Gay statists strike again...you will submit!!!!

[bodecea]

The government, and companies that do business with the government should be equal in all matters. People, especially people who provide services that are not necessities, and are contracted out should be able to refuse anyone they want to. The state is basically enforcing morality here, and its a morality that isn't agreed upon with an overriding majority.

The only resulting harm to the aggrieved parties is having to find another place to patronize and their feewings being injured. This isn't the South before the 60's where whole towns were divided, where separate was 100% unequal, and where government was enforcing the separation.

Let's use me as an example. I'm a private citizen, not a business owner of any sort. Two or three times every week I bake cookies and cupcakes for the apt community (we're a round building and facing inwards my unit and everyone else's feels very much like an enclosed micro-community with all the rec stuff on the interior like pool, tennis courts, etc.) I try to give em out to everyone who wants one, and have never said no if asked for one. But I don't offer them to everyone. Some people don't need any more cookies or cupcakes shall we say. But because I'm not selling them, nor operating a home-run business I can offer them or withhold them at will. I'd never say no though even to fat people (they know they're fat, it's their call.) But I"m fully within my rights to do so.

But if I ran a business, had a business license, was subject to health inspections and codes and laws, I'd expect to be fully under obligation to sell them to everyone regardless. If part of this business was a store I wouldn't be able to refuse service to people I didn't like if doing so violated their civil rights. As it is though, here in Missouri there are no equal rights for LGBT so presumedly I could. But if a state has such equality then you can't. Without looking I'm gonna assume New York state has such equality. So if you're running an actual business, your services or goods or accomodations must be available for everyone, simple as that. You want the tax breaks and all that goodies that goes with owening a legal business you gotta play by the state's rules.

No I do not, I am perfectly free to ignore the state laws, just like the people in Feguson who loot the stores.

That, dear idiot, is called free will.

Well, it won't be free when you get fined.

 

[bodecea]

It's funny how the liberals thinks it's okay for a bank to not do business with a gun dealer. The bank closed accounts, but a religious person cannot cannot choose the same type of a decision for their business. Can I say hypocrite?

I have a big problem with a bank closing an acct just because a business is a gun dealer. However, that being said.....banks have the freedom to not RENEW loans with businesses they feel are a financial risk....as long as they can document such.

 

[bodecea]

The petitioned the commission, and they are getting compensated, That's suing, and the use of semantics does nothing to hide that fact.

They got the State to sue FOR them, which is even worse.

Nope....they were fined for breaking a state law. The couple did not sue them....they reported them. Do you have a problem with someone reporting a law being broken?

They did not break a law, if they had the would have gone to criminal court. The were fined because there are unconstitutional regulations that are considered to be law by people who think that we should have a king instead of a president.

Then, it would be your civic duty to challenge the constitutionality of such laws, wouldn't it? Unless you'd rather just whine.

 

[bodecea]

Does anyone really think a homo bar would be forced to accommodate a private party for the Westboro Baptist church?

You do know that the law is on the side of the Westboro Baptist Church in that regard, right?

Do you understand that that is a perfect example of why the "law" is wrong?

Then...do something about it besides whining.

 

[bodecea]

Carrying this out to its logical conclusion, a gay man will be able to sue a straight male if they refuse to marry them. Stopping discrimination will be the justification.

I'd love to see the "logic" that led you to that "conclusion"...

As would I.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Does anyone really think a homo bar would be forced to accommodate a private party for the Westboro Baptist church?

They should give it a try.

 

[bodecea]

Does anyone really think a homo bar would be forced to accommodate a private party for the Westboro Baptist church?

They should give it a try.

I agree. The law will be on their side....just like the law is on the side of the lesbian couple in the OP case.

 

[jknowgood]

It's funny how the liberals thinks it's okay for a bank to not do business with a gun dealer. The bank closed accounts, but a religious person cannot cannot choose the same type of a decision for their business. Can I say hypocrite?

I have a big problem with a bank closing an acct just because a business is a gun dealer. However, that being said.....banks have the freedom to not RENEW loans with businesses they feel are a financial risk....as long as they can document such.

Yes, SunTrust closed several accounts i'm talking checking accounts, credit cards everything on several pawn shops. Some had been customers for years. In greenville and Spartanburg south Carolina.

 

[bodecea]

It's funny how the liberals thinks it's okay for a bank to not do business with a gun dealer. The bank closed accounts, but a religious person cannot cannot choose the same type of a decision for their business. Can I say hypocrite?

I have a big problem with a bank closing an acct just because a business is a gun dealer. However, that being said.....banks have the freedom to not RENEW loans with businesses they feel are a financial risk....as long as they can document such.

Yes, SunTrust closed several accounts i'm talking checking accounts, credit cards everything on several pawn shops. Some had been customers for years. In greenville and Spartanburg south Carolina.

