Ignorant Homophobes fined $13,000 for refusing to host wedding

[80zephyr]

Can you show me where in the Constitution it states that?

Thanks.

Mark

The 14th Amendment. Everyone is treated equally under the law.

Also, when the business owner applies and receives a business license they agree to comply with all state and federal laws that govern business.

Then there's our equal rights and civil rights laws that say that if you do business with the public you must do it with ALL the public. A business owner can't pick and choose who they sell to.

Then there's also our discrimination laws. Specifically discrimination against a person's sex. That business owner denied those people their services because one of them is of the wrong sex according to the business owner. Which is very illegal according to our sexual discrimination laws.

Just suppose you live in a small town and there's only one place in town that performs wedding ceremonies. There isn't another place to get married within at least 100 miles. When you go there the owner of the establishment denies you that ceremony just because of our sex. Will you allow them to break the law and discriminate against you? Or will you do what real Americans do and stand up for your rights?

If the 14th states everyone has to be treated equally under the law, then forcing a conscientious person with religious convictions to serve for a gay wedding is NOT BEING TREATED EQUALLY UNDER THE LAW.

Do you understand that?

Also, when applying for a business license, it is illegal to take away a persons rights as a condition of doing business. So that argument is a non sequitur.

Mark

No. If all other businesses have to follow the law. So do you.

Since the 14th amendment says everyone must be treated equally under the law, then a person who says they're special and shouldn't have to follow the law is breaking the law and violating the 14th amendment.

When applying for a business license you must fill out and sign forms. In those forms the person who signs it is agreeing to follow all state and federal laws that govern business. If you don't want to sign away what you believe is your right to discriminate against people, then don't go into business in America.

Business licenses have been issued for decades. If it was a violation of the law to sign agreeing to follow the laws that govern business, then it wouldn't be included in the business license contract.

Anyone can sign away their rights. It's done all the time. Insurance companies are a very good example. When you sign that contract with an insurance company you agree to sign away your right to a trial by jury. You sign to agree to arbitration. That's signing away your rights and it's perfectly legal.

Agreeing to follow the law isn't violating anyone's rights. Following the law is expected from the citizens of our nation. If it wasn't, no business owner would be safe. There wouldn't be any police to protect their business from thieves and looters. It would also mean that we would have "whites only" signs still hanging in businesses across America.

You said this:

Since the 14th amendment says everyone must be treated equally under the law,

Denying a persons religious freedom is not equal treatment. No matter what you say. Logic dictates it.

Mark

Business isn't religion. No one is telling those business people they can't be religious. If they were a church they would be exempted but they're not a church and they can't expect to be special from everyone else and be allowed to violate the law.

What the business people are doing is a violation of the business license contract, violation of the 14th amendment and violation of our anti discrimination laws.

You can talk about religious freedom all you want. It won't make any difference. You're in the minority here and you're advocating violating laws and our constitution.

That business violated the law and they should expect to pay the consequences of their crime. It's a crime to violate the law.

I agree it is a crime to violate the law. Someone should pay damages to the shop owner for violating his right to freedom of religion.

You might be careful what you wish for.

Mark

 

[Seawytch]

Interracial marriage is still thought of as a sin for some people and back in 1967 it REALLY, REALLY was...and still we have protections in FEDERAL Public Accommodation laws that says you can't discriminate against THAT couple. Should racist bigots get your "religious exemption" from anti discrimination laws as well or just gays? It's a sin for women to speak in public...does that mean a business can discriminate against women unless they are silent?

That sin was based on poor interpretation of the Bible. The Bible is quite clear on homosexuality being sinful.

Your opinion on how they interpret the bible is irrelevant. They believed it just as you believe that being gay is sinful...and yet there are plenty of people that disagree with YOUR interpretation.

They would be wrong.

There are no rational people out there saying the Bible advocates or approves of a homosexual lifestyle. The Bible's view on race has had a preponderance of people saying it is either neutral on it, or supportive of equality or at least tolerance among the races. The justification of slavery/racism via the bible was an aberration among white southern baptists in response to the abolitionist position of slave-owning as sinful.

Islam is even more clear that racism is wrong, but even more clear that homosexuality is wrong as well.

