RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Refuse Service

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Refuse Service

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Refuse Service

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/27/2015 3:55:25 PM

NorthernGent

Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

How 'bout a seat at a lunch counter?

Two different scenarios.

One is the systematic segregation, and humiliation, of an entire group of people; supported by a view in wider society and its institutions that an entire group of people are not equal under the law.

The other is an isolated incident involving one person. I think most people would not agree with his method of conducting business, and the customer has an array of other shops on offer.

I would agree with you in the event homosexuality was still illegal, or there was a systematic attempt to treat gay men and women as second class citizens.

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to dcnovice)

Post #: 41

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/27/2015 4:10:36 PM

NorthernGent

Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

It is not bothering you of course because you are not being denied....

It is bothering me to an extent because every time these people can't settle their individual disputes the tax payer is picking up the tab.

The argument surrounding equality under the law has been settled with the right outcome, but quite frankly I don't want to have pay to settle other people's individual disputes in a civil court when there's a perfectly good shop down the road.

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to NorthernGent)

Post #: 42

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/27/2015 4:27:00 PM

kdsub

Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline

Unless my friend there is NOT a shop down the road

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to NorthernGent)

Post #: 43

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/27/2015 4:35:43 PM

NorthernGent

Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Unless my friend there is NOT a shop down the road

Usually there are, though.

I think there's a line to be drawn somewhere.

There was an imbalance in terms of the treatment meted out to gay men and women, and minorities, that was settled a long while back.

For me, that's it job done.

To then have a situation where people feel they need to take isolated disputes through the courts, then that's no longer about redressing an imbalance in wider society.

That could be about many things, but one thing it smacks of to me is spoiling for a fight (at the tax payers expense).

The situation seems a bit like the Trade Unions in my country. Entirely necessary in their day and worked hard to win employee rights. But once the job was done and a balance had been achieved, they just couldn't stop fighting battles that in many cases their members didn't want them to fight on their behalf.

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to kdsub)

Post #: 44

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/27/2015 4:58:12 PM

BamaD

Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Unless my friend there is NOT a shop down the road

It was clearly a MENs barber shop.
She was likely looking for a reason to be offended.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to kdsub)

Post #: 45

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/27/2015 5:00:34 PM

BamaD

Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Unless my friend there is NOT a shop down the road

You cannot seem to tell the difference between something like medical care and a haircut.

I have lived in very small towns. Never have I found one were someone couldn't get a haircut. Even in the 50's.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to kdsub)

Post #: 46

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/27/2015 5:32:40 PM

kdsub

Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline

quote:

You cannot seem to tell the difference between something like medical care and a haircut.

This is a good point Bama... If there is a law then can you pick and choose? If a baker can refuse so can a doctor...If a barber can refuse so could a grocer... If a restaurateur can refuse to serve a gay then why could not another restaurateur refuse to serve an African American and claim it is against his or her religion. Can you not see where this would be unworkable with a pick and choose law.

Hanging a sign on the door even with directions to an accommodating business is just not acceptable and would be impossible to enforce such a law that allowed this.

If your religion says all girls at the age of 12 must submit to genital mutilation... should this be allowed under the Constitution?If your religion says that boys at age 13 must wear gloves full of stinging ants... should this be allowed? If your religion mandates that if you are gay you should be thrown off a tall building then stoned to death if you survive... or receive a 100 lashes and have your hand cut off... should this be allowed?

Or is it only YOUR religion that must be allowed even when it suppresses the rights of others and perhaps even THEIR religion?

Butch

< Message edited by kdsub -- 7/27/2015 5:49:54 PM >

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to BamaD)

Post #: 47

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/27/2015 5:48:51 PM

kdsub

Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline

There is a line to be drawn...at total equal right to life. Simple... there should be no need for gays or any other groups to worry what service will be available to them and where. Just let all have an equal right and access to the same services. No problems there.

Just imagine where your way of thinking could lead when someone can discriminate legally. As DC insinuated soon bald or beardless people will not be able to get a hamburger at a Muslim owned Mick D's, or blacks must go back to drinking at separate water fountains...etc.

Butch

< Message edited by kdsub -- 7/27/2015 6:44:30 PM >

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to NorthernGent)

Post #: 48

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/27/2015 6:54:18 PM

BamaD

Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

You cannot seem to tell the difference between something like medical care and a haircut.

This is a good point Bama... If there is a law then can you pick and choose? If a baker can refuse so can a doctor...If a barber can refuse so could a grocer... If a restaurateur can refuse to serve a gay then why could not another restaurateur refuse to serve an African American and claim it is against his or her religion. Can you not see where this would be unworkable with a pick and choose law.

Hanging a sign on the door even with directions to an accommodating business is just not acceptable and would be impossible to enforce such a law that allowed this.