If it is as simple as you say....the gun dealers should sue them or at least report them to the state. That being said...does South Carolina have a law such as the one in New York? If they don't, the gun dealers have no legal recourse.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It's funny how the liberals thinks it's okay for a bank to not do business with a gun dealer. The bank closed accounts, but a religious person cannot cannot choose the same type of a decision for their business. Can I say hypocrite?

You can say that you're ignorant and that your post fails as a false comparison fallacy.


'Gun dealers' don't constitute a class of persons entitled to protection in any state's public accommodations law. That's the fault of of the states, not 'liberals.' If you want gun dealers included along with Jews, Hispanics, and women as being entitled to public accommodations protection, petition your state government to include them.


Otherwise there's no 'hypocrisy' on the part of liberals to correctly understand that there are some classes of persons entitled to protections and some that are not. Indeed, many states prohibit discrimination in public accommodations based on race, religion, and gender but exclude sexual orientation, allowing businesses to deny services to gay Americans with impunity.


It all depends on how a given state's or jurisdiction's public accommodations laws are written, and in states such as Colorado and New York those laws afford protections to gay Americans.


But when a state's public accommodations law doesn't include gun dealers as a protected class of persons, and a bank refuses to provide them services, then gun dealers have no legal recourse, as the banks have violated no laws.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Just to make it clear: This was not a "private home", or "occasionally rented out for weddings".

It's a full-time business.

Here's the website: Fall fun on the farm! | Saratoga Fall Family Fun, Pumpkin Picking, Cornfield MazeSaratoga Fall Family Fun, Pumpkin Picking, Cornfield Maze | Saratoga Fall Family Fun, Pumpkin Picking, Cornfield Maze

Just to be clear, your link mentions barn weddings and tent weddings, not weddings in the private house, which is what the couple says they were denied.

No, the couple says they were denied the right to have the ceremony there at all.

The only mention of it being in a "house" was made by the woman to justify why she denied them.

And we al know that lesbians never lie.

The article clearly stated that they were only denied access to the house. They were actually offered the opportunity to have the reception on the grounds, but they preferred to complain because they did not get exactly what they wanted, just like everyone else that thinks the government exist to force their opinions on other people. their feelings were hurt.

 

[Bush92]

These statistics are so gay.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Wrong again. Even in New York state you can have a business that is not a public accommodation.

http://www.dhr.ny.gov/sites/default/files/doc/hrl.pdf

From your own link:

The term "place of public accommodation, resort or amusement" shall include, except as
hereinafter specified, all places included in the meaning of such terms as: inns, taverns, road
houses, hotels, motels, whether conducted for the entertainment of transient guests or for the
accommodation of those seeking health, recreation or rest, or restaurants, or eating houses, or
any place where food is sold for consumption on the premises; buffets, saloons, barrooms, or any store, park or enclosure where spirituous or malt liquors are sold; ice cream parlors,
confectionaries, soda fountains, and all stores where ice cream, ice and fruit preparations or their derivatives, or where beverages of any kind are retailed for consumption on the premises;
wholesale and retail stores and establishments dealing with goods or services of any kind,
dispensaries, clinics, hospitals, bath-houses, swimming pools, laundries and all other cleaning
establishments, barber shops, beauty parlors, theatres, motion picture houses, airdromes, roof
gardens, music halls, race courses, skating rinks, amusement and recreation parks, trailer camps, resort camps, fairs, bowling alleys, golf courses, gymnasiums, shooting galleries, billiard and pool parlors; garages, all public conveyances operated on land or water or in the air, as well as the stations and terminals thereof; travel or tour advisory services, agencies or bureaus; public
halls and public elevators of buildings and structures occupied by two or more tenants, or by the
owner and one or more tenants.

Does anything you just quoted contradict my claim that it is possible to run a business in New York without it being a public accommodation?

Didn't think so.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

From the hack partisan link in the OP:

This is outrageous. Just because there's an occasional weddiing (sic) ceremony performed in their house doesn't make it "public."

This is just one gigantic willful lie.

In reality, it is a business that has a web site prominently advertising their wedding business.

There are several Ceremony Sites nestled on the 100 acre grounds.

The partisan hack in the OP must have a different definition of "occasional" than the rest of us do. The hack also claimed these ceremonies are performed on the first floor of the house. Not so fast, dickweed. "There are several Ceremony Sites nestled on the 100 acre grounds."

Do you need help planning your wedding? We have taken the leg work out of the planning process. Let us relieve the stress of arranging your wedding day. Choose the venue, catering package and floral option, right here on the farm with one of our wedding coordinators

Wedding coordinators!


.

Are you talking about the website that repeatedly mentions barn and tent weddings, but never once mentions an indoor venue like the house?

You really should pay attention to details before you try to declare yourself the victor in an argument that you barely comprehend.

What magical quality does an advertised wedding business acquire if it is indoors, oh brilliant one?

