The myth of discrimination against “gays” and lesbians

[DGS49]

The manufactured brouhaha about the new “religious freedom” law in Indiana illustrates the hysteria of the Gay Mafia and the inexplicable willingness of our craven mainstream media to accommodate their ridiculous whims.


The new Indiana law allows businesses to decline to sell products or to perform objectionable services for potential clients and customers, if the objection is based on legitimate religious beliefs. The is intended to address various rare situations where, for example, a religious-affiliated event venue might turn down a request for rental for a bachelor party where porn films are going to be shown.


But of course, the hysteria concerns the possibility that merchants might use this law as an excuse to discriminate against “gay,” lesbian, bi-sexual, trans-gendered, or otherwise sexually fouled-up people, just because the business owner finds their behavior (or existence) to be unacceptably immoral. To illustrate the seriousness of the problem, we are given the horrifying examples of a gay couple who were denied the opportunity to buy a wedding cake from a Christian baker, and another couple whose wedding reception was refused by some religious-affiliated venue.


I’m positively horrified at the thought.


But aside from these virtually non-existent circumstances (a few instances in a state with many millions of people), what other times and places are “ripe” for this sort of discrimination?


HOW can a restaurant discriminate against gay patrons? How could they possibly know that the people are “gay” (or whatever)? Same for shopkeepers. How would they know? I frequently travel on business and usually show up at restaurants with another man. Would we be perceived as “potentially gay”? How many merchants turn down business of any kind, regardless of the reason? One in a million? Most businesses get into trouble because they ACCEPT business that they are not competent to perform, not because they turn people away.
And this positively BEGS the question, What is the legal definition of gay? Is a celibate gay man (e.g., a Catholic priest) “gay” for the purposes of an anti-discrimination law? What about a “butch” looking female? What about a married man who has hidden homosexual desires that he has never acted on? Truly, we should require that these people get a tattoo on their foreheads or something, so that we can all be careful not to discriminate against them. Otherwise, we might do it inadvertently.


But getting back to the threat and fear of discrimination, is it even conceivable that any gay person might be left without a possible wedding venue, or photographer, or wedding cake, or seat in a restaurant, or any desired product or service whatsoever, due to discrimination under this law?


Didn’t think so. It is all bullshit.

 

[koshergrl]

I know. The limp wristed faggots like to call America *extremist Christian*.

I tell you, it's time to cull the worthless losers of this country.

 

[mdk]

I know. The limp wristed faggots like to call America *extremist Christian*.

I tell you, it's time to cull the worthless losers of this country.

Well get off your ass do it then. You're going to do exactly two things to "cull" these "worthless losers" out of the country...jack and shit.

 

[koshergrl]

I know. The limp wristed faggots like to call America *extremist Christian*.

I tell you, it's time to cull the worthless losers of this country.

Well get off your ass do it then. You're going to do exactly two things to "cull" these "worthless losers" out of the country...jack and shit.

I'm thinking more of an organized movement..not just one person emptying a carbine then being carted off to death row, thanks.

 

[Camp]

Thanks for clearing all that up. Someone needs to explain it to all those corporate CEO's. Sounds like they really got snookered.

 

[longknife]

It's being done by a very small group of Cyber-terrorists who are well-funded and have set up a system to create tens of thousands of tweets to stage a fake "outrage." And the limp-wristed media goes along with it.

 

[mdk]

I know. The limp wristed faggots like to call America *extremist Christian*.

I tell you, it's time to cull the worthless losers of this country.

Well get off your ass do it then. You're going to do exactly two things to "cull" these "worthless losers" out of the country...jack and shit.

I'm thinking more of an organized movement..not just one person emptying a carbine then being carted off to death row, thanks.

An organized movement to cull other citizens from the nation? Yeah, good luck with that. Until then I suppose gays better watch their steps or face the wrath of your bluster and Internet bravado.

 

[Syriusly]

But getting back to the threat and fear of discrimination, is it even conceivable that any gay person might be left without a possible wedding venue, or photographer, or wedding cake, or seat in a restaurant, or any desired product or service whatsoever, due to discrimination under this law?


Didn’t think so. It is all bullshit.

Is it even conceivable that this law is necessary to protect anyone's 'religious freedom's?

Didn't think so. It is all bullshit.

 

[Syriusly]

I know. The limp wristed faggots like to call America *extremist Christian*.

I tell you, it's time to cull the worthless losers of this country.

Yeah- nothing says 'Proud American' like a bigot calling for the murder of other Americans.

 

[emilynghiem]

But getting back to the threat and fear of discrimination, is it even conceivable that any gay person might be left without a possible wedding venue, or photographer, or wedding cake, or seat in a restaurant, or any desired product or service whatsoever, due to discrimination under this law?


Didn’t think so. It is all bullshit.