Again, it doesn't matter what YOU think, they know they are just as right about it being a sin as you think you are. Do they get religious exemptions from PA laws too or just people that hate the gays?

Interracial marriage is still thought of as a sin for some people and back in 1967 it REALLY, REALLY was...and still we have protections in FEDERAL Public Accommodation laws that says you can't discriminate against THAT couple. Should racist bigots get your "religious exemption" from anti discrimination laws as well or just gays? It's a sin for women to speak in public...does that mean a business can discriminate against women unless they are silent?

That sin was based on poor interpretation of the Bible. The Bible is quite clear on homosexuality being sinful.

Your opinion on how they interpret the bible is irrelevant. They believed it just as you believe that being gay is sinful...and yet there are plenty of people that disagree with YOUR interpretation.

They would be wrong.

There are no rational people out there saying the Bible advocates or approves of a homosexual lifestyle. The Bible's view on race has had a preponderance of people saying it is either neutral on it, or supportive of equality or at least tolerance among the races. The justification of slavery/racism via the bible was an aberration among white southern baptists in response to the abolitionist position of slave-owning as sinful.

Islam is even more clear that racism is wrong, but even more clear that homosexuality is wrong as well.

Again, it doesn't matter what YOU think, they know they are just as right about it being a sin as you think you are. Do they get religious exemptions from PA laws too or just people that hate the gays?

What it does is prevents you from bringing up the whole racism thing as a valid argument. Racism is not condoned in the bible. Homosexuality is condemned in plain text.

Your fetishes for forcing people to accept you need some other basis, you can't keep using the one you are using without looking stupid.

It's valid even though it makes you uncomfortable. They have just as much biblical justification as you do.

 

[Seawytch]

Business isn't religion. No one is telling those business people they can't be religious. If they were a church they would be exempted but they're not a church and they can't expect to be special from everyone else and be allowed to violate the law.

What the business people are doing is a violation of the business license contract, violation of the 14th amendment and violation of our anti discrimination laws.

You can talk about religious freedom all you want. It won't make any difference. You're in the minority here and you're advocating violating laws and our constitution.

That business violated the law and they should expect to pay the consequences of their crime. It's a crime to violate the law.

The anti-discrimination laws you speak of do not include sexual orientation as an identified protected class. Legislation regarding the establishment of sexual orientation as a protected class is still pending in Congress.

.

The Supreme Court has already made the determination. (Romer)

 

[Pop23]

What silly notion gives you the idea I would try to convert homosexuals ... Convert them to what? I want people to desire earning respect from one another ... And to understand that requires more than demanding it.

.

How does a homosexual patron of a wedding chapel, photographer, florist, baker or any other businesses open to the public demand tolerance? They come to these merchants and vendors with money in their hands. They come as American citizens and taxpayers. They come as serving military personnel, as veterans. They come sober, mature, free.

What reason, what sane legal reason would anyone have to treat them differently from any other American citizen?

They do not want to be part of the enabling of the dilussional

Delusional? In your opinion, or are you saying homosexuality is, by its nature, delusional?

What studies can you cite backing up a claim of delusional? What defines 'delusional'? Is, in your opinion, homosexuality a mental condition? Where do the experts come down on that?

What studies?

Observing a group that denies reality requires no studies. Do you need studies to understand that no child has ever been born from a same sex coupling? Do you need a study to understand it takes opposing sex couplings to create human life?

If you need studies to show the obvious, you are either one of the delusional or looking for a reason for your enabling.

There are plenty of elderly couples who get married. They cannot produce human life. Are they delusional too?

Does your outlook on human sexuality begin and end with conception alone?

Having to compare yourself to the elderly or the disabled justifies what?

Answer: your delusion

 

[martybegan]

That sin was based on poor interpretation of the Bible. The Bible is quite clear on homosexuality being sinful.

Your opinion on how they interpret the bible is irrelevant. They believed it just as you believe that being gay is sinful...and yet there are plenty of people that disagree with YOUR interpretation.

They would be wrong.

There are no rational people out there saying the Bible advocates or approves of a homosexual lifestyle. The Bible's view on race has had a preponderance of people saying it is either neutral on it, or supportive of equality or at least tolerance among the races. The justification of slavery/racism via the bible was an aberration among white southern baptists in response to the abolitionist position of slave-owning as sinful.

