Bill Allowing Businesses to Refuse Gays Service

[JakeStarkey]

The passage is merely to rev up the base in AZ.

It won't survive litigation.

 

[candycorn]

Oh I get your point, you think religious people are hypocrites and should just shut up. In another post you asked why gays get all the attention in these cases, I can answer that. They have an agenda and are the only ones out there making a stink to prove how they are so abused. I wonder how they would react to a sign in the establishment saying *$100,000.00 SURCHARGE FOR GAY EVENTS*, you think that would get a reaction?

I most certainly do not think that of religious people. Some are hypocrites - sure - but some non-religious people are hypocrites too. I'm just asking why is it that the gay lifestyle gets more attention than other similarly sinful lifestyles, and why do you hear stories of photographers refusing to photograph a gay wedding and not a photographer refusing to photograph the wedding of a man who divorced his previous wife and didn't get the marriage annulled (meaning he would be committing adultery with this new woman in God's eyes)?

As far as I know the requirement for an annulment is only in the Catholic church so that leave a wide spectrum of Christians that wouldn't necessarily worry about that. You asked "why is it that the gay lifestyle gets more attention than other similarly sinful lifestyles", because they are going out of their way to force their lifestyle on a population that doesn't want it in their face. Very simple concept, people tend to push back.

Just out of curiosity, how many gay couples do you know (not counting celebrities--that you personally are aware of). Are they going out of their way to flaunt their lifestyles?

 

[GreenBean]

To clarify, I support a business's right to refuse service to anyone they want. I'm generally a person who wants less government involvement in our lives.

The OP question was why do Christians single gay people out? Why don't they also refuse to serve people who work on Sunday (by choice) - for instance - or a guy who says "Jesus Christ" in vein all of the time, or a guy who gambles and is divorced, or a guy who's known to worship idols, or a guy who doesn't honor his parents, etc?

Why do they single out the gays as the customer of choice to refuse?

First you're making assumptions that it's not only Christians and once again you ignored my point about them refusing to service weddings, I haven't seen any evidence of other reasons.

Oh I get what you mean, but let me approach it this way..

Why don't we see cases of bakeries refusing to make a cake for someone who is getting married for the second or third time - for example? Wouldn't that be just as significant of a sin in God's eyes?

I just feel like some Christian individuals focus in a lot on the gay lifestyle (as sinful) while turning a blind eye (and even welcoming) other types of sinful lifestyles..

Homosexuality as well as Divorce are both favored agendas of the socio-fascist Liberal Mob - Both engineered toward the same ends. The destruction of anything held in higher esteem than Big Brother - The Family

 

[Katzndogz]

First an foremost you're ignoring that divorce is provided for in the bible. I have done some semiprofessional wedding photography, I wouldn't do a gay wedding. Why, it's not natural, now prove me wrong scientifically. You are also ignoring that in Christianity as in other religions, you are responsible for your own decisions and must answer for them to a higher power. In this country you shouldn't have to answer to government for those decisions due to that "free exercise" clause in the Constitution.

Hey I'm not arguing that a photographer shouldn't have the right to refuse service; I'm cool with that.

I just think that the gays get singled out unfairly, that's all. A million straight people commit a million significant sins willfully - every day - and participate willfully in sinful lifestyles where idols are worshiped, people have sex out of wedlock, etc, and a photographer is totally cool capturing all of that, but when he has to go to a gay wedding "oh no that would be against my religion" as if it's the only sin that's ever existed.

Get my point?

Where is a photographer okay with photographing any of that?

Pornographers don't complain when a Christian refuses to be the cameraman for the latest porn shoot. They just get another cameraman.

 

[Iceweasel]

I pointed this out yesterday to a loud chorus of stunned silence. The answer is simple. This is not about religion. It's about hatred of homosexuals.

Religion is brought into it in this country, from a legal perspective, because the bigots believe it's a loophole through which discrimination can be made legal.

Religion is not some sort of magic bullet that can shoot holes in the Constitution.

