If Gays Are Allowed to Target and Discriminate Against Christian Businesses. . . .

[Seawytch]

You don't have to worry about losing your ability to think. You are a right winger, after all, and you can't lose what you don't have.

First of all, I'm not a right winger, I've never publically stated my political allegiance, if anything, I'd say I'm more of a constitutionalist, as I believe there are inherent flaws in both parties. However, all of that is gone, you have reformed me, and I thank you for your generosity in showing me how my thinking was flawed. I have turned full circle and am now a proud member of the democratic party, and I think we should destroy individuality. We should all live in harmony and joy and be one with each other.

Let's stop all of this partisan bickering and see that, in order to reach true happiness, we must all come together on the same page, and we must all support the right of individuals to marry whomever they want, and that, for everyone to be equal, there.must be no person who makes more money than anyone else. We must strive for unity and equilibrium.

Again, thank you for your kindness and insight!



Clinton 2020!

If that's how you truly feel, you will never make it as a liberal. Since you are no longer a right winger, you should find out what liberals are really all about. What you were told as a RWNJ is nowhere near accurate.

Well, no, I listen to a lot of talk radio, both on the right and left side of the spectrum. I'd say my assessment that those on the right are evil and want to destroy the country is pretty spot on, according to all of the liberal talk radio I've listened to.

What I've learned, in my recent transformation is that, all of the problems in this country really stem from individuality. As long as we have people allowed to do their own thing, have their own dreams, desires, and goals, it will inherently intrude on the dreams and goals of others. Free will, left unchecked, will ultimately tear this country apart. You can see it in the discussions on this very forum. The ability for people to have their own thoughts and opinions will ultimately only lead to dissention and division.

If we could find a way to make people think the same, harmony will be achieved, and then we shall finally have peace.

As long as we have differing opinions, we will always argue, and we will never come together.

Clinton 2020!

Again, you're expecting the imagenary librul that the right has made up to scare right wing children. Since you claim to be a new liberal, you should at least make an effort to determine reality instead of hanging to the lies you listened to for so long. Otherwise, you're still just a dumb RWNJ who is confused.

Lol, listen, the left peddles as many lies as the right, neither side is immune to that. All I want is for people to live their lives as free from government meddling as possible.

I'm small government minded, because I think government has gotten too big and has intruded into too many areas of our lives.

How about we do what the constitution says? Government at the federal level can do what the constitution says it can do, then anything else rests with the states.

Okay. The Supreme Court has already weighed in on the constitutionality of public accommodation laws. They found them to be constitutional on numerous occasions. Segregationist even tried the "religious freedom" angle. It didn't fly.

 

[BULLDOG]

You don't have to worry about losing your ability to think. You are a right winger, after all, and you can't lose what you don't have.

First of all, I'm not a right winger, I've never publically stated my political allegiance, if anything, I'd say I'm more of a constitutionalist, as I believe there are inherent flaws in both parties. However, all of that is gone, you have reformed me, and I thank you for your generosity in showing me how my thinking was flawed. I have turned full circle and am now a proud member of the democratic party, and I think we should destroy individuality. We should all live in harmony and joy and be one with each other.

Let's stop all of this partisan bickering and see that, in order to reach true happiness, we must all come together on the same page, and we must all support the right of individuals to marry whomever they want, and that, for everyone to be equal, there.must be no person who makes more money than anyone else. We must strive for unity and equilibrium.

Again, thank you for your kindness and insight!



Clinton 2020!

If that's how you truly feel, you will never make it as a liberal. Since you are no longer a right winger, you should find out what liberals are really all about. What you were told as a RWNJ is nowhere near accurate.

Well, no, I listen to a lot of talk radio, both on the right and left side of the spectrum. I'd say my assessment that those on the right are evil and want to destroy the country is pretty spot on, according to all of the liberal talk radio I've listened to.

What I've learned, in my recent transformation is that, all of the problems in this country really stem from individuality. As long as we have people allowed to do their own thing, have their own dreams, desires, and goals, it will inherently intrude on the dreams and goals of others. Free will, left unchecked, will ultimately tear this country apart. You can see it in the discussions on this very forum. The ability for people to have their own thoughts and opinions will ultimately only lead to dissention and division.

If we could find a way to make people think the same, harmony will be achieved, and then we shall finally have peace.

As long as we have differing opinions, we will always argue, and we will never come together.