If your religion says all girls at the age of 12 must submit to genital mutilation... should this be allowed under the Constitution?If your religion says that boys at age 13 must wear gloves full of stinging ants... should this be allowed? If your religion mandates that if you are gay you should be thrown off a tall building then stoned to death if you survive... or receive a 100 lashes and have your hand cut off... should this be allowed?

Or is it only YOUR religion that must be allowed even when it suppresses the rights of others and perhaps even THEIR religion?

Butch

Your whole post is hyperbole. How does saying it is against your religion for me to say I am violating mine by touching a woman I am not related to?
Is there any religion that requires that women have strange men's hands laid upon them.
Is there any religion that says that it isn't truly a wedding cake unless it is made by someone who doesn't believe in gay (or mixed for that matter) marriages?
The only peoples religion violated in this case was the Muslim's.
Everything else is gross exaggeration.
There are women's only gyms do they need to be put out of business?
I mean if I want to go there and they won't let me then I could be denied emergency medical care. If I happen to be taken to a women's hospital. After all that may be the only one close enough to help me.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to kdsub)

Post #: 49

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/27/2015 7:12:41 PM

kdsub

Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline

Sorry Bama you make no sense to me...I don't know what the heck you are talking about... it does not work to answer questions with questions and I have found that is your defense when you don't have an answer.

If you can't do any better lets just stop this silly back and forth and let others judge.

Butch

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to BamaD)

Post #: 50

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/27/2015 7:22:54 PM

CreativeDominant

Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

You cannot seem to tell the difference between something like medical care and a haircut.

This is a good point Bama... If there is a law then can you pick and choose? If a baker can refuse so can a doctor...If a barber can refuse so could a grocer... If a restaurateur can refuse to serve a gay then why could not another restaurateur refuse to serve an African American and claim it is against his or her religion. Can you not see where this would be unworkable with a pick and choose law.

Hanging a sign on the door even with directions to an accommodating business is just not acceptable and would be impossible to enforce such a law that allowed this.

If your religion says all girls at the age of 12 must submit to genital mutilation... should this be allowed under the Constitution?If your religion says that boys at age 13 must wear gloves full of stinging ants... should this be allowed? If your religion mandates that if you are gay you should be thrown off a tall building then stoned to death if you survive... or receive a 100 lashes and have your hand cut off... should this be allowed?

Or is it only YOUR religion that must be allowed even when it suppresses the rights of others and perhaps even THEIR religion?

Butch

I don't know, Butch. There's been recent and not so recent articles about Muslims bringing in doctors to perform such an act as clitorectomy or sending girls home to have it done.

But that has fuck-all to do with a haircut. Just as a haircut has FUCK-all to do with medical care. No barber I know of takes an oath to cut someone's hair regardless of race, creed or gender. Every health care professional I know of...including me...does take an oath to care for the sick or injured or wounded regardless of what color they are, who they pray to...or not..., who they fuck, who they hate. They may hate my white Christian male straight ass and I'll still treat them. But that's a hell of a lot different from "I need a haircut".

< Message edited by CreativeDominant -- 7/27/2015 8:14:51 PM >

(in reply to kdsub)

Post #: 51

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/27/2015 7:31:47 PM

BamaD

Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Sorry Bama you make no sense to me...I don't know what the heck you are talking about... it does not work to answer questions with questions and I have found that is your defense when you don't have an answer.

If you can't do any better lets just stop this silly back and forth and let others judge.

Butch

I was giving you the same kinds of situations you gave me.
You really think that not touching an unrelated woman equates to pushing gays off of rooftops?

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to kdsub)

Post #: 52

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/27/2015 7:33:13 PM

BamaD

Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

You cannot seem to tell the difference between something like medical care and a haircut.

This is a good point Bama... If there is a law then can you pick and choose? If a baker can refuse so can a doctor...If a barber can refuse so could a grocer... If a restaurateur can refuse to serve a gay then why could not another restaurateur refuse to serve an African American and claim it is against his or her religion. Can you not see where this would be unworkable with a pick and choose law.

Hanging a sign on the door even with directions to an accommodating business is just not acceptable and would be impossible to enforce such a law that allowed this.

If your religion says all girls at the age of 12 must submit to genital mutilation... should this be allowed under the Constitution?If your religion says that boys at age 13 must wear gloves full of stinging ants... should this be allowed? If your religion mandates that if you are gay you should be thrown off a tall building then stoned to death if you survive... or receive a 100 lashes and have your hand cut off... should this be allowed?

Or is it only YOUR religion that must be allowed even when it suppresses the rights of others and perhaps even THEIR religion?

Butch

I don't know, Butch. There's been recent and not so recent articles about Muslims bringing in doctors to perform such an act as clitorectomy or sending girls home to have it done.