The chorus of silence might have been due to the stunning level of ignorance. It isn't about hate or religion it's the dictating of moral values onto the majority by propagandists. They name call, seek to intimidate and threaten anyone that disagrees with them. Homosexuality isn't a person. If you try to force a baker to make a gay wedding cake the issue is not about any individual denied rights, it's the demand that you accept their alternative lifestyle as normal.

 

[Silhouette]

Just out of curiosity, how many gay couples do you know (not counting celebrities--that you personally are aware of). Are they going out of their way to flaunt their lifestyles?

I know the question wasn't directed to me, but if I may?

I spent quite a deal of time near San Francisco and knew/saw many gay couples, some triads and other alternate situations. Do they flaunt their lifestyles? Are you kidding me?

Most of the gays I knew and know now will launch into sexual innuendo within 2 minutes of opening their mouths and they tie literally everything they speak about to sex. Their hypersexuality is so rampant that is frankly uncomfortable to be around them. And since I know that kids who were molested have often as their number one symptom: hypersexuality and, that most gay men at least have been found by the CDC to have been molested as boys, their hypersexual "in your face" behavior with the gay thing is doubly uncomfortable. As I listen to them talk and gesticulate, I always have in the front of my mind "this poor creature was abused as a child, untreated, and is now evangelizing his own unresolved psychosis on the world as a cool/hip lifestyle". Which then makes me nauseated at how dark deeds can spiral out of control if not confronted.

Yet, if you confront them now, now that gays have taken this hypersexuality, this untreated mass-compulsions of child sexual abuse to a "civil rights movement", you will be punished in some way...

Gee it's great gays took over the APA and had themselves removed from the DSM; then turned that Association into a political machine instead of a scientific one...so that the AMA, pediatrics and clinicians of all walks can take their orders from the New Establishment. Your first hint of the end of times is medical doctors assisting the amputation of healthy organs instead of confronting the obvious mental issues in so-called "transgenders". Once the AMA itself has abandoned the science, the hippocratic oath, your pretty much dead in the water as a society.

Asking christians to embrace all of this is not only beyond the pale, it is sacreligious and will get them condemned forever to the pit of fire. The buck has to stop somewhere and the frank confrontation must begin. I believe it will be right at the door step of the 1st Amendment and its guarantee of freedom of religion.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

It's kind of a broad brush you got there Kevin. Not all christians do that.

With that said..I think a business has a right to refuse service to anyone. They are paying the rent, the bills, the overhead. If they want to lose customers due to a sexual preference.....then that is on them. But to FORCE them to service people is kind of..well..unamerican. Isn't it?

Kevin appears to agree with you, he's just in this to mock the Christians apparently.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

It's kind of a broad brush you got there Kevin. Not all christians do that.

With that said..I think a business has a right to refuse service to anyone. They are paying the rent, the bills, the overhead. If they want to lose customers due to a sexual preference.....then that is on them. But to FORCE them to service people is kind of..well..unamerican. Isn't it?

Hi Gracie, I never used the phrase "all Christians" and definitely didn't intend to imply that in any way. Totally understand that.

And about the law, I can honestly swing either way on it and understand the viewpoint that businesses should be able to serve whoever they please.

But the OP was addressing the point that I've heard stories of two gays being refused wedding photography services, but never of refusing service to a divorced person remarrying, or a guy who uses the lord's name in vein a lot, etc.

You know?

I believe Gracie gave an excellent answer. I agree with her on both points. I believe any business has the right to deny service to someone and that those businesses that do deny services are going lose customers.

Would I bake the cake or do the photography job? Sure. Why not? I'm a christian and I'm being given the opportunity to do my best work for people who might not even trust christians much less allow them to be in their company on any other basis.

Love would bake the cake. imo.

 

[dblack]

It's kind of a broad brush you got there Kevin. Not all christians do that.