Clinton 2020!

Again, you're expecting the imagenary librul that the right has made up to scare right wing children. Since you claim to be a new liberal, you should at least make an effort to determine reality instead of hanging to the lies you listened to for so long. Otherwise, you're still just a dumb RWNJ who is confused.

Lol, listen, the left peddles as many lies as the right, neither side is immune to that. All I want is for people to live their lives as free from government meddling as possible.

I'm small government minded, because I think government has gotten too big and has intruded into too many areas of our lives.

How about we do what the constitution says? Government at the federal level can do what the constitution says it can do, then anything else rests with the states.

So you condemn the government interfering with a woman's choices aboout her own body, and all the massive tax giveaways for the rich at the expense of the poor. Good for you.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Notice that according to liberals, it's not enough that in both of the cases under discussion, the Christian vendors were willing to provide all but one of their services to gays. So, shall we sue doctors who will perform any operation they're licensed to perform except an abortion? Shall we sue photographers who will not service nudist parties? Shall we sue Orthodox Jewish or Muslim photographers who won't take pictures of children in swimsuits or ballet suits? Shall we sue gay printers who won't print advertisements for seminars on the health risks of homosexuality or on the superiority of traditional marriage over gay marriage?

I mean, after all, if "all or nothing" is good enough for gays, why not for others?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Notice that according to liberals, it's not enough that in both of the cases under discussion, the Christian vendors were willing to provide all but one of their services to gays

Irrelevant . It is still discrimination

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

So, shall we sue doctors who will perform any operation they're licensed to perform except an abortion?

Doctors are obligated to provide all services that they are trained to provide. If they don't, they should, at minimum be disciplined by the medical board. And, if any harm is caused by their inaction, they damned sure should be sued, not for discrimination, but for negligence and malpractice

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Shall we sue photographers who will not service nudist parties?

Nudist parties do not allow photographers Believe me I know. But to answer your question, no, there is no law establishing nudists as a protected class. See the difference.?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Shall we sue Orthodox Jewish or Muslim photographers who won't take pictures of children in swimsuits or ballet suits?

No dummy, that is a false equivalency logical fallacy. Children in costumes are not covered by laws against discrimination.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Notice that according to liberals, it's not enough that in both of the cases under discussion, the Christian vendors were willing to provide all but one of their services to gays

Irrelevant . It is still discrimination

How? How is it "discrimination" when you are only asking for the service because you want to sue the vendor for denying it, and when you can easily and quickly obtain that service elsewhere?

So if a nudist couple wants an Amish painter to do a nude portrait of them, is it "discrimination" for the Amish painter to decline their patronage?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Shall we sue gay printers who won't print advertisements for seminars on the health risks of homosexuality or on the superiority of traditional marriage over gay marriage?

No. Bigots who spread anti gay horseshit are not protected either. Get over yourself

 

[mikegriffith1]

So, shall we sue doctors who will perform any operation they're licensed to perform except an abortion?

Doctors are obligated to provide all services that they are trained to provide. If they don't, they should, at minimum be disciplined by the medical board. And, if any harm is caused by their inaction, they damned sure should be sued, not for discrimination, but for negligence and malpractice

You would have made a great Nazi. What if we're talking about ELECTIVE surgery, i.e., surgery that is not needed for the health of the patient, such as elective abortion?

In your world, when someone goes into any kind of business, they forfeit their First Amendment right of freedom of religion if that right conflicts with the *desires* of any gay person.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

How? How is it "discrimination" when you are only asking for the service because you want to sue the vendor for denying it, and when you can easily and quickly obtain that service elsewhere?

I have been all through this horseshit with people like you too many times. How the fuck do you know that they can "easily and quickly obtain that service elsewhere?" It depends on geography . Maybe there is only one bakery that is conveniently located

But that is beside the point. The fact is that even if there was another baker next door, they were still inconvenienced, and possible humiliated and embarrassed. They are receiving UNEQUAL TREATMENT and that is DISCRIMINATION. And you assertion that they just want to sue is ignorant and bigoted bovine excrement

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

So if a nudist couple wants an Amish painter to do a nude portrait of them, is it "discrimination" for the Amish painter to decline their patronage?

Oh Christ, not that horseshit again!

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You would have made a great Nazi. What if we're talking about ELECTIVE surgery, i.e., surgery that is not needed for the health of the patient, such as elective abortion?

