Federal appeals court rules religious businesses can refuse same-sex weddings

[dblack]

Being a libertarian is a privilege for only those in the majority.

You're thinking of democracy.

 

[danielpalos]

What government control? Saying that your business has to ...

... is government control

selling is what engenders profit.

 

[danielpalos]

it has to be about the money on a for-profit basis.

if capitalists feel strongly about morals, they should only trade on not-for-profit basis, to ensure the moral high ground.

 

[dblack]

What government control? Saying that your business has to ...

... is government control

selling is what engenders profit.

Piss off, troll.

 

[HappyJoy]

What government control? Saying that your business has to ...

... is government control

No, that's not government control. You still call the shots there are just some laws and regulations like in any other country worth it's shit that you have to follow.

Give me an example of a libertarian paradise where things run like you want them to.

 

[hjmick]

The homos keep losing when their demands hit federal courts.

They always kept losing in referendums too. Even here in Communist California, Proposition 8 to eliminate the right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry, was a statewide ballot proposition in California. In 2008 it won!! California voted against homo marriage. The courts immediately overturned it.

Homo marriage ONLY exists because of corrupt courts.

They used to say that about interacial marriage.

Consider the source...

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Since I have been mentioned...here is my view.

Any and all anti-discrimination laws applied to anyone but the government itself are unconstitutional. The Constitution tells the government they cannot discriminate, it does not tell me and you we cannot.

Furthermore, the very concept of a "protected class" violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution as protected classes have more protections, thus it is not equal.

I understand why we had them, but I do believe if they were removed today that the marketplace would weed out those that wanted to discriminate against any group.

 

[dblack]

What government control? Saying that your business has to ...

... is government control

No, that's not government control. You still call the shots there are just some laws and regulations like in any other country worth it's shit that you have to follow.

Ok, so it's not TOTAL government control, You got me there. So what? Can you give an example of total government control? Isn't this just an excuse that would make ANY level of government intrusion OK in your book?

 

[danielpalos]

Public Accommodation is a privilege not a right.

 

[deanrd]

It’s funny that some right wingers right here on the USMB said that we no longer hate gay people. That’s a thing of the past. You got to quit saying we hate gay people because we don’t think that way anymore.

Saying Republicans don’t hate gay people is like saying Republicans aren’t racist.

 

[Bush92]

It’s funny that some right wingers right here on the USMB said that we no longer hate gay people. That’s a thing of the past. You got to quit saying we hate gay people because we don’t think that way anymore.

Saying Republicans don’t hate gay people is like saying Republicans aren’t racist.

Republicans don’t hate gay people and are not racist. Keep your homosexuality to the privacy of the boudoir and political correctness results in reverse racism such as the concept of “white privilege.”

 

[HappyJoy]

What government control? Saying that your business has to ...

... is government control

No, that's not government control. You still call the shots there are just some laws and regulations like in any other country worth it's shit that you have to follow.

Ok, so it's not TOTAL government control, You got me there. So what? Can you give an example of total government control?

USSR and North Korea to name two.

Isn't this just an excuse that would make ANY level of government intrusion OK in your book?

No.

Now, where is this libertarian utopia that you guys speak of where government has a hands off approach and the markets act morally? Please, tell me.

 

[danielpalos]

Since I have been mentioned...here is my view.

Any and all anti-discrimination laws applied to anyone but the government itself are unconstitutional. The Constitution tells the government they cannot discriminate, it does not tell me and you we cannot.

Furthermore, the very concept of a "protected class" violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution as protected classes have more protections, thus it is not equal.

I understand why we had them, but I do believe if they were removed today that the marketplace would weed out those that wanted to discriminate against any group.

more consistent application of the law is simpler. why is the subjective value of morals a consideration over Profit, under Capitalism?

 

[Bush92]

If you own a business you have the right to refuse service to who ever you want. You’re $$$ and investment. As a customer if you don’t like the owners attitude toward you then don’t frequent the establishment. This is NOT a civil rights issue for gays or anyone else. It’s very simple...common sense and liberty should take precedent over nanny state.

 

[HappyJoy]

Since I have been mentioned...here is my view.

Any and all anti-discrimination laws applied to anyone but the government itself are unconstitutional. The Constitution tells the government they cannot discriminate, it does not tell me and you we cannot.

Considering the courts who are responsible for interpreting our laws and ensuring their Constitutionality by the Constitution disagree with you...

