Will Republicans ever learn? Indiana governor to sign bill allowing business not to serve gays

[rightwinger]

It more than qualifies me to discuss legal matters on USMB

You aren't qualified to discuss legal matters on teletubbies.

That's why a biz should be forced to identify before hand what group they won't serve. Eventually they would either be bankrupted or driven into the underground economy because Wal-Mart or Amazon will destroy them.

That's precisely why they shouldn't be forced to identify.

They shouldn't be allowed to advertise they provide a service, if they have no intention of providing that to someone. They don't have any right to hide their bigotry or beliefs, if they choose to run a business on them. And then the rest of us, who might buy from them or from another, can make our commercial decisions on any bigotry or believe that we choose to act on. It's the same as when we had signs like this.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-3bhsEChcjNw/TlZXbdJSZKI/AAAAAAAAR5w/0LMsaqqXxck/s1600/Bruce+Davidson6336.jpg

Vandalizing their property, however, would be wrong.

Fuck you. They do have the right to tell people whatever they like so long as it isn't fraudulent. Who put you in charge of deciding what rights people have?

Cowards. They are cowards. They want to throw rocks and hide their hands.

Yelp will take care of the bigots, but they should still have to advertise that they will discriminate.

There will be no problem letting the world know who these fine American Taliban members, assuming that someone doesn't get so pissed off that they burn their business to the ground, which I wouldn't bet against. This is a hot issue, pun intended.

If they are brave enough to advocate this legislation, they should be brave enough to tell the community which businesses don't serve gays

 

[LoneLaugher]

You sell guns, Lonestar? Is that your business?

Yes I co-own a gun store.

How about that. Have you ever sold a gun to a person that you knew was gay?

No, but as I said I don't ask a persons sexual preference when they make a purchase.

So.....you have sold a gun to a gay person?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

That may be how shit works in your world, but not in mine.

Sorry, dummy. You and. I live in the same world. If you refuse to do business with someone who is gay....I'll bet you give them a reason that has nothing to do with the fact that they are gay. That's because you are a coward and don't want to face the music.

Go ahead.....tell me I'm wrong. Liar.

I don't ask for sexual preferences when someone comes in to make a purchase. That's between them and God.

Still acting stupid? Elton John comes in and wants to buy three dozen AR-15's for his anniversary party. Cash above market value. You going to sell to him?

I wouldn't sell anyone that many guns at one time.

Oh......look at the nutter avoid the question. He wants one gun......an antique that sells for $18k and he's willing to pay $25k. Are you selling it to him?

I avoided nothing. I answered you silly question you just didn't like the answer. I wouldn't sell 13 guns at one time to anyone not to Elton John, the Pope or the President of the NRA.

I don't deal in antiques. But if your asking if I would sell to a gay man, the answer is why wouldn't I?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

You sell guns, Lonestar? Is that your business?

Yes I co-own a gun store.

How about that. Have you ever sold a gun to a person that you knew was gay?

No, but as I said I don't ask a persons sexual preference when they make a purchase.

So.....you have sold a gun to a gay person?

I honestly have no idea. It is a possibility.

 

[rightwinger]

Admit it....you have lost
Gay Marriage will be the law of the land by June ...

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

For you, it may very well be

Marriage is, a law of nature, which requires such is he joining of one man and one woman.

FYI: another Law of Nature is that lending money to people on the basis of a deviant interpretation of 'fairness: defined as "Everyone deserves to own their own home", will lead to the catastrophic failure of loans made on such.

(Reader, you should know that the above cited contributor and 100% of those who agree with him with regard to rejecting the natural law of marriage, were in total support of the Left's decades long effort to coerce the Financial Industry into dropping the longstanding, sustaining actuarial lending principles, for the Left's perverse definition of fairness. And well, you remember how that worked out. What you may not know is that the financial industry, while an important element of the culture, is irrelevant in terms of sustaining the culture, when compared to the Nucleus of the Culture; OKA: Marriage. And while the Leftist policy that modified lending principle lead to financial catastrophe... the consequences of what they're foolishly proposing here will be exponentially more destructive. In truth, you've no means to so much as imagine the brutality to come from following their road map BACK to humanity's understanding of natural law.)

Nobody is forcing you to marry someone against your beliefs

You just can't force the government to accept your biggotry

Ah but it's ok to force the government to accept bigotry against Christians.

It is the Christians exhibiting the biggotry. They are the ones passing judgement

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

“Act to Protect the Extra-Dainty Feewings of Homophobic Bakers and Florists”

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I pick my and choose who I sell to. Have been doing so for over twenty years and haven't had a complaint yet.

