RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi?

RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (Full Version)

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

Message

DaddySatyr -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 9:58:22 AM)
Now, let me see if I have this right ... quote: Then again, the gay in question could seek therapy from someone who is a less discriminatory, judge mental, holier than though jackass. somehow is different than: quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr quote: Counselors or therapists refusing to provide counseling or therapy under this bill must coordinate a referral of the client to another counselor or therapist who will provide the service. Take note of the words: "must coordinate". That means that the therapist can't just give the patient a number. The therapist is required to make sure another, more sympathetic, counselor is in place. Michael Sorry. I don't see a difference except immunizing Christians against being persecuted for their beliefs. You see, the law makes sure that a Christian counselor can't just 'dump" a client, leaving them with no help or hope. It forces the therapist to make sure that the client is going to be counseled by a therapist "who is a less discriminatory, judgmental, holier-than-though jackass" (all I did was fix the typos) More and more, I'm beginning to believe the assertion that people don't read threads (or do their own investigation) and just fly off the handle because of what someone else told them. After all, it was on the interwebz. It *must* be true. If ignorance really is bliss, there must be a lot of happy people around here.

ifmaz -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 10:08:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML ... Yes, you are required (not forced) to serve them unless they are disrupting your business in some fashion. When you open your door you are bound by the Laws of city, state, and nation. The Civil Rights Act of 1965 is one of those Laws which bind our commerce. If one is required, one is forced. Suppose for a moment the Civil Rights Act was to expire, what do you think would happen? Would it be business as usual or would we suddenly revert to 1960s-era thinking? quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Religious freedom granted by our Constitution, that pesky thing again, does not grant us the right to be intolerant of others. What are you thinking with? Whatever you are thinking is coming out of your arse. So again, a Jewish shop would be forced/required to cater to Nazis, a gay shop would be forced to cater to the Westboro Baptist Church, etc. This is the society you are advocating for? quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML The 'free market' is a neo-liberal invention used to justify smaller government and to enrich CEO's at the expense of impoverishing a large number of our citizenry; it is a canard that justifies the upward distribution of wealth. Said like a true statist. quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Then finally in an effort to justify bigotry you switch 180 degrees from a merchant choosing who he will serve to consumers boycotting a business. The two are diametrically opposed. To answer your whiney complaints about authoritarianism and government coercion, you fail to recognize that we give the government the power to coerce in order to provide for the mutual defense and to maintain a civil society. Under our Constitution we have the power to change that government or to have our representatives restrain that power. What happened when Chick-fil-a came out against gay marriage: did Chick-fil-a eventually change its stance without government coercion? quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Perhaps you would prefer the Libertarian wet dream of anarchy. The thought gives me a brain-boner.

ifmaz -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 10:10:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance DaddySatyr posted: "...Maybe it's prophetic that ol' Dumbo Ears referenced the Crusades. It could happen, again. Christians only have so many cheeks to turn. ..." Considering there have been so many crimes against humanity done in the name of religion; The Crusades among them, I'm finding a bit of sad irony that you feel the same is happening or will/could happen to those of the Christian Faith. Or extremely concerned that you might be implying you think there should be a return of The Crusades to punish the sinners or as some faiths call them, infidels. Thats ridiculous! Virtually everything is in the name of 'religion' and now days the atheist religion is the problem child. People can cite religious wars like the crusades but all theist based religious wars combined you are looking at less than a couple hundred thousand dead from the beginning of time compared to the ATHEIST religious wars where you are looking at a COUPLE HUNDRED MILLION in this century alone. What "atheist religious wars" are you referring to specifically?