With that said..I think a business has a right to refuse service to anyone. They are paying the rent, the bills, the overhead. If they want to lose customers due to a sexual preference.....then that is on them. But to FORCE them to service people is kind of..well..unamerican. Isn't it?

Kevin appears to agree with you, he's just in this to mock the Christians apparently.

This just a guess, but I don't think that's what he's up to. I think he's mocking hateful homophobes dressed up as Christians. Most of my friends are Christians and many of them consider homosexuality to be a sin - like the other things Kevin is asking about. But they don't have a focused preoccupation with beating down the 'homosexual agenda'. They see it as a sin, but they recognize that most of the people engaging in it are no different than the rest of us. Sinful creatures doing our best to get by. They understand that most homosexuals, sinful though they may be, are just people trying to love each other. They're not abusing children, they're not spreading disease, they're not on a campaign to lay waste to western civilization.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

It's kind of a broad brush you got there Kevin. Not all christians do that.

With that said..I think a business has a right to refuse service to anyone. They are paying the rent, the bills, the overhead. If they want to lose customers due to a sexual preference.....then that is on them. But to FORCE them to service people is kind of..well..unamerican. Isn't it?

Kevin appears to agree with you, he's just in this to mock the Christians apparently.

It was a reasonable question. I don't believe Kevin was trying to mock anyone.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

It's kind of a broad brush you got there Kevin. Not all christians do that.

With that said..I think a business has a right to refuse service to anyone. They are paying the rent, the bills, the overhead. If they want to lose customers due to a sexual preference.....then that is on them. But to FORCE them to service people is kind of..well..unamerican. Isn't it?

Kevin appears to agree with you, he's just in this to mock the Christians apparently.

This just a guess, but I don't think that's what he's up to. I think he's mocking hateful homophobes dressed up as Christians. Most of my friends are Christians and many of them consider homosexuality to be a sin - like the other things Kevin is asking about. But they don't have a focused preoccupation with beating down the 'homosexual agenda'. They see it as a sin, but they recognize that most of the people engaging in it are no different than the rest of us. Sinful creatures doing our best to get by. They understand that most homosexuals, sinful though they may be, are just people trying to love each other. They're not abusing children, they're not spreading disease, they're not on a campaign to lay waste to western civilization.

The only "focus" I see on the gays is on the internet. Or on the propaganda liberals put on tv daily.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

It's kind of a broad brush you got there Kevin. Not all christians do that.

With that said..I think a business has a right to refuse service to anyone. They are paying the rent, the bills, the overhead. If they want to lose customers due to a sexual preference.....then that is on them. But to FORCE them to service people is kind of..well..unamerican. Isn't it?

Kevin appears to agree with you, he's just in this to mock the Christians apparently.

It was a reasonable question. I don't believe Kevin was trying to mock anyone.

I don't consider it reasonable in the least. I am not a Christian and I find the homosexual lifestyle to be a bad thing.
Why must everyone generalize. It's like claiming all racists are conservatives.

 

[Howey]

It's kind of a broad brush you got there Kevin. Not all christians do that.

With that said..I think a business has a right to refuse service to anyone. They are paying the rent, the bills, the overhead. If they want to lose customers due to a sexual preference.....then that is on them. But to FORCE them to service people is kind of..well..unamerican. Isn't it?

And if that bill allowed them to refuse service to women? You'd be ok with that too?

How about blacks? Shall we change the laws back and allow discrimination against them again?

 

[Katzndogz]

It's kind of a broad brush you got there Kevin. Not all christians do that.

With that said..I think a business has a right to refuse service to anyone. They are paying the rent, the bills, the overhead. If they want to lose customers due to a sexual preference.....then that is on them. But to FORCE them to service people is kind of..well..unamerican. Isn't it?

Look how Chick Fil A and Cracker Barrel was forced into ruin because of their position on same sex marriage.

 

[Sallow]

First you're making assumptions that it's not only Christians and once again you ignored my point about them refusing to service weddings, I haven't seen any evidence of other reasons.

