A solution to the gay rights/"religious" freedom debate.

[The Rabbi]

Have businesses post the identity of any groups with whom they will not do business. That protects the right of businesses, and allows excluded groups to shun, and move the overall community to shun, those same businesses. Let the market decide. I think the problem will soon disappear.

You ‘think’ wrong.

The issue has nothing to do with ‘shunning’ anyone, nor is allowing business a owner to be ‘up front and honest’ about his or her ignorance and hate a ‘solution.’

Public accommodations laws are predicated on Commerce Clause jurisprudence, where government is authorized to regulate markets, including prohibiting acts that threaten those markets, including local markets. The ‘solution’ you advocate would clearly threaten both the local market and all interrelated markets, and is consequently no ‘solution’ at all.

Either you failed to think this all the way through or lack the capacity to do so.

Last, it’s both telling and sad that this is the type of America you and many others on the right wish it live in.

You keep positing this nonsense about markets being threatened because business owners can decide whom they want to do business with.
It isn't true. It's never been true. You've been called on it but repeat the same lie anyway.
Are you stupid?

 

[Mac1958]

.

I'm certainly impressed by the Left's commitment to the rule of law and how we need to follow it, and I'm sure they feel the same way about illegal immigration.

.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

.

I'm certainly impressed by the Left's commitment to the rule of law and how we need to follow it, and I'm sure they feel the same way about illegal immigration.

.

Would you like us to kick them all out?

 

[Mac1958]

.

I'm certainly impressed by the Left's commitment to the rule of law and how we need to follow it, and I'm sure they feel the same way about illegal immigration.

.

Would you like us to kick them all out?

I'll try to make my point a little more obvious:

The Left is engaging in selective commitment to law.

.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

.

I'm certainly impressed by the Left's commitment to the rule of law and how we need to follow it, and I'm sure they feel the same way about illegal immigration.

.

Would you like us to kick them all out?

I'll try to make my point a little more obvious:

The Left is engaging in selective commitment to law.

.

Yes, the right never does such a thing? Is that what you mean?

 

[Mac1958]

Would you like us to kick them all out?

I'll try to make my point a little more obvious:

The Left is engaging in selective commitment to law.

.

Yes, the right never does such a thing? Is that what you mean?

Of course the right does that.

And deflection noted.

The point remains.

.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Have businesses post the identity of any groups with whom they will not do business. That protects the right of businesses, and allows excluded groups to shun, and move the overall community to shun, those same businesses. Let the market decide. I think the problem will soon disappear.

Have to wonder is "to shun" including things like sabotage and arson? Because I've been on liberal websites where gay activists have proudly threatened to burn down people's houses who were thinking of witnessing against gay marriage in court proceedings. God forbid there's a business shut for the night with a "we are christian and cannot morally serve gay weddings" sign out front.

No, this isn't the solution. Harvey Milk v Utah will be the solution though in the US Supreme Court this year..

Liberals can be as big as jerks as conservatives on this issue.

Yes, Utah's decision will be in favor of marriage equality and the issue will be resolved.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Have businesses post the identity of any groups with whom they will not do business. That protects the right of businesses, and allows excluded groups to shun, and move the overall community to shun, those same businesses. Let the market decide. I think the problem will soon disappear.

Businesses don't have that right.

A sign in a window can't amend the Constitution and/or volumes of case law stemming from it.

And what case law prohibits businesses from refusing service based on ideological grounds relative to behavior or expression?

*crickets chirping*

You're a liar, aren't you?

Oh, wait, you stupidly accepted the OP's false premise relative to the actual legal concerns of natural, constitutional and case law. You imbecile, the proposed Arizona bill vetoed by Brewer, for example, makes no mention of sexual orientation whatsoever. The latter is utterly irrelevant. Anyone could have invoked its protections irrespective of their sexual orientation on the grounds of their religious convictions. In fact, the bill would have done nothing new relative to established law. It's net effect, in practice, would have been to stave off the costs of frivolous lawsuits. That's all. The ignorance of the law and the pertinent concerns of proposed legislation is staggering on this board, among both the left, most especially, but also on the right.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I'll try to make my point a little more obvious:

The Left is engaging in selective commitment to law.

.

Yes, the right never does such a thing? Is that what you mean?

Of course the right does that.

And deflection noted.

The point remains.

.

You used a poor example. Ask yourself why, for 50 years we haven't bothered, Dem or Rep administration, to close the borders?

 

[hazlnut]

Have businesses post the identity of any groups with whom they will not do business. That protects the right of businesses, and allows excluded groups to shun, and move the overall community to shun, those same businesses. Let the market decide. I think the problem will soon disappear.

Better idea:

Continue to shame and mock the intolerant and hateful "Christians" until they start acting like Christ would have them act.


BTY -- do any of these businesses sell shrimp or clothing of mixed threads to Christians, because those are ABOMINATIONS!!!

 

[Listening]

Stupid white racist assholes said the same thing about black people in white diners during the 1950s and 60s- "They can just go somewhere else."

How about religious fucks adopt a business model where they don't refuse service to anyone who is paying for their product? Unless a gay couple starts blowing each other in the shop, Christians need to just shut the fuck up.

Neg repped for being a moron.

Where do you get off telling others what business models to adopt.

For a long time golf courses would not give certain tee times to women because they tend to play slower. Were the wrong. Women do play slower.

 

[Listening]

Have businesses post the identity of any groups with whom they will not do business. That protects the right of businesses, and allows excluded groups to shun, and move the overall community to shun, those same businesses. Let the market decide. I think the problem will soon disappear.

You ‘think’ wrong.

The issue has nothing to do with ‘shunning’ anyone, nor is allowing business a owner to be ‘up front and honest’ about his or her ignorance and hate a ‘solution.’