DaddySatyr -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 10:11:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ifmaz The thought gives me a brain-boner. Fair warning: I'm stealing that. Michael

WinsomeDefiance -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 10:11:56 AM)
@DaddySatyr, There is no difference - provided the choices are available. As DC and others have mentioned, the options are limited in poor and rural areas. What happens then, when there are no available gay or BDSM or D/s friendly therapist to be referred to? Is that therapist then required to grudgingly treat the patient?

ifmaz -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 10:24:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: ORIGINAL: ifmaz quote: ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance For those who support such Bills, do think that establishments that chose to exercise their religious beliefs should be required to openly post on the door or window stating that the business reserves the right to refuse service based on religious beliefs? Would it not be easier to have businesses that are "all inclusive" post such notices on their doors? Without some sort of signage, how are "undesirables" (at least in the merchant's eyes) supposed to know that they need to take their business elsewhere? By walking in and trying to buy something? Lets assume the example of a cake maker. A couple enters and wants to buy a rather expensive cake. The baker must decide if their religious convictions outweigh their desire to keep the lights on. Now imagine gay couples lined up around the block to enter this baker's shop, all wanting to buy expensive cakes. A fairly loud message, yes? Perhaps a person, seeing the sudden need for an all-inclusive bakery, opens their own bakery and caters to everyone. Do you think those gay couples who all want expensive cakes (or any baked good) would patron the religious bakery? Do you think friends of the gay couples would? Did the government need to become involved or did the free market work as expected?

DaddySatyr -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 10:26:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance @DaddySatyr, There is no difference - provided the choices are available. As DC and others have mentioned, the options are limited in poor and rural areas. What happens then, when there are no available gay or BDSM or D/s friendly therapist to be referred to? Is that therapist then required to grudgingly treat the patient? You seem to be arguing out of both sides of your mouth. Do *you* want the counselor to be forced to counsel the patient? Wait! let's turn that around: Do you want to subject a gay person to be counseled by someone who can't really help them? Do you want the law to force counselors to "smile and wave" and hide their true feelings while counseling that gay person? Do you think that someone who thinks that the crux of a person's problem is their sexual identity will find some way to help that person that doesn't amount to (what did they used to call it? Where Christian groups forced "straight counseling" on gays?) making them straight? "There you go, now you are attracted to the opposite gender! Problems solved!" The law mandates that the therapist MUST COORDINATE a referral to a more compassionate therapist. No one's going without therapy and the onus is on the Christian therapist to find a new therapist for the client. Do you think forcing that therapist to give some sort of half-hearted counseling is going to *benefit* the client? I think you should try to float that law that a counselor should be forced to treat someone that they believe can only be truly "cured" by becoming "straight". I'll bet the LGBT community will line up to thank you for it.

Lucylastic -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 10:34:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nnanji quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: It's seriously pathetic to try to swing it all around so that you now claim that it's such 'Christians' are being persecuted. Cloaking bigotry in "religion" doesnt make it any less bigoted. Oh and calling people out on their bigotry isnt persecution, its accountability... I agree. Nor is cloaking bigotry in political correctness. If you had a clue, you would see that what your friends are doing is is ignoring EQUAL human rights. and persecution of non christians. Not having your ears offended by consequences of your hatefut rhetoric and ignorance. Bigotry/hate/fear is now wanting and making sure people have the same rights as everyone else???????LMAO FUck me sideways, that isnt anywhere close to political correctness either.

LadyPact -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 10:38:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: Then again, the gay in question could seek therapy from someone who is a less discriminatory, judge mental, holier than though jackass. That would be this gay's instinct. But then, I live in a city with lots of gay and gay-friendly therapists. I've read that mental-health-treatment options for rural folks can be incredibly limited and far-flung. I used to live in Delta Junction, Alaska. It's the exact opposite of what you describe. People forget it's not as easy when there just aren't options. Even finding a therapist on the KAP (Kink Aware Professionals) list isn't easy for a lot of people. North Carolina has also passed similar legislation recently. Due to this fact, MP and I will not be attending Debauchery this year and will not spend our tourism dollars in either of these states.