Is it even conceivable that this law is necessary to protect anyone's 'religious freedom's?

Didn't think so. It is all bullshit.

Dear Syriusly It was in response to the lawsuits where photography/bakery businesses
lost and/or were forced to pay fines.

Why are gays and transgender allowed to pass laws to protect themselves from backlash,
but Christians are not? What kind of political discrimination is that?

 

[Syriusly]

But getting back to the threat and fear of discrimination, is it even conceivable that any gay person might be left without a possible wedding venue, or photographer, or wedding cake, or seat in a restaurant, or any desired product or service whatsoever, due to discrimination under this law?


Didn’t think so. It is all bullshit.

Is it even conceivable that this law is necessary to protect anyone's 'religious freedom's?

Didn't think so. It is all bullshit.

Dear Syriusly It was in response to the lawsuits where photography/bakery businesses
lost and/or were forced to pay fines.

Why are gays and transgender allowed to pass laws to protect themselves from backlash,
but Christians are not? What kind of political discrimination is that?

The very same laws that protect the LGBT community explicitly protect Christians and all other religious believers in exactly the same way.

Whether the business owner is Gay or Christian, Black or Jewish, female or handicapped- the law applies the same to all business's.

Whether the customer is Gay or Christian, Black or Jewish, female or handicapped- the law applies the same to every group covered by the law.

 

[DGS49]

Let's go into "ancient history" of about 5-6 years ago.

The Roman Catholic Church deems both abortion and "artificial birth control" in most circumstances to be immoral. The Roman Catholic Church runs, among many other things, a large network of hospitals. Laws were bandied about that would require - under the cluster-fuck that has since been named, "Obama-care" - that EVERY employer over a certain size provide "reproductive health services" as covered benefits under their mandatory health insurance coverage.

The Roman Catholic hospitals are, by and large, SELF INSURED. They hire insurance companies to administer the plans, but the actual benefits are self-provided. Therefore, the Roman Catholic Church would have been required by law to provide goods and services that it considers morally abhorrent.

The new law in Indiana addresses that situation. Faced with a similar Indiana law, the RC church could opt out of the "required" coverage due to its conflict with their religious beliefs.

Getting back to the main point of the thread, the "threat" of rampant bigotry against "gays," etc. is an illusion. Aside from a few contrived sets of circumstances, it DOES NOT EXIST, nor would it exist under this law. Most obviously, HOW WOULD ANY MERCHANT KNOW THAT THE POTENTIAL CLIENT IS "GAY"? What is the proportion of the merchant population who would even give a shit? Near Zero.

It is all contrived, or to put it more crudely, bullshit.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I tell you, it's time to cull the worthless losers of this country.

But I don't WANT to be alone, Koshergirl.

What would I do for entertainment?

 

[emilynghiem]

But getting back to the threat and fear of discrimination, is it even conceivable that any gay person might be left without a possible wedding venue, or photographer, or wedding cake, or seat in a restaurant, or any desired product or service whatsoever, due to discrimination under this law?


Didn’t think so. It is all bullshit.

Is it even conceivable that this law is necessary to protect anyone's 'religious freedom's?

Didn't think so. It is all bullshit.

Dear Syriusly It was in response to the lawsuits where photography/bakery businesses
lost and/or were forced to pay fines.

Why are gays and transgender allowed to pass laws to protect themselves from backlash,
but Christians are not? What kind of political discrimination is that?

The very same laws that protect the LGBT community explicitly protect Christians and all other religious believers in exactly the same way.

Whether the business owner is Gay or Christian, Black or Jewish, female or handicapped- the law applies the same to all business's.

Whether the customer is Gay or Christian, Black or Jewish, female or handicapped- the law applies the same to every group covered by the law.

Hi Syriusly No, there is SERIOUS backlash going on, and has been going on against Christians.

More than one video has been released of MUSLIM bakeries turning away gays,
and there has been NO OUTCRY by the LGBT community over that!!!

I understand Syriusly SERIOUSLY that because Christians in particular have been more visible and vocal IN AMERICA
(not to the point of killing gays as in Arab/Islamic countries)
that there is BACKLASH and this is a karmic response to the TARGETING of gays from before.

BUT TWO WRONGS DON'T MAKE RIGHT

It is NOT "justice" to bash and punish Christians back in order to make up for how gays were mistreated in the past.

Double discrimination against both sides is DOUBLY WRONG.

Unfortunately, society and media is run by humans. And humans can be retributive in their justice.

The correct way is to resolve conflicts and HEAL relations.

Syriusly when I see cases of Christian wedding businesses being FINED by the govt and SHUT DOWN
how is that any less wrong than if GAY businesses were fined by govt for boycotting and refusing to serve bigots
and were SHUT DOWN by Christians protesting.

That's what I'm talking about is GOING TOO FAR.

