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  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 8:20:41 PM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline 		We already talked about how if a baker or barber could refuse on their religious beliefs so could a pharmacists or doctor or grocer or any other business we depend on for the necessities of life. At first thought the refusal of a baker does not seem that important...but could very well, if allowed, discriminate against a group of people and their rights because of YOUR religious beliefs you feel are more important than THEIR religious beliefs. Well this is what the first sentence of the first amendment deals with... Many of our forefathers were discriminated against because of their religion and the Constitution attempts to allow the freedom of religion...as long as the teachings and laws are not established by governments. This allows a judgement as to where your rights end and others begin...as has been judged in the baker case and as it should be.

The only way your , and my, Christian beliefs can be law to non Christians is if these beliefs are mandated by our government...and this is against the Constitution you so adore when it agrees with your way of thinking.

Butch

< Message edited by kdsub -- 7/28/2015 8:21:29 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)
Profile   Post #: 101
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 8:25:49 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3664
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline 		Yet, with the Hobby Lobby case, there are still more questions than answers. And one of these denial of service cases is going to have to go to SCOTUS before we get a clear and definitive standard.

(in reply to kdsub)
Profile   Post #: 102
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 8:28:55 PM   
BamaD


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

ORIGINAL: kdsub

We already talked about how if a baker or barber could refuse on their religious beliefs so could a pharmacists or doctor or grocer or any other business we depend on for the necessities of life. At first thought the refusal of a baker does not seem that important...but could very well, if allowed, discriminate against a group of people and their rights because of YOUR religious beliefs you feel are more important than THEIR religious beliefs. Well this is what the first sentence of the first amendment deals with... Many of our forefathers were discriminated against because of their religion and the Constitution attempts to allow the freedom of religion...as long as the teachings and laws are not established by governments. This allows a judgement as to where your rights end and others begin...as has been judged in the baker case and as it should be.

The only way your , and my, Christian beliefs can be law to non Christians is if these beliefs are mandated by our government...and this is against the Constitution you so adore when it agrees with your way of thinking.

Butch

You talked about it no matter how many times you are told that isn't my position at all. Neither of these cases asked the woman to never go anywhere where she would be touched by a unrelated male, but she asked them to meet her religious views, in the other case nobody said the gays had to go straight but the gays demanded that the baker accept their religious view. In both cases it was the customer demanding that the businessman accept their believes. As for the medical fantasy someone in that profession has already explained to you that the argument is pure bull.

_____________________________

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)
Profile   Post #: 103
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 8:33:49 PM   
kdsub


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

_____________________________

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 JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 104
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 8:34:16 PM   
BamaD


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

ORIGINAL: JVoV

Yet, with the Hobby Lobby case, there are still more questions than answers. And one of these denial of service cases is going to have to go to SCOTUS before we get a clear and definitive standard.

That is why they make these things civil cases, to keep them away from SCOTUS.

_____________________________

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 JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 105
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 8:38:23 PM   
BamaD


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

ORIGINAL: kdsub

We already talked about how if a baker or barber could refuse on their religious beliefs so could a pharmacists or doctor or grocer or any other business we depend on for the necessities of life. At first thought the refusal of a baker does not seem that important...but could very well, if allowed, discriminate against a group of people and their rights because of YOUR religious beliefs you feel are more important than THEIR religious beliefs. Well this is what the first sentence of the first amendment deals with... Many of our forefathers were discriminated against because of their religion and the Constitution attempts to allow the freedom of religion...as long as the teachings and laws are not established by governments. This allows a judgement as to where your rights end and others begin...as has been judged in the baker case and as it should be.

The only way your , and my, Christian beliefs can be law to non Christians is if these beliefs are mandated by our government...and this is against the Constitution you so adore when it agrees with your way of thinking.

Butch

If a barber not cutting a woman's hair for religious reasons somehow leads to throwing gays off a roof, then how can you say that a church can refuse to do a gay wedding without believing that this too leads to murdering gays?

Could it be that if you admit that it shows that you are defending the discrimination against Christians, or in this case Muslims. You also make the irrational argument that I only support the freedom of Christians while I am arguing in defense of a Muslim.

_____________________________

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)
Profile   Post #: 106
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 8:43:48 PM   
BamaD


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

So if I go into a Kosher Jewish deli and order a ham sandwich I can sue them if they don't provide it for 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 BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 107
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 8:45:09 PM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

So if I go into a Kosher Jewish deli and order a ham sandwich I can sue them if they don't provide it for me.



Leave the Jews alone, please. Go Hal-Al (of course the PPLs won't like that).



Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 108
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 8:45:24 PM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline 		Keep in mind the Hobby Lobby case is different... They did not want to pay for the birth control which is against their religion... if you applied this to the baker then the baker would have to be paying the Lesbians to make their cake... this is not the case... and also keep in mind the medical insurance was not offered to the general public... What do you think the judgement would be if Hobby Lobby refused service to women they suspected were on birth control medication?