Islam is even more clear that racism is wrong, but even more clear that homosexuality is wrong as well.

Again, it doesn't matter what YOU think, they know they are just as right about it being a sin as you think you are. Do they get religious exemptions from PA laws too or just people that hate the gays?

That sin was based on poor interpretation of the Bible. The Bible is quite clear on homosexuality being sinful.

Your opinion on how they interpret the bible is irrelevant. They believed it just as you believe that being gay is sinful...and yet there are plenty of people that disagree with YOUR interpretation.

They would be wrong.

There are no rational people out there saying the Bible advocates or approves of a homosexual lifestyle. The Bible's view on race has had a preponderance of people saying it is either neutral on it, or supportive of equality or at least tolerance among the races. The justification of slavery/racism via the bible was an aberration among white southern baptists in response to the abolitionist position of slave-owning as sinful.

Islam is even more clear that racism is wrong, but even more clear that homosexuality is wrong as well.

Again, it doesn't matter what YOU think, they know they are just as right about it being a sin as you think you are. Do they get religious exemptions from PA laws too or just people that hate the gays?

What it does is prevents you from bringing up the whole racism thing as a valid argument. Racism is not condoned in the bible. Homosexuality is condemned in plain text.

Your fetishes for forcing people to accept you need some other basis, you can't keep using the one you are using without looking stupid.

It's valid even though it makes you uncomfortable. They have just as much biblical justification as you do.

They have none, and have been repeatedly beaten down by decades of theological debate. They have as much of a right to say a blue book is orange as they do to say the bible condones racism, but it does not give them a valid argument.

 

[BlackSand]

Business isn't religion. No one is telling those business people they can't be religious. If they were a church they would be exempted but they're not a church and they can't expect to be special from everyone else and be allowed to violate the law.

What the business people are doing is a violation of the business license contract, violation of the 14th amendment and violation of our anti discrimination laws.

You can talk about religious freedom all you want. It won't make any difference. You're in the minority here and you're advocating violating laws and our constitution.

That business violated the law and they should expect to pay the consequences of their crime. It's a crime to violate the law.

The anti-discrimination laws you speak of do not include sexual orientation as an identified protected class. Legislation regarding the establishment of sexual orientation as a protected class is still pending in Congress.

.

The Supreme Court has already made the determination. (Romer)

SCOTUS - Romer v Evans is not legislation.

.

 

[Nosmo King]

How does a homosexual patron of a wedding chapel, photographer, florist, baker or any other businesses open to the public demand tolerance? They come to these merchants and vendors with money in their hands. They come as American citizens and taxpayers. They come as serving military personnel, as veterans. They come sober, mature, free.

What reason, what sane legal reason would anyone have to treat them differently from any other American citizen?

They do not want to be part of the enabling of the dilussional

Delusional? In your opinion, or are you saying homosexuality is, by its nature, delusional?

What studies can you cite backing up a claim of delusional? What defines 'delusional'? Is, in your opinion, homosexuality a mental condition? Where do the experts come down on that?

What studies?

Observing a group that denies reality requires no studies. Do you need studies to understand that no child has ever been born from a same sex coupling? Do you need a study to understand it takes opposing sex couplings to create human life?

If you need studies to show the obvious, you are either one of the delusional or looking for a reason for your enabling.

There are plenty of elderly couples who get married. They cannot produce human life. Are they delusional too?

Does your outlook on human sexuality begin and end with conception alone?

Having to compare yourself to the elderly or the disabled justifies what?

Answer: your delusion

I'm not Gay. I am an American citizen who cannot fathom using hate, fear and suspicion as motivation for discrimination in business.

 

[martybegan]

They do not want to be part of the enabling of the dilussional

Delusional? In your opinion, or are you saying homosexuality is, by its nature, delusional?

What studies can you cite backing up a claim of delusional? What defines 'delusional'? Is, in your opinion, homosexuality a mental condition? Where do the experts come down on that?

What studies?

