Should people have to perform/provide services for gay weddings?

[gallantwarrior]

It allows tyrannical, well funded minority potentates to establish bad law over the will of the people.

True. Prop 8 in Cali was passed by the will of the people. Then a judge with a social agenda, who just happened to disagree with the People, suborned the will of the People.

 

[koshergrl]

Bush/republican counterpoint to illustrate that tyrannical behavior exists on both ends of spectrum.

I dislike Obama equally (if not more) than Mr. Bush. Anyways, now you're getting way off topic, moving onwards.

No, you used Bush as an analogy to call him a tyrant. Please don't lie. This thread has nothing to do with Bush, so I suggest you get back on topic yourself, Kevin.

I admit I was off topic, but only because I responded to an already off topic post by Kosh (lol) - anyways.

.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Actual court cases prove you wrong.

Funny how you never posted them.

Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Uhh, that's not was I was referring to. She said "cases" so what others were there?

Secondly, lets say you own a business. Your money funds it. Should you be told how to operate your own business? According to the FOURTH AND FIFTH AMENDMENT no, you should not.

 

[TemplarKormac]

It allows tyrannical, well funded minority potentates to establish bad law over the will of the people.

True. Prop 8 in Cali was passed by the will of the people. Then a judge with a social agenda, who just happened to disagree with the People, suborned the will of the People.

That should never happen. Minorities should be protected not coddled by the courts.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Holding: Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment.

SCOTUSBlog

In other words, they could come up with no legal justification other than "We want to."

Deprivation of liberty means imprisonment or enslavement - it is an absurdity in justification of redefining marriage as quid pro quo for political support.

 

[Uncensored2008]

That's not the case at all. It is individuals refusing to provide a personal service.

If the service provider didn't want to provide a particular person a service, all he/she has to do is say "no, I will not provide you this service". That's totally within their rights under law.

Case closed.

What's the argument here?

What the SCOTUS has made clear is that we have no rights and the law is only what pleases them at any given moment.

 

[Katzndogz]

It allows tyrannical, well funded minority potentates to establish bad law over the will of the people.

True. Prop 8 in Cali was passed by the will of the people. Then a judge with a social agenda, who just happened to disagree with the People, suborned the will of the People.

To be precise. A gay judge that disagreed with the Will of the people.

 

[Seawytch]

Your cases are founded on public accommodation.

The gay is not a protected class either.

In some states they are. What do churches have to do with anything?

Lets see........ what would a church have to do with a wedding and what group would most likely be attempted to be forced to perform a service contrary to their religious beliefs ?

So you can cite a case where a church was successfully sued and forced to marry an interracial or interfaith couple?

 

[Seawytch]

It allows tyrannical, well funded minority potentates to establish bad law over the will of the people.

True. Prop 8 in Cali was passed by the will of the people. Then a judge with a social agenda, who just happened to disagree with the People, suborned the will of the People.

To be precise. A gay judge that disagreed with the Will of the people.

He wasn't the first to rule thusly on Prop 8...just the last.

 

[Seawytch]

Holding: Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment.

SCOTUSBlog

In other words, they could come up with no legal justification other than "We want to."

Deprivation of liberty means imprisonment or enslavement - it is an absurdity in justification of redefining marriage as quid pro quo for political support.

In other words you should actually read Justice Kennedy's ruling.

 

[Seawytch]

Funny how you never posted them.

Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Uhh, that's not was I was referring to. She said "cases" so what others were there?

Secondly, lets say you own a business. Your money funds it. Should you be told how to operate your own business? According to the FOURTH AND FIFTH AMENDMENT no, you should not.

And I provided them within the link.

 

[JoeB131]

Yup. They have the right to refuse service to anyone.

No, actually they don't.

The Right to Refuse Service: Can a Business Refuse Service to Someone Because of Appearance, Odor or Attitude?

I've told customers that I will no longer serve them.

As I should be able to.

It is my business after all.

I can refuse new customers if I want as well.

I don't need a reason.

You are lucky that none of them have sued you yet.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Uhh, that's not was I was referring to. She said "cases" so what others were there?

Secondly, lets say you own a business. Your money funds it. Should you be told how to operate your own business? According to the FOURTH AND FIFTH AMENDMENT no, you should not.

And I provided them within the link.

What link?

 

[JoeB131]

It's okay to refuse to perform services, just make sure your refusal is politically correct.

3-year-old Hitler can't get name on cake - US news - Weird news | NBC News

Is there any reason why one bakery is allowed to make a decision as to what kind of cake they will bake and another bakery denied that right?

In this case, the DCFS was so concerned about these nuts they pulled the kids out of the home.

 

[koshergrl]

Uhh, that's not was I was referring to. She said "cases" so what others were there?

Secondly, lets say you own a business. Your money funds it. Should you be told how to operate your own business? According to the FOURTH AND FIFTH AMENDMENT no, you should not.

And I provided them within the link.

What link?

Exactly. Meet the witch. That's how she rolls.

 

[koshergrl]

Everybody who wants to listen to joeb talk about kids raise your hand.

 

[JoeB131]

Everybody who wants to listen to joeb talk about kids raise your hand.

So you think it's appropriate for children to be raised by crazy white supremicists?

Please take the bait. Please take the bait.

 

[koshergrl]

Everybody who wants to hear joeb talk about kids, raise you hand.

Ok joe, we voted. Now return to the abortion threads where your comments about "medical waste" aka "full term babies" doesn't make everybody puke on the spot.

As a person of the baby killing brigade, your statements about what constitutes acceptable child rearing will be dismissed by all...so really, why waste your breath, and the earth's resources, by voicing your views on this topic at all?

 

[candycorn]

]On Face the Nation this morning Bob Schieffer was surprised to hear that people such as bakers and photographers are facing fines and possibly jail time for not providing their services to gay weddings. Whatever you feel about whether people should be forced to facilitate something they are religiously opposed to, it says a lot about the media coverage that Schieffer didn't even know about it.

Do you feel people who are religiously opposed to gay marriage should have to cater to gay weddings

Absolutely not

Obama said he won't make churches perform gay weddings. So, if we believe him, that one little corner of culture might not be forced to change. But everything else is fair game, isn't it.

Public schools will be actively attempting to make children view gay marriage as normal. Adoption agencies will be penalized for not arranging for children to be placed with gay couples. And bakers could lose thousands of dollars or go to jail if they refuse to put two plastic men on top of a wedding cake.

Heterosexuals have no room to talk about normalcy since its a coin flip chance that the kid will end up being raised by one parent ina traditional household.

Nobody should be forced to work an event they do not wish to work.

Gays picketing your business however is probably going to drive you out of business though so it is likely a moot point.

 

[koshergrl]

Not in my town it won't.