ifmaz -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 10:41:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact I used to live in Delta Junction, Alaska. It's the exact opposite of what you describe. People forget it's not as easy when there just aren't options. Even finding a therapist on the KAP (Kink Aware Professionals) list isn't easy for a lot of people. North Carolina has also passed similar legislation recently. Due to this fact, MP and I will not be attending Debauchery this year and will not spend our tourism dollars in either of these states. The next step would be to let legislators know you will not be visiting or spending money in their state.

dcnovice -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 10:56:59 AM)
quote: By walking in and trying to buy something? Why put the burden of attempting to make a purchase and going through an unpleasant rejection based on an immutable part of their identity on the customers when a sign could have communicated the point right from the start, alerting the would-be buyers to walk on? quote: Lets assume the example of a cake maker. A couple enters and wants to buy a rather expensive cake. The baker must decide if their religious convictions outweigh their desire to keep the lights on. Now imagine gay couples lined up around the block to enter this baker's shop, all wanting to buy expensive cakes. A fairly loud message, yes? Perhaps a person, seeing the sudden need for an all-inclusive bakery, opens their own bakery and caters to everyone. Do you think those gay couples who all want expensive cakes (or any baked good) would patron the religious bakery? Do you think friends of the gay couples would? Did the government need to become involved or did the free market work as expected? Emphasis mine. Let me know when this actually happens in real life.

Nnanji -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 11:01:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ifmaz quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance DaddySatyr posted: "...Maybe it's prophetic that ol' Dumbo Ears referenced the Crusades. It could happen, again. Christians only have so many cheeks to turn. ..." Considering there have been so many crimes against humanity done in the name of religion; The Crusades among them, I'm finding a bit of sad irony that you feel the same is happening or will/could happen to those of the Christian Faith. Or extremely concerned that you might be implying you think there should be a return of The Crusades to punish the sinners or as some faiths call them, infidels. Thats ridiculous! Virtually everything is in the name of 'religion' and now days the atheist religion is the problem child. People can cite religious wars like the crusades but all theist based religious wars combined you are looking at less than a couple hundred thousand dead from the beginning of time compared to the ATHEIST religious wars where you are looking at a COUPLE HUNDRED MILLION in this century alone. What "atheist religious wars" are you referring to specifically? When I read it, I guessed communism. I don't know though.

Lucylastic -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 11:11:01 AM)
HAHHAHAHHAHA FR yep christianity has zero blood on their hands. Not today, not even fifty years ago... its all in the crusades. BTW communism isnt a belief in atheism. Not to mention atheism isnt a belief in communism No matter how you try to conflate it. spin it and lie about it.

Real0ne -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 11:15:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic HAHHAHAHHAHA FR yep christianity has zero blood on their hands. Not today, not even fifty years ago... its all in the crusades. BTW communism isnt a belief in atheism. Not to mention atheism isnt a belief in communism No matter how you try to conflate it. spin it and lie about it. and atheists have over 100 million on their hands, most would choose to live with the one who is least likely to kill them.

vincentML -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 11:16:54 AM)
@RO quote: FAIL! I can save you some time, but no where in law will you find a contractual stipulation defined as a 'grant' FROM the gubblemint with respect to the BoR. It is an 'ACKNOWLEDGED' of rights by the crookocracy what the crookocracy will not violate or infringe. In the case of the constitution the crookocracy both recognized and agreed by stipulation (so they could exist) to the reservation of rights, which are not UNDER the laws of the unoted states but set aside from the laws of the united states since it has no jurisdiction over religion, speech, and arms etc. That might be a thoughtful argument (hard to say, however) from the perspective of your sovereign citizen wet dream. quote: Hence DEMOCRACY IS IN VIOLATION of our rights when it uses ITS mob pressure, LEGISLATION, COURT DECISIONS, CITIES or MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS to stomp the rights of individuals Right! Call out the Michigan militia then. Where the fuck is Paul Revere when we really need him, that slacker.

mnottertail -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 11:17:45 AM)
then go with the atheists. They have far less than the hallucinatory follow the magic wizard guys.

