DesideriScuri
Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote:
ORIGINAL: vincentML quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote:
ORIGINAL: vincentML quote:
What constitutes bigotry in a religious value may be a misinterpretation of the value. But, as long as a person's free exercise of his/her chosen religion isn't infringing on the rights of another, the Federal Government should have no authority to infringe on a religion's "bigotry." And that is the crux of the matter, innit? Absolutely. Your rights don't trump mine. They are equal. So, as long as my freely made choices don't have any impact on your ability to freely choose, I should be free to choose to do whatever I want (as it pertains to any interactions between you and I). When someone refuses to serve another in a public accommodation or business because of their religious values there is an impact on others. Only if there are no alternatives. Any thoughts on this situation? I'm sure there's some sort of alternative. http://www.theroot.com/articles/news/2016/04/interracial_couple_evicted_from_mississippi_rv_park.html I'm sure there are alternatives, and the couple did move to a different trailer park. They didn't get evicted because the park owner's religious beliefs. They got evicted because of the park owner's racism. Now that this has become a story, more people will know. Now, people will be able to choose to do business with that trailer park owner, or not, and can base those decisions, at least in part, on his racism. Would you prefer to do business with a racist, or someone that isn't a racist? I'd prefer the latter myself, but it's not like we have some way of accurately identifying them simply by looks. But, let them open their ignorant mouths and tell us what they believe and let them act and show us what they believe. Now we know they are ignorant racists. That trailer park might be filled with racists. Do you think that couple is going to be willing to face that? Do you think they'd be willing (or even able) to change the hearts and minds of those racists? And, therein, lies a problem. The NAACP gets involved and will likely get something done, but it won't be to change the hearts and minds of the racists. It will likely be some form of punishment which will increase the racial tension and could very easily make the problem worse. So, my thoughts are the church is hypocritical, the trailer park owner is a racist, and the tenants of the trailer park that complained are racists. Let them identify themselves so people can have more information to base their decisions on.
_____________________________
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)
|