking it back to the bakery scenario, at what point does baking a wedding cake go against the religion of the owner? When I was a practicing Catholic, one of the tenets of my religion forbade me from participating in a wedding that was not Catholic. If a person's religion, which they should be free to follow, forbids them from participating in what they're told is an abomination to God (Leviticus), they should be allowed to say: "It's not that you're gay. It's that I am not allowed to facilitate/participate in a same-sex wedding". Plain and simple. (ETA: Whether or not you share the bakers' beliefs, you are putting them in a position where they believe that their soul is in danger of eternal damnation. How "Tolerant" is it to put a human being into that kind of sickness of conscience/soul?) Michael

crazyml -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/30/2015 8:23:14 PM)
Which means "it's not that your gay, but my religion regards being gay as an abomination and encourages me to deny people access to marriage on the basis of their sexuality" Duh

BamaD -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/30/2015 8:27:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml Which means "it's not that your gay, but my religion regards being gay as an abomination and encourages me to deny people access to marriage on the basis of their sexuality" Duh Do you mean that they can't get married without the blessing of that particular baker?

crazyml -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/30/2015 8:30:10 PM)
Nope

BamaD -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/30/2015 8:36:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml Nope Then they take their business to another baker and the only one who loses out is the first baker.

crazyml -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/30/2015 8:40:44 PM)
What if the refusal of service is on the grounds that the person is black? Is it ok to refuse service because someone is of colour?

BamaD -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/30/2015 8:58:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml What if the refusal of service is on the grounds that the person is black? Is it ok to refuse service because someone is of colour? Being black does not violate anyone's religious beliefs so this is a red herring.

crazyml -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/30/2015 9:00:38 PM)
Whoosh. Right over your head. Why should discrimination be ok, if it is on religious grounds but not any other? Is it ok to enshrine nasty backward values in a religion and then seek protection for them?

BamaD -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/30/2015 9:36:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml Whoosh. Right over your head. Why should discrimination be ok, if it is on religious grounds but not any other? Is it ok to enshrine nasty backward values in a religion and then seek protection for them? No it didn't even go over my feet. I got your point completely. What you refuse to understand is that if you force someone to violate their religious beliefs you are discriminating against them. This law does not allow for refusing to serve any gays or what ever, it allows for them to refuse a specific act which violates their religion, like demanding that the Kosher deli provide a ham sandwich.

JVoV -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/30/2015 10:13:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml Whoosh. Right over your head. Why should discrimination be ok, if it is on religious grounds but not any other? Is it ok to enshrine nasty backward values in a religion and then seek protection for them? No it didn't even go over my feet. I got your point completely. What you refuse to understand is that if you force someone to violate their religious beliefs you are discriminating against them. This law does not allow for refusing to serve any gays or what ever, it allows for them to refuse a specific act which violates their religion, like demanding that the Kosher deli provide a ham sandwich. So which specific act of baking a wedding cake, or creating a floral arrangement violates anyone's religion? There is nothing asked of business owners that they are not already in business to do.

BamaD -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/30/2015 10:20:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml Whoosh. Right over your head. Why should discrimination be ok, if it is on religious grounds but not any other? Is it ok to enshrine nasty backward values in a religion and then seek protection for them? No it didn't even go over my feet. I got your point completely. What you refuse to understand is that if you force someone to violate their religious beliefs you are discriminating against them. This law does not allow for refusing to serve any gays or what ever, it allows for them to refuse a specific act which violates their religion, like demanding that the Kosher deli provide a ham sandwich. So which specific act of baking a wedding cake, or creating a floral arrangement violates anyone's religion? There is nothing asked of business owners that they are not already in business to do. Have you read previous posts? Your question has been answered several ways. A former practicing Catholic pointed out that with his church's doctrine participating in any wedding that was not performed by a Priest was a sin. Whether you like it or not all of the things you mentioned would be participating. If your church believes that gay marriage is a sin it would violate it. Would you force a gay florist to set up an arraignment at Westboro church? How about demanding that the Kosher deli cater ham and pork chops?