But that has fuck-all to do with a haircut. Just as a haircut has FUCK-all to do with medical care. No barber I know of takes an oath to cut someone's hair regardless of race, creed or gender. Every health care professional I know of...including me...does take an oath to care for the sick or injured or wounded regardless of what color they are, who they pray to...or not..., who they duck, who they hate. They may hate my white Christian male straight ads and I'll still treat them. But that's a hell of a lot different from "I need a haircut".

That is what I have been tring to get through to him.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)

Post #: 53

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 2:06:12 AM

tweakabelle

Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Or is it only YOUR religion that must be allowed even when it suppresses the rights of others and perhaps even THEIR religion?

Butch

Good question.

We only hear these claims of religious exemption advanced to support overt discrimination, usually against queers. However if the principle of religious exemption is valid, then there's no reason why, for instance, some people can't commit bigamy. There are a number of well known religions that permit a man taking several wives (it's never the other way around - does any one know of a religion that permits a wife taking several husbands?)

So would the people proposing religious exemptions also support Muslims, or other religions, being permitted to have several wives? Would they insist on the Catholic position of denying abortions to rape victims? Or is it only a case of "your religion" being permitted to suppress others' rights? Is it only a case of the rights of queers being suppressed?

Because that it what it looks like.

_____________________________

(in reply to kdsub)

Post #: 54

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 6:19:59 AM

DesideriScuri

Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub
I believe the Constitution quite plainly, and the courts agree, has determined that basic human rights for all are more important then individual rights of a particular religious belief… especially when individuals can follow those beliefs as long as they do not impinge the rights of others.
Otherwise if you do not want to touch a woman’s hair or bake a cake for a gay wedding then find another profession open to the public where you can follow your beliefs without taking away the rights of others to follow their beliefs.
Butch

Hang on a second. Does a person have a right to get their hair cut by a particular barber? I suppose if there is only one hair cutter in an area, there may be something (or, there may be Market forces to support an entrepreneur opening another salon/barbershop), but I doubt this is the case in this situation. This woman was treated the same way any other woman would be treated, outside of the barber's family.

I ordered pizza from a local pizza shop. I hadn't ever eaten there before, but, liking pizza, I like to try several styles until I find the one(s) I really like. The boys and I like bacon on our pizza, so that's what I tried to order. They didn't have bacon, so I got pepperoni. When I got there, I asked why they didn't have bacon or sausage options, and the manager (not even the owner) said the owner was Muslim, so there are no pork products (the pepperoni was all-beef). Would I have had the right to complain and force this pizza joint to serve bacon or sausage on a pizza?

I don't think so.

If a person is an asshole, can service be denied? I have to imagine the Christian bakers might not look highly upon the gay couple that is, in essence, closing their business. Can they now refuse to serve them because they're assholes?

_____________________________

What I support:

A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
Personal Responsibility
Help for the truly needy
Limited Government
Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to kdsub)

Post #: 55

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 6:28:17 AM

DesideriScuri

Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
What I find strange is not the difference of opinion - that's life.
It's that people feel the need to make a song and a dance over a haircut or a cake.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIOMoTLnArA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=misEcHqSp3Y

_____________________________

What I support:

A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
Personal Responsibility
Help for the truly needy
Limited Government
Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to NorthernGent)

Post #: 56

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 6:28:33 AM

RottenJohnny

Posts: 1677
Joined: 5/5/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
it's never the other way around - does any one know of a religion that permits a wife taking several husbands?

Fraternal polyandry was traditionally practiced among Tibetans in Nepal, parts of China and part of northern India, in which two or more brothers are married to the same wife, with the wife having equal "sexual access" to them. [3] It is most common in egalitarian societies marked by high male mortality or male absenteeism. It is associated with partible paternity, the cultural belief that a child can have more than one father.[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyandry

_____________________________

"I find your arguments strewn with gaping defects in logic." - Mr. Spock

"Give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry

I believe in common sense, not common opinions. - Me

(in reply to tweakabelle)

Post #: 57

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 6:47:45 AM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

off to join the tibetans in nepal and get me some brothers.actually scratch that...NON brothers.
i just skeeved myself.

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to RottenJohnny)

Post #: 58

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 6:49:34 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Three year old news from the perpetually offended.

No...if it was about the perpetually offended, it would:

Be about a member of a group

Said member of said group would be claiming damage (like 88 different symptoms)

Said member's damage could only be fixed with money and/or forcing the offending party to close OR do things in the manner chosen by the offended party.

She's talking about posters here, Sparky.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)

Post #: 59

RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 7:01:08 AM

RottenJohnny

Posts: 1677
Joined: 5/5/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

off to join the tibetans in nepal and get me some brothers.actually scratch that...NON brothers.
i just skeeved myself.

Live it up, Lucy!

_____________________________

"I find your arguments strewn with gaping defects in logic." - Mr. Spock

"Give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry

I believe in common sense, not common opinions. - Me

(in reply to Lucylastic)

Post #: 60

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Refuse Service

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.125