Observing a group that denies reality requires no studies. Do you need studies to understand that no child has ever been born from a same sex coupling? Do you need a study to understand it takes opposing sex couplings to create human life?

If you need studies to show the obvious, you are either one of the delusional or looking for a reason for your enabling.

There are plenty of elderly couples who get married. They cannot produce human life. Are they delusional too?

Does your outlook on human sexuality begin and end with conception alone?

Having to compare yourself to the elderly or the disabled justifies what?

Answer: your delusion

I'm not Gay. I am an American citizen who cannot fathom using hate, fear and suspicion as motivation for discrimination in business.

and yet you can fathom using government to punish people for their beliefs, even in something as inconsequential and non essential as where to hold a wedding, who to bake a cake for, or who to shoot photographs for.

 

[Pop23]

They do not want to be part of the enabling of the dilussional

Delusional? In your opinion, or are you saying homosexuality is, by its nature, delusional?

What studies can you cite backing up a claim of delusional? What defines 'delusional'? Is, in your opinion, homosexuality a mental condition? Where do the experts come down on that?

What studies?

Observing a group that denies reality requires no studies. Do you need studies to understand that no child has ever been born from a same sex coupling? Do you need a study to understand it takes opposing sex couplings to create human life?

If you need studies to show the obvious, you are either one of the delusional or looking for a reason for your enabling.

There are plenty of elderly couples who get married. They cannot produce human life. Are they delusional too?

Does your outlook on human sexuality begin and end with conception alone?

Having to compare yourself to the elderly or the disabled justifies what?

Answer: your delusion

I'm not Gay. I am an American citizen who cannot fathom using hate, fear and suspicion as motivation for discrimination in business.

So you enable others delusions.

That's what they count on

So comparing them to the elderly and the disabled justifies your enabling

Bravo

 

[Dana7360]

We have laws against sexual discrimination. The civil rights act makes sexual discrimination illegal.

Homosexuals are being denied the marriage ceremony by some people because one person is of the wrong sex.

That's against our civil rights laws. It's also against the laws that makes sexual discrimination illegal.

I'm not homosexual but if I was and lived in an area that didn't include gays in the PA laws, I would still sue that business owner on the grounds of sexual discrimination and I would win. Since I'm a bitch and hate discrimination in any form, I would also have financially destroyed the business owner and the business. I would sue that business for as much money as I possibly could and made sure that the owner was so financially destroyed, they wouldn't be able to recover. I have no sympathy for people who believe they're special and laws don't apply to them.

Guess what? You have absolutely no legal leg to stand on.

None of the laws you stated identify sexual orientation as a protected class. If you would like proceed with measures to include sexual orientation and gender identification in legislation ... You need to contact your Representative in the House where legislation passed by the Senate is waiting approval.

.

Wow you can't be that obtuse can you?

In case you are I'll spell it out for you.

I said IF I lived in a place where PA laws didn't include sexual orientation I would use the already existing sexual discrimination laws.

The only reason why some people want to deny that ceremony to homosexuals is because one of them isn't the opposite sex of the other. If they were a couple of the opposite sex, they would get that marriage ceremony.

Ok sparky pay attention, here's the hard part, That's sexual discrimination. They're discriminating against the person because they aren't of the opposite sex. In a male homosexual couple, one of them isn't a woman. In a female homosexual couple, one isn't a man. That is discrimination based on sex. Which is sexual discrimination. We have many very clear laws that prevent sexual discrimination.

I talked about it with a state supreme court judge recently. He agreed with me. He was one of the judges who ruled that banning gay marriage is constitutional in my state. That was during the bush boy years. He has changed his mind about the whole thing and agrees that it's sexual discrimination and if the case came before him today, he would rule that it's sexual discrimination. That's from a judge on the Washington state supreme court.

The people of Washington state overruled that ruling and voted in 2012 to make homosexual marriage legal. It's been legal here since 2012. Notice, no judge did that, in fact the judges on our supreme court ruled it was constitutional. So the lie that judges are biased or making legislation from the bench to get homosexual marriage legal is nothing but a lie.

 

[BlackSand]

We have laws against sexual discrimination. The civil rights act makes sexual discrimination illegal.

Homosexuals are being denied the marriage ceremony by some people because one person is of the wrong sex.

