RE: Business should be banned based upon

RE: Business should be banned based upon (Full Version)

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

Message

Thegunnysez -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (8/30/2015 5:36:31 PM)
quote: Would you feel the same if the city council were skin heads Islamists or whatever, pushing THEIR radical agenda at a big city airport Would you?

crazyml -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (8/31/2015 5:07:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey religious beliefs? moral beliefs? whatever else you can come up with? Let's start with religious and moral beliefs, as "whatever else you can come up with" is a little broad. The short answer is "Hell no." And that'll be a "hell no" for left leaining activists and a "hell no" for right leaning activists. People should be allowed to believe what they choose to believe, no matter how unpleasant someone else might find those beliefs. When it comes to "whatever else you can come up with" - I'm not really sure what that means... there are some things that are banned because they are dangerous (like "kinder eggs" for example) - There's a strong argument that says that government shouldn't be acting like a child minder, and that the fact that something is "dangerous" doesn't give you a right to ban it. The sale of cocaine in corner stores is banned because it's illegal to sell cocaine... I think it is wrong for a city council to ban a fast food outlet because of the way it chooses to give donations or political support. Sure, people who are offended by that fast food outlet's stance can boycott it, they can exercise their democratic right to complain about it, but unless that fast food outlet has broken a law, there is no justification in banning it. I think the question brings to light some of the confusion that some people have had over a couple of the recent cases... I am not in favour of banning anything, but I am strongly in favour of sanctioning businesses that break the law, whether that is by failing to meet their obligations to keep the kitchens clean, or their legal obligation not to discriminate. If people don't like anti-discrimination law, they have a process through which they can have the law changed... in the meantime, I am very much in favour of people being required to obey the law, whatever their moral, political, or religious beliefs. It does seem to me that the reliance that some people on the right place on the "religious" nature of the beliefs that cause some people to break the law should some how give them an exemption for the law is a little odd. I think it's pretty clear that the US constitution specifically bars the special treatment of people on the basis of religion, but I guess if people with deeply held beliefs want to change that law, there's a process for that too.

KenDckey -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (8/31/2015 5:42:20 AM)
ml the whatever else was intentionally made broad to stimulate conversation A primary example of religious freedom vs government regulation is the Amish.

Thegunnysez -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (8/31/2015 8:25:41 AM)
quote: I have a buddy, who owns a legal gunsmithing business. The banks shut down his ability to take credit cards because of that, though he was able to find a workaround. There is another banking business that was set up specifically in response to the Obama regimes' scheme that he was able to use Wasn't "chokepoint" put in place to ferret out the drug dealers and gun smuglers by interdicting their economic arteries?

CreativeDominant -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (8/31/2015 9:09:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thegunnysez quote: I have a buddy, who owns a legal gunsmithing business. The banks shut down his ability to take credit cards because of that, though he was able to find a workaround. There is another banking business that was set up specifically in response to the Obama regimes' scheme that he was able to use Wasn't "chokepoint" put in place to ferret out the drug dealers and gun smuglers by interdicting their economic arteries? Ostensibly. *Operation Choke Point is an initiative of the United States Department of Justice that was announced in 2013,[1] which is investigating banks in the United States and the business they do with payment processors, payday lenders, and other companies believed to be at higher risk for fraud and money laundering.* However: *This operation, disclosed in August 2013 Wall Street Journal story [2] has been accused of bypassing due process.; the government is pressuring the financial industry to cut off the companies' access to banking services, without first having shown that the targeted companies are violating the law.[3][4][5][6] As reported by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, critics believe "it's a thinly veiled ideological attack on industries the Obama administration doesn't like, such as gun sellers and coal producers."[7]*** Leading to: On January 29, 2015, the FDIC issued a Financial Institution Letter that states "The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) issued a Financial Institution Letter today encouraging supervised institutions to take a risk-based approach in assessing individual customer relationships, rather than declining to provide banking services to entire categories of customers without regard to the risks presented by an individual customer or the financial institution's ability to manage the risk."[23] The Washington Times says this letter "effectively ends Operation Choke Point."[24][23] As reported by Forbes, "a change in the political landscape, many businesses threatening legal action and a congressman with a background in banking [forced] the bureaucracy to admit to misconduct and to stop financial attacks on legal businesses that the Obama administration deems to be politically incorrect."[25]Reports of continued termination of services to legitimate businesses, however, continue.** https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point

CreativeDominant -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (8/31/2015 9:12:47 AM)
By the way...I've yet to see anyone on here from the left deny that the Denver City Council denied Chick-Fil-A a business license to operate out of DIA because of their religious beliefs...NOT practices, but beliefs.