That is not a realistic scenario. Women who get elective abortions go to clinics where there are doctors will to perform them

Now that you have called me a Nazi you officially loose the argment

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

In your world, when someone goes into any kind of business, they forfeit their First Amendment right of freedom of religion if that right conflicts with the *desires* of any gay person

IN my world people like you have a twisted view of what freedom of religion is.

 

[mikegriffith1]

How? How is it "discrimination" when you are only asking for the service because you want to sue the vendor for denying it, and when you can easily and quickly obtain that service elsewhere?

I have been all through this horseshit with people like you too many times. How the fuck do you know that they can "easily and quickly obtain that service elsewhere?" It depends on geography . Maybe there is only one bakery that is conveniently located

But that is beside the point. The fact is that even if there was another baker next door, they were still inconvenienced, and possible humiliated and embarrassed. They are receiving UNEQUAL TREATMENT and that is DISCRIMINATION. And you assertion that they just want to sue is ignorant and bigoted bovine excrement

"UNEQUAL TREATMENT"? You mean like gay couples driving many miles from their own cities and towns to target Christian vendors for lawsuits? You keep ignoring the targeting aspect. Targeting one group of bakers because of their religious beliefs is not only discrimination but also bigoted and hateful.

It is laughable for you to suggest that any of these cases have involved a town where there was only one baker. FYI, in the two cases in question, the gay couples had plenty of other options but still chose to sue after being politely declined and even after the Christian vendor offered any other service and, in one case, even offered to provide flowers for the wedding.

By your fascist definition of "discrimination," gay videographers could be sued for refusing to video-tape a Christian seminar or service, a Muslim or Orthodox Jewish photographer could be sued for refusing to take pictures of young girls in bikinis and ballet outfits, a doctor could be sued for declining to perform an elective abortion (i.e., an abortion not done for health reasons and not done in the aftermath of rape or incest, but purely for the mother's and/or the father's convenience), gun shops could be sued for refusing to sell guns to anyone under the age of 25 (even if they sincerely believed that selling guns to people under 25 was dangerous), painters could be sued for refusing to do paint a nude portrait, towns could be sued for refusing to allow porn peddlers to open a porn shop or for refusing to issue business permits for prostitution establishments, Muslim florists could be used for refusing to bring flowers to a swinger party. Of course, you dismiss all such points because you don't like their implications.

My version of religious freedom is that no religious vendor is forced to do something that violates their religious beliefs as long as the customer has reasonably available alternatives and as long as the requested service does not involve the basic needs of food, health, and lodging. A gay wedding cake does not even remotely qualify as a "need" of any kind, much less a basic need.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

UNEQUAL TREATMENT"? You mean like gay couples driving many miles from their own cities and towns to target Christian vendors for lawsuits? You keep ignoring the targeting aspect. Targeting one group of bakers because of their religious beliefs is not only discrimination but also bigoted and hateful.

NO You and others keep manufacturing this alleged targeting. Bigoted , bullshit!

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

It is laughable for you to suggest that any of these cases have involved a town where there was only one baker. FYI, in the two cases in question, the gay couples had plenty of other options but still chose to sue after being politely declined and even after the Christian vendor offered any other service and, in one case, even offered to provide flowers for the wedding.

Irrelevant horseshit and I explained why. The fact that you can't understand or accept my reasoning is not my problem

 

[Doc1]

You would have made a great Nazi. What if we're talking about ELECTIVE surgery, i.e., surgery that is not needed for the health of the patient, such as elective abortion?

That is not a realistic scenario. Women who get elective abortions go to clinics where there are doctors will to perform them

Now that you have called me a Nazi you officially loose the argment

You meant "lose", right?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

By your fascist definition of "discrimination," gay videographers could be sued for refusing to video-tape a Christian seminar or service,

Possibly. It could be construed as religious discrimination but here is the thing. Gay folks would have no reason to refuse such a job . I keep telling you jackasses that it is not a matter of gays vs., Christians but you just don't fucking get it.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

a Muslim or Orthodox Jewish photographer could be sued for refusing to take pictures of young girls in bikinis and ballet outfits, a doctor could be sued for declining to perform an elective abortion (i.e., an abortion not done for health reasons and not done in the aftermath of rape or incest, but purely for the mother's and/or the father's convenience),

I have addressed those scenarios already. Do you have a reading comprehension problem?