And you seem to believe barns are not "indoor venues", even though the barn is plainly listed under their Indoor Wedding section. BWA-HA-HA-HA!

The claim was made that the wedding venue was public because it was advertised on the website, oh he who cannot read. As I pointed out, the website doesn't actually say anything about the house as a wedding venue.

But, please, feel free to declare victory based on your inability to follow a conversation.

Feel like an idiot yet?

 

[Jarlaxle]

Go right ahead!

I bet that wasn't the response you thought you would get.

Yup...and I'll add that Federal Law prohibits the atheist from refusing to serve (or bake the cake for or photograph the wedding of) the Christian.

Which is also evil.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Just to make it clear: This was not a "private home", or "occasionally rented out for weddings".

It's a full-time business.

Here's the website: Fall fun on the farm! | Saratoga Fall Family Fun, Pumpkin Picking, Cornfield MazeSaratoga Fall Family Fun, Pumpkin Picking, Cornfield Maze | Saratoga Fall Family Fun, Pumpkin Picking, Cornfield Maze

Just to be clear, your link mentions barn weddings and tent weddings, not weddings in the private house, which is what the couple says they were denied.

You really should go back and read the link in the OP again. The couple said nothing of the sort.

This is what the owner said:

When Jennifer McCarthy and Melisa Erwin asked the Giffords to use the facility for a 2012 wedding, Mrs. Gifford, a Christian, said she could only host their reception on the farm, but not the wedding. Weddings typically are conducted on the first floor of the Giffords’ home, and Mrs. Gifford argued the lesbian wedding would “literally hit too close to home,” RNS reported.

The owner is the one claiming that ceremonies are "typically" conducted on the first floor of their home (which their website seems to contradict).

Does that change the fact that you were wrong when you said that the website advertised the house as a wedding venue?

Didn't think so.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Are you talking about the website that repeatedly mentions barn and tent weddings, but never once mentions an indoor venue like the house?

You really should pay attention to details before you try to declare yourself the victor in an argument that you barely comprehend.

Irony!

The Giffords live in the barn. The same barn they advertise for indoor weddings.

You really should pay attention to details before you try to declare yourself the victor in an argument that you barely comprehend.

They live in the barn?

Why the fuck would they do that when their is a house on the property?

 

[Jarlaxle]

Yes, live and let live is not their motto...more gays who will not accept someone not accepting their lifestyle...and so those individuals will be punished...

Blog: NY Farm fined for refusing to host gay wedding

Excellent. Those bigots need to have their property repossessed to pay the fines they owe for the years worth of public indecency (urination, nudity, sexual activities, etc.) that occurred in the public space they reside in.

What the fuck are you talking about, exactly?

He/she/it has absolutely no idea...depends on which pills the orderlies hand out today.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Federal law does no such thing, but thanks for declaring your ignorance.

Of course it does, stop being silly.

Civil Rights Act of 1964: Public Accommodation

I don't see anything there that mentions bakeries, which rarely serve food to be eaten on the premises, as public accommodations, perhaps you should learn to read.

Another thought, never argue with someone that can actually read.

(b)Establishments affecting interstate commerce or supported in their activities by State action as places of public accommodation; lodgings; facilities principally engaged in selling food for consumption on the premises; gasoline stations; places of exhibition or entertainment; other covered establishments
Each of the following establishments which serves the public is a place of public accommodation within the meaning of this subchapter if its operations affect commerce, or if discrimination or segregation by it is supported by State action:
(1) any inn, hotel, motel, or other establishment which provides lodging to transient guests, other than an establishment located within a building which contains not more than five rooms for rent or hire and which is actually occupied by the proprietor of such establishment as his residence;
(2) any restaurant, cafeteria, lunchroom, lunch counter, soda fountain, or other facility principally engaged in selling food for consumption on the premises, including, but not limited to, any such facility located on the premises of any retail establishment; or any gasoline station;
(3) any motion picture house, theater, concert hall, sports arena, stadium or other place of exhibition or entertainment; and
(4) any establishment
(A)
(i) which is physically located within the premises of any establishment otherwise covered by this subsection, or
(ii) within the premises of which is physically located any such covered establishment, and
(B) which holds itself out as serving patrons of such covered establishment.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Tag Archive for "Liberty Ridge Farm" - Art Leonard Observations

The telephone conversation took place in September 2013, with Jennifer listening in on the conversation. Melissa and Gifford discussed renting the Gifford Barn at Liberty Ridge Farm (LRF) to hold a wedding between June and August 2013, and Gifford invited Melissa to visit to check out the facilities. When Melisa then referred to her fiancé as “she,” the tone of the conversation changed.

They wanted to have their wedding ceremony in the barn.

The barn.

The very same barn advertised for weddings. The very same barn they have multiple wedding photos for on their web site.

Got it now?

And we know that people never lie to make their case better, especially if they are lesbians, right?

If they asked for the barn why is it that the actual court decision was based on access to the house?