Real0ne -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (8/31/2015 9:21:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml If people don't like anti-discrimination law, they have a process through which they can have the law changed... in the meantime, I am very much in favour of people being required to obey the law, whatever their moral, political, or religious beliefs. It does seem to me that the reliance that some people on the right place on the "religious" nature of the beliefs that cause some people to break the law should some how give them an exemption for the law is a little odd. I think it's pretty clear that the US constitution specifically bars the special treatment of people on the basis of religion, but I guess if people with deeply held beliefs want to change that law, there's a process for that too. Well I consider myself a people, and I dont recall ever seeing a referendum or voting on any referendum with regard to antidiscrimination so labelled law. So should I appeal to the overlords to change 'their' laws that they chose to impose upon me or is the democratic process limited to the plutocracy alone? I mean if I am part of this so called democratic process then why didnt I get a chance to vote on these so called laws since I am expected to live 'under' them? (the quality or necessity not withstanding) But it does not seem to affect the religion of atheism or secular humanism or scientology that the gubblemint overlords use to enforce their religion.

Real0ne -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (8/31/2015 9:26:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant By the way...I've yet to see anyone on here from the left deny that the Denver City Council denied Chick-Fil-A a business license to operate out of DIA because of their religious beliefs...NOT practices, but beliefs. what reasons do they claim? It may very well be the result of religion.

StWrinklemeat -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (8/31/2015 9:28:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant By the way...I've yet to see anyone on here from the left deny that the Denver City Council denied Chick-Fil-A a business license to operate out of DIA because of their religious beliefs...NOT practices, but beliefs. Well, there you go again, I have yet to see any nutsucker credibly cite that they did so because of religious beliefs. 1. they have not denied it, there is a council meeting on the issue 9/1. 2. There concern was the companies massive contributions to anti-gay groups who are looking to repress their freedoms, (which by definition would be a practice.) So, typical nutsucker horseshit and propaganda, no foundation in truth. The market will decide (and the council is part of the market, for those of you less than facile at market economics). Your Idol. St. Wrinklemeat.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (8/31/2015 9:43:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant By the way...I've yet to see anyone on here from the left deny that the Denver City Council denied Chick-Fil-A a business license to operate out of DIA because of their religious beliefs...NOT practices, but beliefs. Well, there you go again, I have yet to see any nutsucker credibly cite that they did so because of religious beliefs. 1. they have not denied it, there is a council meeting on the issue 9/1. 2. There concern was the companies massive contributions to anti-gay groups who are looking to repress their freedoms, (which by definition would be a practice.) So, typical nutsucker horseshit and propaganda, no foundation in truth. The market will decide (and the council is part of the market, for those of you less than facile at market economics). Your Idol. St. Wrinklemeat. yeahhhh...no. You might try reading my earlier post on this where the council's own words are stated. Their statements make it quite clear that their denial is based on the company's beliefs...and those beliefs of the founder. Practices on the part of the group donated to...not the company itself. The company itself practices non-discrimination in both hiring and service to their customers. In other words, they follow the law. Unless you have a source that shows they've been taken to court for discriminatory practices within the workplace or in serving customers? Idol? Hardly. Sock? Assuredly.