It is as wrong to judge punish bash and bully people for being gay as for being a Christian or bigot or whatever.
A gay can be anti-Christian, anti-establishment.
Just like an anarchist can be anti-government.

But you have a right to your beliefs, right or wrong.

I UNDERSTAND there is backlash, and if you are a hateful bigot, sure, you will invoke equal hatred.

But WHY is that OKAY for Gays and Pro-Gay/ Anti-Christian to be ugly and boycott and reject and threaten the staff of businesses. But it ISN'T OKAY for Christians to express their beliefs even if those are equally onesided.

Both sides get out of hand.

And if people defend one, and attack the other, that is political discrimination.
I UNDERSTAND that many Christians only defend one side. And thus get attacked back.

Doesn't that make BOTH SIDES WRONG to attack each other that way.

 

[Syriusly]

But getting back to the threat and fear of discrimination, is it even conceivable that any gay person might be left without a possible wedding venue, or photographer, or wedding cake, or seat in a restaurant, or any desired product or service whatsoever, due to discrimination under this law?


Didn’t think so. It is all bullshit.

Is it even conceivable that this law is necessary to protect anyone's 'religious freedom's?

Didn't think so. It is all bullshit.

Dear Syriusly It was in response to the lawsuits where photography/bakery businesses
lost and/or were forced to pay fines.

Why are gays and transgender allowed to pass laws to protect themselves from backlash,
but Christians are not? What kind of political discrimination is that?

The very same laws that protect the LGBT community explicitly protect Christians and all other religious believers in exactly the same way.

Whether the business owner is Gay or Christian, Black or Jewish, female or handicapped- the law applies the same to all business's.

Whether the customer is Gay or Christian, Black or Jewish, female or handicapped- the law applies the same to every group covered by the law.

Hi Syriusly No, there is SERIOUS backlash going on, and has been going on against Christians.

More than one video has been released of MUSLIM bakeries turning away gays,
and there has been NO OUTCRY by the LGBT community over that!!!.

I haven't seen any account of Muslim bakeries turning away homosexuals- feel free to provide actual documented cases for me to look at.

In Colorado they would be just as guilty of violating the law as any other business that turned away someone for being black or Christian or handicapped or gay.

 

[G.T.]

I know. The limp wristed faggots like to call America *extremist Christian*.

I tell you, it's time to cull the worthless losers of this country.

People who talk like this ^^^

Especially women?

Immoral cocksuckers.

 

[Syriusly]

Aside from a few contrived sets of circumstances, it DOES NOT EXIST, nor would it exist under this law. Most obviously, HOW WOULD ANY MERCHANT KNOW THAT THE POTENTIAL CLIENT IS "GAY"? .

I guess you should ask those business's who have refused to serve gay couples because they object to their gay wedding.

How would anyone know that someone is a Mormon? Yet the law protects Mormon's for being discriminated against because of their religion.

The funny part is that even though every elected official swears up and down that these laws were not intended to discriminate against homosexuals- here on the boards, Conservatives have been defending these laws- because they believe that these laws would allow business's to be exempt from anti-discrimination laws, and thereby able to legally discriminate.

 

[peach174]

But getting back to the threat and fear of discrimination, is it even conceivable that any gay person might be left without a possible wedding venue, or photographer, or wedding cake, or seat in a restaurant, or any desired product or service whatsoever, due to discrimination under this law?


Didn’t think so. It is all bullshit.

Is it even conceivable that this law is necessary to protect anyone's 'religious freedom's?

Didn't think so. It is all bullshit.

Dear Syriusly It was in response to the lawsuits where photography/bakery businesses
lost and/or were forced to pay fines.

Why are gays and transgender allowed to pass laws to protect themselves from backlash,
but Christians are not? What kind of political discrimination is that?

The very same laws that protect the LGBT community explicitly protect Christians and all other religious believers in exactly the same way.

Whether the business owner is Gay or Christian, Black or Jewish, female or handicapped- the law applies the same to all business's.

Whether the customer is Gay or Christian, Black or Jewish, female or handicapped- the law applies the same to every group covered by the law.

Hi Syriusly No, there is SERIOUS backlash going on, and has been going on against Christians.

More than one video has been released of MUSLIM bakeries turning away gays,
and there has been NO OUTCRY by the LGBT community over that!!!.

I haven't seen any account of Muslim bakeries turning away homosexuals- feel free to provide actual documented cases for me to look at.

In Colorado they would be just as guilty of violating the law as any other business that turned away someone for being black or Christian or handicapped or gay.

GayPatriot What Happens When a Muslim Baker Refuses to Bake a Wedding Cake

 

[emilynghiem]

But getting back to the threat and fear of discrimination, is it even conceivable that any gay person might be left without a possible wedding venue, or photographer, or wedding cake, or seat in a restaurant, or any desired product or service whatsoever, due to discrimination under this law?