Oh I get what you mean, but let me approach it this way..

Why don't we see cases of bakeries refusing to make a cake for someone who is getting married for the second or third time - for example? Wouldn't that be just as significant of a sin in God's eyes?

I just feel like some Christian individuals focus in a lot on the gay lifestyle (as sinful) while turning a blind eye (and even welcoming) other types of sinful lifestyles..

Homosexuality as well as Divorce are both favored agendas of the socio-fascist Liberal Mob - Both engineered toward the same ends. The destruction of anything held in higher esteem than Big Brother - The Family

Ridiculous.

 

[dblack]

Kevin appears to agree with you, he's just in this to mock the Christians apparently.

This just a guess, but I don't think that's what he's up to. I think he's mocking hateful homophobes dressed up as Christians. Most of my friends are Christians and many of them consider homosexuality to be a sin - like the other things Kevin is asking about. But they don't have a focused preoccupation with beating down the 'homosexual agenda'. They see it as a sin, but they recognize that most of the people engaging in it are no different than the rest of us. Sinful creatures doing our best to get by. They understand that most homosexuals, sinful though they may be, are just people trying to love each other. They're not abusing children, they're not spreading disease, they're not on a campaign to lay waste to western civilization.

The only "focus" I see on the gays is on the internet. Or on the propaganda liberals put on tv daily.

Well, there's definitely truth to that.

 

[Katzndogz]

No one has proposed any business be permitted to refuse to service gays who go into their business. The controversy is whether someone can be forced to participate in homosexual activities against their will.

Even the lowly pizza delivery man has refused to deliver pizzas to the door steps in black neighborhoods.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

It's kind of a broad brush you got there Kevin. Not all christians do that.

With that said..I think a business has a right to refuse service to anyone. They are paying the rent, the bills, the overhead. If they want to lose customers due to a sexual preference.....then that is on them. But to FORCE them to service people is kind of..well..unamerican. Isn't it?

Kevin appears to agree with you, he's just in this to mock the Christians apparently.

This just a guess, but I don't think that's what he's up to. I think he's mocking hateful homophobes dressed up as Christians. Most of my friends are Christians and many of them consider homosexuality to be a sin - like the other things Kevin is asking about. But they don't have a focused preoccupation with beating down the 'homosexual agenda'. They see it as a sin, but they recognize that most of the people engaging in it are no different than the rest of us. Sinful creatures doing our best to get by. They understand that most homosexuals, sinful though they may be, are just people trying to love each other. They're not abusing children, they're not spreading disease, they're not on a campaign to lay waste to western civilization.

I agree that is about right. I believe it is a sin but no different from any other sin. Sin is sin. It doesn't fall on a curve. I've never had any agenda towards homosexuals, never attended any protests, held up any signs, called any gay person a mean name. It's never been a focus for me and I didn't hear about the wedding cake story until much later. I think most christians fall into that category but the Westboro cult people are continually held up as some sort of mainstream christianity. ( by the media / hollywood ) Which isn't true.

 

[dblack]

No one has proposed any business be permitted to refuse to service gays who go into their business. The controversy is whether someone can be forced to participate in homosexual activities against their will.

Even the lowly pizza delivery man has refused to deliver pizzas to the door steps in black neighborhoods.

But that's as dubious claim as well. If you're saying that an employer can't fire an employee for refusing to cater to homosexual customers (by 'participating' in their celebration), then you're simply conceding to the common liberal point of view that claims an employer's demands amount to coercion and can be considered a violation of the employees 'rights' - which is nonsense. My reading of this bill would have it prosecuting employers who fired an employee for refusing to do their job for 'religious reasons'. Is that really where you want this to go?

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

No one has proposed any business be permitted to refuse to service gays who go into their business. The controversy is whether someone can be forced to participate in homosexual activities against their will.

Even the lowly pizza delivery man has refused to deliver pizzas to the door steps in black neighborhoods.

I thought it was about baking a cake. I must have missed the story.