Furthermore, the very concept of a "protected class" violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution as protected classes have more protections, thus it is not equal.

Says which court?

I understand why we had them, but I do believe if they were removed today that the marketplace would weed out those that wanted to discriminate against any group.

Beliefs are nice.

Study: anti-black hiring discrimination is as prevalent today as it was in 1989

A new study, by researchers at Northwestern University, Harvard, and the Institute for Social Research in Norway, looked at every available field experiment on hiring discrimination from 1989 through 2015. The researchers found that anti-black racism in hiring is unchanged since at least 1989, while anti-Latino racism may have decreased modestly.

They looked at two kinds of experiments: résumé and in-person audits. In the first, researchers send out résumés with similar levels of education, experience, and so on, but the names differ so some résumés have a stereotypically black or Latino name and the others have a stereotypically white name. In the second, applicants go in-person to apply for a job; they each share similar qualifications, but some are white while others are black or brown.

In total, the researchers produced 24 studies with 30 estimates of discrimination for black and Latino Americans, collectively representing more than 54,000 applications submitted for more than 25,000 positions.

They concluded that, on average, “white applicants receive 36% more callbacks than equally qualified African Americans” while “[w]hite applicants receive on average 24% more callbacks than Latinos.”

They also found no evidence of changes over time in rates of hiring discrimination for black people, with anything but the slight possibility of “a slow decline” ruled out by the studies. With Latinos, the evidence indicates “a possible decline in discrimination, although this trend is outside of conventional levels of significance” — meaning the data isn’t statistically significant enough to draw a solid conclusion.

 

[dblack]

What government control? Saying that your business has to ...

... is government control

No, that's not government control. You still call the shots there are just some laws and regulations like in any other country worth it's shit that you have to follow.

Ok, so it's not TOTAL government control, You got me there. So what? Can you give an example of total government control?

USSR and North Korea to name two.

I'm sure people have/had some freedom, even in those cases. Government can't be everywhere all the time. But I'm hoping you can appreciate the point. If it suits you, call it "intervention" rather than control. That sounds nicer. Regardless of equivocating on terminology, it's the same shit. It's unnecessarily intrusive and shouldn't be allowed.

 

[danielpalos]

It’s funny that some right wingers right here on the USMB said that we no longer hate gay people. That’s a thing of the past. You got to quit saying we hate gay people because we don’t think that way anymore.

Saying Republicans don’t hate gay people is like saying Republicans aren’t racist.

Republicans don’t hate gay people and are not racist. Keep your homosexuality to the privacy of the boudoir and political correctness results in reverse racism such as the concept of “white privilege.”

keep your hypocrisy confined to the privacy of your own homes, right wingers.

 

[HappyJoy]

What government control? Saying that your business has to ...

... is government control

No, that's not government control. You still call the shots there are just some laws and regulations like in any other country worth it's shit that you have to follow.

Ok, so it's not TOTAL government control, You got me there. So what? Can you give an example of total government control?

USSR and North Korea to name two.

I'm sure people have/had some freedom, even in those cases. Government can't be everywhere all the time. But I'm hoping you can appreciate the point. If it suits you, call it "intervention" rather than control. That sounds nicer. Regardless of equivocating on terminology, it's the same shit. It's unnecessarily intrusive and shouldn't be allowed.

You can get caught up in semantics, I'm putting forth the segregated south that kept millions of people in poverty with fewer rights due to "the markets" will. Only the majority can afford to live in a libertarian style government.

Again, for the third time. Show me an example of a libertarian country that works. I don't think it exists or ever will until the population is just a molten blob grey sameness.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Considering the courts who are responsible for interpreting our laws and ensuring their Constitutionality by the Constitution disagree with you...

This is true. it is my opinion they ruled that way more out of practicality than actual following of our Constitution.

Says which court?.

None of course, but it is common sense. Logically speaking, more protection cannot be equal protection.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You can get caught up in semantics, I'm putting forth the segregated south that kept millions of people in poverty with fewer rights due to "the markets" will.

Times have changed.

Only the majority can afford to live in a libertarian style government.

There is no majority in a libertarian style government, only the individual.

Again, for the third time. Show me an example of a libertarian country that works. I don't think it exists or ever will until the population is just a molten blob grey sameness.

There is none, somewhat for the same reason there is not a purely Socialistic country that works, human nature gets in the way