Didn’t think so. It is all bullshit.

Is it even conceivable that this law is necessary to protect anyone's 'religious freedom's?

Didn't think so. It is all bullshit.

Dear Syriusly It was in response to the lawsuits where photography/bakery businesses
lost and/or were forced to pay fines.

Why are gays and transgender allowed to pass laws to protect themselves from backlash,
but Christians are not? What kind of political discrimination is that?

The very same laws that protect the LGBT community explicitly protect Christians and all other religious believers in exactly the same way.

Whether the business owner is Gay or Christian, Black or Jewish, female or handicapped- the law applies the same to all business's.

Whether the customer is Gay or Christian, Black or Jewish, female or handicapped- the law applies the same to every group covered by the law.

Hi Syriusly No, there is SERIOUS backlash going on, and has been going on against Christians.

More than one video has been released of MUSLIM bakeries turning away gays,
and there has been NO OUTCRY by the LGBT community over that!!!.

I haven't seen any account of Muslim bakeries turning away homosexuals- feel free to provide actual documented cases for me to look at.

In Colorado they would be just as guilty of violating the law as any other business that turned away someone for being black or Christian or handicapped or gay.

Hi Syriusly
Isn't it revealing that most gay customers KNOW BETTER than to go to a Muslim bakery and demand that???
Of course only Christian bakeries are getting sued, if that's the audience they are targeting.

The video's I'm talking about are actually hidden camera scenarios of people asking different bakeries and getting turned away. I tried to find the media watchdog who did a test run on that.

I found this:
HIDDEN CAMERA Gay Wedding Cake At Muslim Bakeries

And I also found this on gay bakeries turning away bigotry cake orders:
Christian Man Asks Thirteen Gay Bakeries To Bake Him Pro-Traditional Marriage Cake And Is Denied Service By All Of Them WATCH THE SHOCKING VIDEO - Walid Shoebat

It seems clear to me, the point is not to force businesses to do things they don't want to do.

Again, I would recommend that such service businesses provide written waivers for customers to sign,
agreeing to mediate any conflicts by consensus, to avoid legal action or expenses. And if they don't
agree on those values, that's why they don't do business together; so this doesn't JUDGE one value over another,
but acknowledges that it's the "mutual conflict" between them that prevents them from engaging in commerce. Big deal!!!

 

[emilynghiem]

Is it even conceivable that this law is necessary to protect anyone's 'religious freedom's?

Didn't think so. It is all bullshit.

Dear Syriusly It was in response to the lawsuits where photography/bakery businesses
lost and/or were forced to pay fines.

Why are gays and transgender allowed to pass laws to protect themselves from backlash,
but Christians are not? What kind of political discrimination is that?

The very same laws that protect the LGBT community explicitly protect Christians and all other religious believers in exactly the same way.

Whether the business owner is Gay or Christian, Black or Jewish, female or handicapped- the law applies the same to all business's.

Whether the customer is Gay or Christian, Black or Jewish, female or handicapped- the law applies the same to every group covered by the law.

Hi Syriusly No, there is SERIOUS backlash going on, and has been going on against Christians.

More than one video has been released of MUSLIM bakeries turning away gays,
and there has been NO OUTCRY by the LGBT community over that!!!.

I haven't seen any account of Muslim bakeries turning away homosexuals- feel free to provide actual documented cases for me to look at.

In Colorado they would be just as guilty of violating the law as any other business that turned away someone for being black or Christian or handicapped or gay.

GayPatriot What Happens When a Muslim Baker Refuses to Bake a Wedding Cake

Note the common criticism in the comments:
"Of course, the Progressive Left could also not care less that gays are routinely tortured and executed in Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Palestine…

But a Christian politely declining to bake a wedding cake is a crime against humanity, and they should burn for it."

Clearly Syriusly the liberal politics are TARGETING easy TARGETS.
It is easier to raise a legal and media hubbub over CHRISTIANS who are civil and are bound to follow civil authority.

This is like targeting vulnerable women and children for rape who are easier to dominate and coerce.

When Christians like in the Hobby Lobby case are FORCED to go through EXPENSIVE legal procedures and hoops to DEFEND religious freedom that was supposed to be INALIENABLE (ie not taken away by govt laws first, and then have to go back and restore liberties that were unjustly denied)
then the Christians are not treated as equal but ostracized and bashed for defending their beliefs.

This is clearly not equal, where Christian values and beliefs are treated as HOSTILE to constitutional govt,
while SECULAR beliefs of liberals are FAVORED as "the law of the land" and instantly assumed to be the
right way and compatible just because they are SECULAR.

Political discrimination on the basis of creed. In violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments
and Civil Rights Act. But the left is too biased to see its own bias!!!