Based on what criteria?

Several actually. If a person comes in to buy twenty guns and he has cold hard cash, I won't sell. If a person comes in with saggy pants, I won't sell, if a person comes in and something seems to be a little off about him, I won't sell. It's basically a judgment call, based on actions, appearance, mannerisms and small talk concerning the purpose for the firearm.

That's different, dummy. Are you going to act stupid now? You know that's not what we are talking about.

Try honesty. Otherwise....why bother?

I've been honest this whole time. I'm saying a private business should be able to pick and choose there client base using whatever criteria that suits them. After all this is supposed to be a free country. A person should be free to refuse service and you are free to find another vendor.

their

No. I've already explained why that isn't an option. You have to obey the law. The law says you cannot discriminate based on race, religion or gender. Baggy pants? No shoes? Bad breath? Sure. But if that ****** comes in wearing a suit and smelling like roses....you WILL sell him a gun.

Dumb ass.

Not necessarily.

 

[OKTexas]

Yet the persecution of the religious majority is a staple of the religion of radical liberalism and radical atheist, but that's ok because it's your side doing it, right?

In order to fulfill your beliefs we would have to bring back the right of businesses to refuse to serve anyone they didn't like.

Actually I have no problem with that, if they refuse too many they won't be in business will they? But the owner would determine his own fate, not the state.

Whites only businesses didn't go broke in the South did they?

Remind me, what century was that in again?

The 20th idiot. You either believe businesses should be able to be whites only or you don't.

Which is it ? Youi do or don't?

If you had been paying attention I've already answered that question. I think a business should be able to refuse service to anyone for any reason. Then it's up to its customers to decide if they remain in business. Business, if it's not government controlled, is the most democratic things in our society, customers vote with their dollars to decide if the business succeeds or fails.

 

[bripat9643]

In the case of wedding vendors; bakers, DJs, photographers, caterers and etc., they do not 'participate' in the wedding. They are not invited guests.

So what are they, slaves beholden to your orders?

Leftism is totalitarian by nature - as this again demonstrates.

He says DJs, photographers and caterers don't participate in weddings. They don't? That's news to me.

Are these vendors officiating at the ceremony? Are they to bring a gift to the reception? Do these vendors give away the bride?

As it turns out, these vendors are merely plying their trade. There is no requirement for wedding vendors to approve of the weddings they serve. The vendors do not place a merchantile imperamator to the weddings they service.

Are you saying a business owner shouldn't be able to pick his clients?

I'm saying that a vendor who wraps himself in the thin veneer of "Religious Freedom" in order to perpetuate fear and hatred and suspicion is not truly serving any true 'religion' at all.

Who are you to judge what "true religion" is? Is Islam a true religion? You know, the guys who throw people off of buildings because they are homosexuals?

 

[Foxfyre]

.

I realize this approach won't be popular, but let's take a moment to "think things through".

What are these people going to do, hang a "NO GAYS ALLOWED" sign on their window? Classy. That would make it easy for people to take a photo of it, and before you know it, everyone on the planet knows about it. Then it won't be just the gay population that doesn't go in there, it would be a large segment of the population, those of us who don't like such simple-minded bigotry. Any restaurant that tried that would see a significant drop in business, and no restaurant can afford that for long. Bye bye!

So you're an anti-gay bigot? Cool. Thanks for letting me know. Put up a big sign so that I'll know, and then I'll also know never to go in there and to tell a few friends about it.

Yeah, pass that law.

.

"No Gays Allowed" is too simple.

If these bigoted merchants were intellectually honest their signs should read: "Due to our devotion to Jesus Christ who taught 'Love one another as you would be loved' and 'Judge not lest ye be judged', we refuse to serve American citizens who are homosexuals".

Or we could see it as it actually is. Everybody who comes into the store to buy products or a service the merchant has for sale is provided those products and/or service. That has never been an issue in any of these cases.

But if the merchant has for sale wedding cakes for Christian weddings, does it follow that the mechant HAS to also carry wedding cakes for NAMBLA or white supremacists or the Westboro Baptists or any other group engaged in activities or promoting docrine that the Christian cannot condone or support? Or create any other product for such groups that the store does not routinely have for sale? Most especially if the Christian is forced to go to the customer's premises and be seen and participate in an activity the Christian finds offensive or cannot condone? Must a Christian accept everybody and everything in order to practice his/her Christian faith?

Things are never as simple as we sometimes would want them to be.