That's against our civil rights laws. It's also against the laws that makes sexual discrimination illegal.

I'm not homosexual but if I was and lived in an area that didn't include gays in the PA laws, I would still sue that business owner on the grounds of sexual discrimination and I would win. Since I'm a bitch and hate discrimination in any form, I would also have financially destroyed the business owner and the business. I would sue that business for as much money as I possibly could and made sure that the owner was so financially destroyed, they wouldn't be able to recover. I have no sympathy for people who believe they're special and laws don't apply to them.

Guess what? You have absolutely no legal leg to stand on.

None of the laws you stated identify sexual orientation as a protected class. If you would like proceed with measures to include sexual orientation and gender identification in legislation ... You need to contact your Representative in the House where legislation passed by the Senate is waiting approval.

.

Wow you can't be that obtuse can you?

In case you are I'll spell it out for you.

I said IF I lived in a place where PA laws didn't include sexual orientation I would use the already existing sexual discrimination laws.

The only reason why some people want to deny that ceremony to homosexuals is because one of them isn't the opposite sex of the other. If they were a couple of the opposite sex, they would get that marriage ceremony.

Ok sparky pay attention, here's the hard part, That's sexual discrimination. They're discriminating against the person because they aren't of the opposite sex. In a male homosexual couple, one of them isn't a woman. In a female homosexual couple, one isn't a man. That is discrimination based on sex. Which is sexual discrimination. We have many very clear laws that prevent sexual discrimination.

I talked about it with a state supreme court judge recently. He agreed with me. He was one of the judges who ruled that banning gay marriage is constitutional in my state. That was during the bush boy years. He has changed his mind about the whole thing and agrees that it's sexual discrimination and if the case came before him today, he would rule that it's sexual discrimination. That's from a judge on the Washington state supreme court.

The people of Washington state overruled that ruling and voted in 2012 to make homosexual marriage legal. It's been legal here since 2012. Notice, no judge did that, in fact the judges on our supreme court ruled it was constitutional. So the lie that judges are biased or making legislation from the bench to get homosexual marriage legal is nothing but a lie.

I never argued that States could not approve same sex marriage ... The thread is not about whether or not same sex marriage is legal.

.

 

[Nosmo King]

Delusional? In your opinion, or are you saying homosexuality is, by its nature, delusional?

What studies can you cite backing up a claim of delusional? What defines 'delusional'? Is, in your opinion, homosexuality a mental condition? Where do the experts come down on that?

What studies?

Observing a group that denies reality requires no studies. Do you need studies to understand that no child has ever been born from a same sex coupling? Do you need a study to understand it takes opposing sex couplings to create human life?

If you need studies to show the obvious, you are either one of the delusional or looking for a reason for your enabling.

There are plenty of elderly couples who get married. They cannot produce human life. Are they delusional too?

Does your outlook on human sexuality begin and end with conception alone?

Having to compare yourself to the elderly or the disabled justifies what?

Answer: your delusion

I'm not Gay. I am an American citizen who cannot fathom using hate, fear and suspicion as motivation for discrimination in business.

and yet you can fathom using government to punish people for their beliefs, even in something as inconsequential and non essential as where to hold a wedding, who to bake a cake for, or who to shoot photographs for.

Religious beliefs is a smokescreen. No legitimate religion calls for discrimination as part of their dogma or doctrine. Wrapping homophobia in ecclesiastical robes is a pitiful way to go.

 

[BULLDOG]

NY Farm That Refused To Host Lesbian Wedding Fined $13,000

Liberty Ridge Farm's owners, citing constitutional rights to free speech and religious freedom, have appealed the August ruling by the Division of Human Rights that they violated state anti-discrimination law.

Their attorney said Robert and Cynthia Gifford paid the $10,000 state civil penalty and $1,500 each to Melisa and Jennie McCarthy, whose 2013 wedding they declined to host. The Giffords testified last year that in their Christian beliefs, marriage is between a man and a woman, and the ceremonies are held at their home, a private space where their own rights should be determinate.

Good!

We hurt them in the pocketbook and we shame them in the media.

There is a dark and twisted version of Christianity being practiced in the U.S. They throw love and tolerance over for fear and ignorance, clinging to one archaic hebrew tribal law.