Lucylastic -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 11:19:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: To deny based on race, however, is more complicated. Why? If the landlord truly believes interracial marriage is wrong, doesn't his or her religious liberty allow for turning a couple away? What if the landlord's a devout Jew who disapproves of marrying outside the faith? Does s/he have the legal right to turn away would-be tenants who are in a mixed marriage? Many churchly folks think it wrong to conceive out of wedlock. Does religious liberty mean they can refuse an otherwise qualified tenant who's a single mom? yes hon they can, actually a single dad too. The law, known as House Bill 1523 or the “Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act,” will allow businesses, individuals, and religiously affiliated organizations to deny service to LGBT people, single mothers, and others who somehow offend an individual's "sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction." From the bill text http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/documents/2016/html/HB/1500-1599/HB1523SG.htm SECTION 2. The sincerely held religious beliefs or moral convictions protected by this act are the belief or conviction that: (a) Marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman; (b) Sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage; and (c) Male (man) or female (woman) refer to an individual's immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy and genetics at time of birth. SECTION 3. (1) The state government shall not take any discriminatory action against a religious organization wholly or partially on the basis that such organization: (a) Solemnizes or declines to solemnize any marriage, or provides or declines to provide services, accommodations, facilities, goods or privileges for a purpose related to the solemnization, formation, celebration or recognition of any marriage, based upon or in a manner consistent with a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction described in Section 2 of this act; (b) Makes any employment-related decision including, but not limited to, the decision whether or not to hire, terminate or discipline an individual whose conduct or religious beliefs are inconsistent with those of the religious organization, based upon or in a manner consistent with a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction described in Section 2 of this act; or (c) Makes any decision concerning the sale, rental, occupancy of, or terms and conditions of occupying a dwelling or other housing under its control, based upon or in a manner consistent with a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction described in Section 2 of this act.

Real0ne -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 11:20:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: Then again, the gay in question could seek therapy from someone who is a less discriminatory, judge mental, holier than though jackass. That would be this gay's instinct. But then, I live in a city with lots of gay and gay-friendly therapists. I've read that mental-health-treatment options for rural folks can be incredibly limited and far-flung. Now that is precious! From a nonjudgemental gay we presume? and Ford should stock and sell GM parts too! When I see someone these wacked out arguments its like wtf?????

Nnanji -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 11:21:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: Nnanji quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: It's seriously pathetic to try to swing it all around so that you now claim that it's such 'Christians' are being persecuted. Cloaking bigotry in "religion" doesnt make it any less bigoted. Oh and calling people out on their bigotry isnt persecution, its accountability... I agree. Nor is cloaking bigotry in political correctness. If you had a clue, you would see that what your friends are doing is is ignoring EQUAL human rights. and persecution of non christians. Not having your ears offended by consequences of your hatefut rhetoric and ignorance. Bigotry/hate/fear is now wanting and making sure people have the same rights as everyone else???????LMAO FUck me sideways, that isnt anywhere close to political correctness either. Actually, I don't think you know who my friends are or what they believe. So, that's a pretty bigoted post by you. Which, pretty much proves my point. Anyone who doesn't kowtow to you is a bigot. You won't listen to different views. We must just all follow your party line and say the words required to be said. That is politically correct bigotry.

WinsomeDefiance -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 11:21:20 AM)
I'm not arguing for either sides of the extremes. For every extreme action, there is an equal and opposing extreme push back. What you end up with are a lot of legislation that only serves the lawyers and those who can afford them. Each side wants to win, and neither ever does. It is why I try to understand the reasoning behind both sides of the argument. When I ask a question, I'm not trying to further any sides argument. I'm trying to understand them. At the same time, I do find myself baffled and distressed by the evidence of hatred and bigotry that I see expressed. To answer your question, no I would not want a counselor to be forced to treat someone they despise nor should someone have to endure treatment from a coouncelor that despises them for living true to their own nature. Which brings us back full circle to what I'm trying to understand in the first place... Both sides to this issue.

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875