Butch

< Message edited by kdsub -- 7/28/2015 8:46:21 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 JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 109
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 8:48:05 PM   
BamaD


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

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Keep in mind the Hobby Lobby case is different... They did not want to pay for the birth control which is against their religion... if you applied this to the baker then the baker would have to be paying the Lesbians to make their cake... this is not the case... and also keep in mind the medical insurance was not offered to the general public... What do you think the judgement would be if Hobby Lobby refused service to women they suspected were on birth control medication?

Butch

You are out in lala land again. There is only one way they would know.
What do you think the outcome would be if someone demanded birthcontrol coverage from them, oh that's right, you lose.

_____________________________

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)
Profile   Post #: 110
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 8:50:46 PM   
BamaD


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

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Keep in mind the Hobby Lobby case is different... They did not want to pay for the birth control which is against their religion... if you applied this to the baker then the baker would have to be paying the Lesbians to make their cake... this is not the case... and also keep in mind the medical insurance was not offered to the general public... What do you think the judgement would be if Hobby Lobby refused service to women they suspected were on birth control medication?

Butch

Your argument is and always had been that if they aren't willing to violate their beliefs they have no right to be in business. Dress it up any way you want, that is what it comes down to.

_____________________________

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)
Profile   Post #: 111
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 9:12:54 PM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline
I've always believed in doing business on a handshake and having the ability to just tell someone: "I don't like or trust you so, I refuse to do business with you."

Agreed doctors and other emergency service people kind of give up that right, when they decide that's what they want to do for a living, but there's a huge difference between denying someone some stitches and a bandage and denying them a cake.

There are plenty of people with whom I still refuse to do business; potheads, and drunks being amongst them.



Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 112
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 9:39:18 PM   
BamaD


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

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


I've always believed in doing business on a handshake and having the ability to just tell someone: "I don't like or trust you so, I refuse to do business with you."

Agreed doctors and other emergency service people kind of give up that right, when they decide that's what they want to do for a living, but there's a huge difference between denying someone some stitches and a bandage and denying them a cake.

There are plenty of people with whom I still refuse to do business; potheads, and drunks being amongst them.



Michael

Bigot


_____________________________

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 DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 113
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 11:16:24 PM   
Zonie63


Posts: 2826
Joined: 4/25/2011
From: The Old Pueblo
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

No shirt, no shoes, no service.


Signs like that always bring the wiseass out of me. "Hey, the sign didn't say anything about 'no pants'!"

(in reply to RottenJohnny)
Profile   Post #: 114
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/28/2015 11:28:24 PM   
RottenJohnny


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

ORIGINAL: Zonie63


quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

No shirt, no shoes, no service.


Signs like that always bring the wiseass out of me. "Hey, the sign didn't say anything about 'no pants'!"

Or underwear.

_____________________________

"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 Zonie63)
Profile   Post #: 115
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/29/2015 3:48:42 AM   
GotSteel


Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Moderator3
Apparently this is something you all wish to debate and I just want it to be debated without having to lock it down again.


*shrug* it'll happen, happens like clockwork since the problems never actually get dealt with.

(in reply to Moderator3)
Profile   Post #: 116
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/29/2015 6:54:37 AM   
Musicmystery


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

ORIGINAL: Zonie63


quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

No shirt, no shoes, no service.


Signs like that always bring the wiseass out of me. "Hey, the sign didn't say anything about 'no pants'!"

However, the law does.

(in reply to Zonie63)
Profile   Post #: 117
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/29/2015 7:05:50 AM   
Zonie63


Posts: 2826
Joined: 4/25/2011
From: The Old Pueblo
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63


quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

No shirt, no shoes, no service.


Signs like that always bring the wiseass out of me. "Hey, the sign didn't say anything about 'no pants'!"

However, the law does.


Yes, I knew that. I was just joking around.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 118
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/29/2015 7:22:19 AM   
Zonie63


Posts: 2826
Joined: 4/25/2011
From: The Old Pueblo
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD



So if I go into a Kosher Jewish deli and order a ham sandwich I can sue them if they don't provide it for me.


It's not the same argument. If they don't have ham anywhere in the store, then they can't make a sandwich out of what they don't have.

We're talking about specific religious beliefs here, and the argument the store owner is making "I can not [perform this service] because to do so would violate my beliefs." There are rules in the Jewish religion regarding the eating of pork. There are rules in the Muslim religion regarding whether a man can cut the hair or touch a woman who's not his wife or blood relative. These are specific, unambiguous rules which are documented in Scriptures and can be easily verified.

There are NO RULES in the Christian religion about baking a cake for a gay wedding. If there was, then maybe (just maybe) they'd have an argument. If there are any rules to that effect, then they've already ostensibly violated them by continuing to reside in a country where homosexuality has been made legal. So, it's too late for them to save their souls now; might as well just bake the cake.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 119
RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Ref... - 7/29/2015 7:36:01 AM   
Arturas


Posts: 3245
Status: offline
quote:

There are NO RULES in the Christian religion about baking a cake for a gay wedding


Actually there is. God destroyed an entire city of homosexuals. Given that example not baking them a cake should be interpreted as a kindness.

_____________________________

"We master Our world."

(in reply to Zonie63)
Profile   Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Religious Rights Not "Good Enough" to Refuse Service Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   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 Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.113