I honestly believe you would have supported Hitler, no joke, I truly believe you are that limited when it comes to brain power.

I fully support gays getting married, I don't care... But I also support people not having to host or blah blah blah help gays. Just like Gays shouldn't have to dress heterosexuals or some other mindless bullshit.

You act as if you think they were required to invite them into their home for Thanksgiving dinner. They were not. Woolworths had your same belief back in 1960. We know how that turned out.

 

[Nosmo King]

Delusional? In your opinion, or are you saying homosexuality is, by its nature, delusional?

What studies can you cite backing up a claim of delusional? What defines 'delusional'? Is, in your opinion, homosexuality a mental condition? Where do the experts come down on that?

What studies?

Observing a group that denies reality requires no studies. Do you need studies to understand that no child has ever been born from a same sex coupling? Do you need a study to understand it takes opposing sex couplings to create human life?

If you need studies to show the obvious, you are either one of the delusional or looking for a reason for your enabling.

There are plenty of elderly couples who get married. They cannot produce human life. Are they delusional too?

Does your outlook on human sexuality begin and end with conception alone?

Having to compare yourself to the elderly or the disabled justifies what?

Answer: your delusion

I'm not Gay. I am an American citizen who cannot fathom using hate, fear and suspicion as motivation for discrimination in business.

So you enable others delusions.

That's what they count on

So comparing them to the elderly and the disabled justifies your enabling

Bravo

You really should answer the questions I posed earlier: What, in your expert and educated opinion constitutes delusion? Do you believe homosexuality is a mental condition? Where have the experts come down on that?

Otherwise, you are arguing 'delusion' as a personal opinion. And for my money, that opinion is you projecting your beliefs onto another group.

 

[Dana7360]

The more you do research into the actual text of the law ... Sexual orientation is an assumed protection not identified. There are existing laws that have been passed subsequently at the state level based on that simple assumption.

.

I don't like to assume what a law says. If I can assume something that is not stated, then any law becomes meaningless. At that point, "the law" becomes whatever you want it to be.

A dangerous concept, IMO.

Mark

I agree ... That is why I am surprised.

Reading the legislation like the Equal Rights Act and the Equal Employment Opportunity Act ... Sexual orientation is not identified in the text. We have been led to believe that sexual orientation identifies a protected class which isn't so according to the law at the Federal level.

Other legislative bodies have decided to include sexual orientation as a protected class without grounds in the previously existing law. The law at the Federal level that specifically identifies sexual orientation includes gender identification and hasn't even passed Congress yet.

Go Figure!

.

We have laws against sexual discrimination. The civil rights act makes sexual discrimination illegal.

Homosexuals are being denied the marriage ceremony by some people because one person is of the wrong sex.

That's against our civil rights laws. It's also against the laws that makes sexual discrimination illegal.

I'm not homosexual but if I was and lived in an area that didn't include gays in the PA laws, I would still sue that business owner on the grounds of sexual discrimination and I would win. Since I'm a bitch and hate discrimination in any form, I would also have financially destroyed the business owner and the business. I would sue that business for as much money as I possibly could and made sure that the owner was so financially destroyed, they wouldn't be able to recover. I have no sympathy for people who believe they're special and laws don't apply to them.

Guess what? You have absolutely no legal leg to stand on.

You said this:

Since I'm a bitch and hate discrimination in any form,

I wonder how you'd feel in the KKK and the American Nazi party wanted to book a party at your place?

Mark

I'm not in the business of parties so I would promptly tell them to go find a racist to host their party.

See how that works? Since I'm not not in the business of hosting parties, I get to tell them to bite me and it's perfectly legal.

Now if my business was parties I would let them have their party in my business. I won't break the law. I won't like having it in my establishment but I dislike breaking the law more.

Since those people are in the business of performing weddings, they can't legally discriminate against one portion of the population and deny only one group their services. They signed papers agreeing to not break business laws. If they're denying someone their services that they deliver to everyone else, they're discriminating and should accept all the consequences of their illegal actions.