crazyml -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/30/2015 10:53:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml Whoosh. Right over your head. Why should discrimination be ok, if it is on religious grounds but not any other? Is it ok to enshrine nasty backward values in a religion and then seek protection for them? No it didn't even go over my feet. I got your point completely. What you refuse to understand is that if you force someone to violate their religious beliefs you are discriminating against them. This law does not allow for refusing to serve any gays or what ever, it allows for them to refuse a specific act which violates their religion, like demanding that the Kosher deli provide a ham sandwich. So which specific act of baking a wedding cake, or creating a floral arrangement violates anyone's religion? There is nothing asked of business owners that they are not already in business to do. Have you read previous posts? Your question has been answered several ways. Since you haven't actually answered any of my questions directly I'm not at all sure how you might draw this conclusion quote: A former practicing Catholic pointed out that with his church's doctrine participating in any wedding that was not performed by a Priest was a sin. The catholic church has many doctrines that are stupid and offensive. Which makes the people that hold them stupid and offensive. Many churches have come to understand that their old dogma is out of date. For example, the Anglican church has realised that discriminating against people on the grounds of gender is wrong. It isn't that hard for people to recognise that their dogma is stupid and wrong. quote: Whether you like it or not all of the things you mentioned would be participating. I disagree, all of the things I mentioned would be providing a service without discriminating against the person requesting the service. quote: If your church believes that gay marriage is a sin it would violate it. Would you force a gay florist to set up an arraignment at Westboro church? If a gay florist refused to transact business with someone on the basis of their religious beliefs, I would certainly regard that as wrongful discrimination. quote: How about demanding that the Kosher deli cater ham and pork chops? This is a nonsense, specious, point - that has been put to bed already on this thread. Since you're so keen to ask me whether I've read the thread, I think I can expect the same from you. Not a single opponent of discrimination on the basis of race, gender, sexuality, or religious belief has argues that kosher deli's should be obliged to serve ham. The argument is that a kosher deli should not be allowed to deny service to people that might buy ham from somewhere else. So... if a florist were asked to create a 6 foot arrangement for a gay funeral depicting a cock entering an anus, they would be perfectly entitled to say no, on the grounds that making that arrangement would offend their sensibilities. But if they were happy to do the same arrangement for a straight white man, it would be discrimination. Do you understand now?

slvemike4u -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/31/2015 12:14:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml Whoosh. Right over your head. Why should discrimination be ok, if it is on religious grounds but not any other? Is it ok to enshrine nasty backward values in a religion and then seek protection for them? No it didn't even go over my feet. I got your point completely. What you refuse to understand is that if you force someone to violate their religious beliefs you are discriminating against them. This law does not allow for refusing to serve any gays or what ever, it allows for them to refuse a specific act which violates their religion, like demanding that the Kosher deli provide a ham sandwich. How is it that everyone using that silly analogy doesn't get that the kosher deli serves ham to no one Let me repeat....no one Now work with me here,if I won't serve ham to anyone....than no one is discriminated against.

MercTech -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/31/2015 12:26:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u How is it that everyone using that silly analogy doesn't get that the kosher deli serves ham to no one Let me repeat....no one Now work with me here,if I won't serve ham to anyone....than no one is discriminated against. Actually, that depends on the deli. I grew up near a deli that did kosher and local menus. They did their own sugar cured ham that was spot on perfect. I once asked Irv how he got perfection in a dish he never sampled. "I listened to goy acquaintances on what made a perfect ham and tried to do so. Now, is it the ham or the corned beef today?"

crazyml -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/31/2015 12:37:18 AM)
Grin. "pragmatism" is a cornerstone of most of my Jewish friends' beliefs.

JVoV -> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone (3/31/2015 12:48:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml Whoosh. Right over your head. Why should discrimination be ok, if it is on religious grounds but not any other? Is it ok to enshrine nasty backward values in a religion and then seek protection for them? No it didn't even go over my feet. I got your point completely. What you refuse to understand is that if you force someone to violate their religious beliefs you are discriminating against them. This law does not allow for refusing to serve any gays or what ever, it allows for them to refuse a specific act which violates their religion, like demanding that the Kosher deli provide a ham sandwich. So which specific act of baking a wedding cake, or creating a floral arrangement violates anyone's religion? There is nothing asked of business owners that they are not already in business to do. Have you read previous posts? Your question has been answered several ways. A former practicing Catholic pointed out that with his church's doctrine participating in any wedding that was not performed by a Priest was a sin. Whether you like it or not all of the things you mentioned would be participating. If your church believes that gay marriage is a sin it would violate it. Ok. Now explain to me exactly when a Catholic baker has the right to ask if the two people getting married are both Catholic, and if a priest is conducting the wedding. quote: Would you force a gay florist to set up an arraignment at Westboro church? I really hadn't thought about sending flowers to Westboro Baptist. But Gay isn't a recognized religion. I'm sure that if the occasion called for it, a gay florist would put together something respectable and have it delivered without a fuss. quote: How about demanding that the Kosher deli cater ham and pork chops? I may as well go to Taco Bell and order a Big Mac. It's not on the menu. Regardless of anyone's religion, you can't go into a business and demand outrageous things. I mean, you can, you just look stupid when you do. But we're talking about businesses actually doing nothing different than they've ever done. The products and services aren't being changed in any way. Only the paying customers.

Page: << < prev 12 13 [14] 15 16 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875