StWrinklemeat -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (8/31/2015 10:17:08 AM)
“I think the airport also has a question about our reputation. It has been the corporate philosophy [of Chik-fil-A] to use the dollars they earn to fund discriminatory lawsuits and to fund discriminatory political rhetoric. So that’s of concern to the extent that they will be forming profits from operating in our airport.” Dumbass you? Assuredly so, don't know English, most definitly not. Let me help you out moron: action: the fact or process of doing something, typically to achieve an aim. Funding discriminatory political rhetoric is an action. Funding discriminatory lawsuits is an action. belief: trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something. I believe that Chik-fil-a have acted in the sense, meaning, and definition of the word. I believe you have quoted that lead quote in your felchings earlier. I believe that the council have denied no license. They have not acted on denying that license. I believe you are a nutsucker. I believe you are a fucking cretin. I believe you felch nutsuckerisms. I have acted by showing you what a fucking idiot you are.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (8/31/2015 4:48:28 PM)
Awwww...you're so cute, little ronniesock. I'll give you this...they have not acted on it except to indicate what their likely action will be. As for the rest? You want to split hairs? Funding is an action. Not illegal under the eyes of the law. Any more than these causes supported by Starbucks: Planned Parenthood. Starbucks is also a founder of a group pushing extreme cap and trade measures. The GAP: Funds BICEP, a group that pushes environmental cap-and-trade. Home Depot: Funds the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. Yet, all those causes are not supported by their customers or by citizens who are not their customers. Yet, I don't see anyone on any city council worried about these companies' support for these causes. Because these causes have NOTHING to do with how they comport business with the public or how they treat their employees.

Thegunnysez -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (8/31/2015 9:49:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant By the way...I've yet to see anyone on here from the left deny that the Denver City Council denied Chick-Fil-A a business license to operate out of DIA because of their religious beliefs...NOT practices, but beliefs. It looks like Chick-Fil-A's lawyers may get some billable hours.

Thegunnysez -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (8/31/2015 9:52:09 PM)
quote: Wasn't "chokepoint" put in place to ferret out the drug dealers and gun smuglers by interdicting their economic arteries? quote: Ostensibly. Did they catch any drug dealers or gun smuglers?

Thegunnysez -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (8/31/2015 9:58:12 PM)
quote: The company itself practices non-discrimination in both hiring and service to their customers. In other words, they follow the law. Unlike the cake people who chose not to follow the law.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (9/1/2015 7:33:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thegunnysez quote: The company itself practices non-discrimination in both hiring and service to their customers. In other words, they follow the law. Unlike the cake people who chose not to follow the law. Yep...you're right. So then...given that..myour thoughts on Denver City Council considering denial to Chick-Fil-A over beliefs and actions completely legal and NOT carried over into the way they hire people and serve people?

JVoV -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (9/1/2015 10:53:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Yep...you're right. So then...given that..myour thoughts on Denver City Council considering denial to Chick-Fil-A over beliefs and actions completely legal and NOT carried over into the way they hire people and serve people? A quick Google search brings up several lawsuits of just how those beliefs have carried over into hiring & firing practices. Something the city may be taking into consideration.

KenDckey -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (9/1/2015 12:39:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat “I think the airport also has a question about our reputation. It has been the corporate philosophy [of Chik-fil-A] to use the dollars they earn to fund discriminatory lawsuits and to fund discriminatory political rhetoric. So that’s of concern to the extent that they will be forming profits from operating in our airport.” Dumbass you? Assuredly so, don't know English, most definitly not. Let me help you out moron: action: the fact or process of doing something, typically to achieve an aim. Funding discriminatory political rhetoric is an action. Funding discriminatory lawsuits is an action. belief: trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something. I believe that Chik-fil-a have acted in the sense, meaning, and definition of the word. I believe you have quoted that lead quote in your felchings earlier. I believe that the council have denied no license. They have not acted on denying that license. I believe you are a nutsucker. I believe you are a fucking cretin. I believe you felch nutsuckerisms. I have acted by showing you what a fucking idiot you are. Would funding to a PAC or Political Party that sues (no matter the reason/outcome) fall within this category?

joether -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (9/1/2015 1:06:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey religious beliefs? moral beliefs? whatever else you can come up with? "Business should be banned based upon...." ...THE RULE OF LAW Why do you guys have to try to complicate things? Businesses live and breath under the current laws of the United States of America. From the local level ordinances on up to the federal amendments.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Business should be banned based upon (9/1/2015 1:42:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey religious beliefs? moral beliefs? whatever else you can come up with? "Business should be banned based upon...." ...THE RULE OF LAW Why do you guys have to try to complicate things? Businesses live and breath under the current laws of the United States of America. From the local level ordinances on up to the federal amendments. Tell that to your leftist friends on the Denver City Council.

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875