 

[Dana7360]

Business isn't religion. No one is telling those business people they can't be religious. If they were a church they would be exempted but they're not a church and they can't expect to be special from everyone else and be allowed to violate the law.

What the business people are doing is a violation of the business license contract, violation of the 14th amendment and violation of our anti discrimination laws.

You can talk about religious freedom all you want. It won't make any difference. You're in the minority here and you're advocating violating laws and our constitution.

That business violated the law and they should expect to pay the consequences of their crime. It's a crime to violate the law.

The anti-discrimination laws you speak of do not include sexual orientation as an identified protected class. Legislation regarding the establishment of sexual orientation as a protected class is still pending in Congress.

.

Actually they do. I pointed it out to you earlier.

They're sexually discriminating against that couple. They're denying their services based on the customer's sex. Which is against the anti discrimination laws.

If the couple was of the opposite sex they would preform the ceremony. Since they're basing their discrimination on the basis of sex it's sexual discrimination.

You might want to take it up with one of the judges on the Washington state supreme court. He agrees with me and said if a case came before him today, he would rule in favor of the homosexual couple based on the fact that the business owner was sexually discriminating them.

 

[BlackSand]

Business isn't religion. No one is telling those business people they can't be religious. If they were a church they would be exempted but they're not a church and they can't expect to be special from everyone else and be allowed to violate the law.

What the business people are doing is a violation of the business license contract, violation of the 14th amendment and violation of our anti discrimination laws.

You can talk about religious freedom all you want. It won't make any difference. You're in the minority here and you're advocating violating laws and our constitution.

That business violated the law and they should expect to pay the consequences of their crime. It's a crime to violate the law.

The anti-discrimination laws you speak of do not include sexual orientation as an identified protected class. Legislation regarding the establishment of sexual orientation as a protected class is still pending in Congress.

.

Actually they do. I pointed it out to you earlier.

They're sexually discriminating against that couple. They're denying their services based on the customer's sex. Which is against the anti discrimination laws.

If the couple was of the opposite sex they would preform the ceremony. Since they're basing their discrimination on the basis of sex it's sexual discrimination.

You might want to take it up with one of the judges on the Washington state supreme court. He agrees with me and said if a case came before him today, he would rule in favor of the homosexual couple based on the fact that the business owner was sexually discriminating them.

That is in the context of same sex marriage and protects the couple from discrimination in regards to whether or not they can be married. It doesn't mean that the couple can violate the first amendment rights of the business owner.

Equal protection under the law would actually be equal ... I have no need to take it up with a judge in Washington attempting to legislate from the bench. I don't live in Washington, don't much care what they do there ... And support the ability of States to determine their own laws involving same sex marriage.

Just don't make the mistake of thinking a Washington State judge makes Federal policy.

.

 

[Dana7360]

The 14th Amendment. Everyone is treated equally under the law.

Also, when the business owner applies and receives a business license they agree to comply with all state and federal laws that govern business.

Then there's our equal rights and civil rights laws that say that if you do business with the public you must do it with ALL the public. A business owner can't pick and choose who they sell to.

Then there's also our discrimination laws. Specifically discrimination against a person's sex. That business owner denied those people their services because one of them is of the wrong sex according to the business owner. Which is very illegal according to our sexual discrimination laws.

Just suppose you live in a small town and there's only one place in town that performs wedding ceremonies. There isn't another place to get married within at least 100 miles. When you go there the owner of the establishment denies you that ceremony just because of our sex. Will you allow them to break the law and discriminate against you? Or will you do what real Americans do and stand up for your rights?

If the 14th states everyone has to be treated equally under the law, then forcing a conscientious person with religious convictions to serve for a gay wedding is NOT BEING TREATED EQUALLY UNDER THE LAW.

Do you understand that?

Also, when applying for a business license, it is illegal to take away a persons rights as a condition of doing business. So that argument is a non sequitur.

Mark

No. If all other businesses have to follow the law. So do you.

Since the 14th amendment says everyone must be treated equally under the law, then a person who says they're special and shouldn't have to follow the law is breaking the law and violating the 14th amendment.

When applying for a business license you must fill out and sign forms. In those forms the person who signs it is agreeing to follow all state and federal laws that govern business. If you don't want to sign away what you believe is your right to discriminate against people, then don't go into business in America.