Public accommodations laws are predicated on Commerce Clause jurisprudence, where government is authorized to regulate markets, including prohibiting acts that threaten those markets, including local markets. The ‘solution’ you advocate would clearly threaten both the local market and all interrelated markets, and is consequently no ‘solution’ at all.

Either you failed to think this all the way through or lack the capacity to do so.

Last, it’s both telling and sad that this is the type of America you and many others on the right wish it live in.

Commentary aside (which is pretty pitiful), you'd need to prove your first point, which you have not. It is not an article of faith.

The only place this might have accord is where government is providing subsidies to a business district where a business is receiving government benefits.

If you started a business at your home and it required nothing from the government....there would be nothing wrong with it morally or legally (unless some liberal decides he has to regulate what goes on in your home).

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Have businesses post the identity of any groups with whom they will not do business. That protects the right of businesses, and allows excluded groups to shun, and move the overall community to shun, those same businesses. Let the market decide. I think the problem will soon disappear.

You ‘think’ wrong.

The issue has nothing to do with ‘shunning’ anyone, nor is allowing business a owner to be ‘up front and honest’ about his or her ignorance and hate a ‘solution.’

Public accommodations laws are predicated on Commerce Clause jurisprudence, where government is authorized to regulate markets, including prohibiting acts that threaten those markets, including local markets. The ‘solution’ you advocate would clearly threaten both the local market and all interrelated markets, and is consequently no ‘solution’ at all.

Either you failed to think this all the way through or lack the capacity to do so.

Last, it’s both telling and sad that this is the type of America you and many others on the right wish it live in.

Enough! Stow it, you silly ass.

You've incessantly confounded the matter yourself from the beginning.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ry-have-the-right-to-deny-32.html#post8700263

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ry-have-the-right-to-deny-22.html#post8694245

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ry-have-the-right-to-deny-18.html#post8690687

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...us-freedom-laws-are-doomed-5.html#post8704684

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ry-have-the-right-to-deny-33.html#post8700779

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ry-have-the-right-to-deny-32.html#post8700513

 

[deltex1]

Stupid white racist assholes said the same thing about black people in white diners during the 1950s and 60s- "They can just go somewhere else."

How about religious fucks adopt a business model where they don't refuse service to anyone who is paying for their product? Unless a gay couple starts blowing each other in the shop, Christians need to just shut the fuck up.

How many businesses can you name that have such policies? It isn't solely about "religious fucks", Gertrude...just as "same sex marriage" should not be solely defined by your consent to have your ass penetrated by he whom you call husband.

Same-sex marriage is defined by a marriage license recognized by the US government in every state, the same as hetero marriage.

And, yes, this debate is all on the religious fucks because they are the ones screaming about "sin", "evil", "the gay illness" and "a loss of fundamental family values". All that gay people want is to have their marriage recognized the same as any other marriage. That's called "equality". You interpret your religious "freedom" as your ability to deny that equality to them. You don't have that freedom, and your Bible has no authority over American law. Christians need to get over it and stop your whining.

You and the state can redefine all you want...God's intent will be here long after you are dust.

 

[Silhouette]

The simple way to end this debate for good is to debate not whether or not a christian can refuse to bake a gay wedding cake, but if a muslim can refuse to bake a gay wedding cake.

If the answer is "no" for the muslim, it is also "no" for the christian. Case closed.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Have businesses post the identity of any groups with whom they will not do business. That protects the right of businesses, and allows excluded groups to shun, and move the overall community to shun, those same businesses. Let the market decide. I think the problem will soon disappear.

You ‘think’ wrong.

The issue has nothing to do with ‘shunning’ anyone, nor is allowing business a owner to be ‘up front and honest’ about his or her ignorance and hate a ‘solution.’

Public accommodations laws are predicated on Commerce Clause jurisprudence, where government is authorized to regulate markets, including prohibiting acts that threaten those markets, including local markets. The ‘solution’ you advocate would clearly threaten both the local market and all interrelated markets, and is consequently no ‘solution’ at all.

Either you failed to think this all the way through or lack the capacity to do so.

Last, it’s both telling and sad that this is the type of America you and many others on the right wish it live in.

Commentary aside (which is pretty pitiful), you'd need to prove your first point, which you have not. It is not an article of faith.

The only place this might have accord is where government is providing subsidies to a business district where a business is receiving government benefits.

If you started a business at your home and it required nothing from the government....there would be nothing wrong with it morally or legally (unless some liberal decides he has to regulate what goes on in your home).

Public accommodation law puts your comment to shame.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The simple way to end this debate for good is to debate not whether or not a christian can refuse to bake a gay wedding cake, but if a muslim can refuse to bake a gay wedding cake.

If the answer is "no" for the muslim, it is also "no" for the christian. Case closed.

No one is excused by his religion in refusing to accommodate public services.

 

[sealybobo]

Have businesses post the identity of any groups with whom they will not do business. That protects the right of businesses, and allows excluded groups to shun, and move the overall community to shun, those same businesses. Let the market decide. I think the problem will soon disappear.

I have a great idea. Keep your religion and sexuality to yourself. No PDAs straight or gay. And no talking about your lord in public. Or if you are a public employee.

 

[sealybobo]

Conservatives clinging desperately to any right to discriminate they possibly can.

And calling it 'freedom'.

They know how it works. Bud Light had a gay in their commercial, republicans stopped drinking bud light. The stock tanked.

 

[sealybobo]

No one is excused by his religion in refusing to accommodate public services.

A religious cake company shouldn’t be forced to make a cock shaped cake or Kevin and Kyle wedding cake. But a racist diner can’t say no blacks.