Business licenses have been issued for decades. If it was a violation of the law to sign agreeing to follow the laws that govern business, then it wouldn't be included in the business license contract.

Anyone can sign away their rights. It's done all the time. Insurance companies are a very good example. When you sign that contract with an insurance company you agree to sign away your right to a trial by jury. You sign to agree to arbitration. That's signing away your rights and it's perfectly legal.

Agreeing to follow the law isn't violating anyone's rights. Following the law is expected from the citizens of our nation. If it wasn't, no business owner would be safe. There wouldn't be any police to protect their business from thieves and looters. It would also mean that we would have "whites only" signs still hanging in businesses across America.

You said this:

Since the 14th amendment says everyone must be treated equally under the law,

Denying a persons religious freedom is not equal treatment. No matter what you say. Logic dictates it.

Mark

Business isn't religion. No one is telling those business people they can't be religious. If they were a church they would be exempted but they're not a church and they can't expect to be special from everyone else and be allowed to violate the law.

What the business people are doing is a violation of the business license contract, violation of the 14th amendment and violation of our anti discrimination laws.

You can talk about religious freedom all you want. It won't make any difference. You're in the minority here and you're advocating violating laws and our constitution.

That business violated the law and they should expect to pay the consequences of their crime. It's a crime to violate the law.

I agree it is a crime to violate the law. Someone should pay damages to the shop owner for violating his right to freedom of religion.

You might be careful what you wish for.

Mark

This isn't a religious situation. It's a business situation. Those who are a church are exempted from those laws.

Since this isn't a church but a business that takes money from the public they must follow the laws. They aren't special from any other business that has to follow the law.

A business following the law isn't religious discrimination. The supreme court ruled that decades ago. Bigots tried that excuse back when the civil rights laws were passed and then again when interracial marriage was ruled constitutional. The supreme court ruled that if you're not a church, you have to follow the business laws of the nation and state.

 

[martybegan]

What studies?

Observing a group that denies reality requires no studies. Do you need studies to understand that no child has ever been born from a same sex coupling? Do you need a study to understand it takes opposing sex couplings to create human life?

If you need studies to show the obvious, you are either one of the delusional or looking for a reason for your enabling.

There are plenty of elderly couples who get married. They cannot produce human life. Are they delusional too?

Does your outlook on human sexuality begin and end with conception alone?

Having to compare yourself to the elderly or the disabled justifies what?

Answer: your delusion

I'm not Gay. I am an American citizen who cannot fathom using hate, fear and suspicion as motivation for discrimination in business.

and yet you can fathom using government to punish people for their beliefs, even in something as inconsequential and non essential as where to hold a wedding, who to bake a cake for, or who to shoot photographs for.

Religious beliefs is a smokescreen. No legitimate religion calls for discrimination as part of their dogma or doctrine. Wrapping homophobia in ecclesiastical robes is a pitiful way to go.

It does call certain activities a sin, and most say supporting a sin can be just as bad as acting on one. These are established belief structures that are protected by the US constitution. Protections you evidently don't like, and thus feel the need to squash by any means available.

How Fascist of you.

 

[Nosmo King]

There are plenty of elderly couples who get married. They cannot produce human life. Are they delusional too?

Does your outlook on human sexuality begin and end with conception alone?

Having to compare yourself to the elderly or the disabled justifies what?

Answer: your delusion

I'm not Gay. I am an American citizen who cannot fathom using hate, fear and suspicion as motivation for discrimination in business.

and yet you can fathom using government to punish people for their beliefs, even in something as inconsequential and non essential as where to hold a wedding, who to bake a cake for, or who to shoot photographs for.

Religious beliefs is a smokescreen. No legitimate religion calls for discrimination as part of their dogma or doctrine. Wrapping homophobia in ecclesiastical robes is a pitiful way to go.

It does call certain activities a sin, and most say supporting a sin can be just as bad as acting on one. These are established belief structures that are protected by the US constitution. Protections you evidently don't like, and thus feel the need to squash by any means available.

How Fascist of you.

The same warped Biblical quotations were used as cover for racists in the Jim Crow days.

Is this your paradigm of religious freedom?