In the case of wedding vendors; bakers, DJs, photographers, caterers and etc., they do not 'participate' in the wedding. They are not invited guests. They do not officiate durning the service. Their merchandise imperamator is not required to legitimize or confirm the actual marriage. Could you imagine your marriage hanging on the approval of the person who bakes your wedding cake?

They are, in fact, merchants who operate public businesses, that is to say businesses open to the public.

Any refusal to provide their normal services is tantamount to discrimination.

What is to stop such merchants from expanding such discrimination to inter racial couples? As it is legal for inter racial couples to wed, and as it is not a crime to merely be an inter racial couple, discriminating against them is patently illegal and morally wrong.

It is not illegal to merely be a homosexual. A majority of states recognize marriage equality. Why should homosexuals suffer under the bigoted discrimination of merchants who clearly have not thoroughly read their Bibles?

Nosmo, I didn't say a word about gays in the post you are responding to here. And you flat out ignored the examples I gave. I want you to focus on those examples and tell me that people should be required to provide services to such people no matter how wrong, evil, or unacceptable they may be.

When you are forced to provide services off premises, you have to go to your customer's premises. Your delivery van is outside for all the world to see and conclude you are giving consent and approval to the activity sometimes much to the glee and delight of people who would gladly use that to smear you. You think the Westboro Baptists would be adverse to photographing a van that belong to gay bakers or florists that was sitting in their parking lot and having a ball with that photograph?

And the fact that the people are there on the premises of that which most offends them is absolutely giving consent that the activity is okay.

The gay baker should not have to provide services for a group like the Westboro Baptists.

And the Christian should not have to provide services for a gay wedding if they cannot condone that as a matter of faith.

It is not a matter of discrimination. It is a matter of liberty and the right to not participate in that which offends us.

Never in any human experience has two wrongs equaled a right.

Providing the services that your business is opened for is doing business in the American value, e.g. Capitalism.

Business transactions do not, in and of themselves, suggest approval or acquiescence in political or cultural events.

My brother owns and operates the printing shop my family has held since 1921. He prints raffle tickets for gun clubs where the prize can be several weapons. My brother shares our family values and disapproves of deadly weapons. Yet raffle tickets flow out of the shop on a regular basis. Does this mean our family approves of the activities of the gun clubs?

He would no more refuse the business of the gun clubs on any basis; political, cultural or otherwise than he would refuse any other business on those grounds. It is not his responsibility to vet or approve his clientele. It is his responsibility to provide the services he is contracted to provide.

So you think the gay florist should have to set up flowers at the Westboro Baptist church? The black baker should have to set up the wedding cake at the white supremacist hall? The Jewish photographer should have to photograph the activities of the Young Nazis of America? The Christian should have to serve them all and give consent to those activities by his/her presence?

When I was still in business I too served people I did not approve of. But had they wanted me to participate in activities that I saw as morally wrong as a Christian and/or a citizen of the USA, I would have wanted the right to refuse.

Printing those tickets did not require your brother to participate in the event in any way. If it had, and it was important enough to him, I would have fully supported his choice not to do so. And nobody else should be able to interfere with that choice.

 

[bripat9643]

No the police doesn't protect my business but regardless, those services are paid for through MY taxes.

and the taxes of those you wish to shame....

They pay taxes for their protection, not mine.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

What civil rights are being violated? If I refuse to sell you a firearm because you look like a thug, have I violated your right?

He looked Black ? thug is a racist dog whistle term.....for Black

Apparently the right to bear arms isn't a right to bear arms according to this cracker.

You have every right to bear arms, but I'm not under any obligation to sell to you.

If you're a licensed gun dealer, please, by all means prove to us that you have the legal right to refuse to sell a gun to an otherwise qualified black person.

Look up gun dealers code of conduct.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Boycott Indiana until they lose the bigotry...

 

[bluedog1]

Is Pence about to run for president?

Seems he is thinking about it

This legislation will not help him

Nothing will help him, he aint ever gonna be Prez.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

No the police doesn't protect my business but regardless, those services are paid for through MY taxes.

and the taxes of those you wish to shame....

They pay taxes for their protection, not mine.

They pay for yours too they do not have a separate Police Department ...Bush43 for brains

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

You are welcome to show me any anti-gay legislation being passed at any level of government by Democrats.......otherwise STFU

(Reader: By "Anti-gay" it is trying to avoid conveying "Advocacy to Normalization of Sexual Abnormality"; which is to say policy the lifts mental disorder to a protected class... lending it privileges above those enjoyed by the sane; which simply means UNSOUND GOVERNANCE.)

 

[bluedog1]

Boycott Indiana until they lose the bigotry...

Do I really need a political reason to never go there?

 

[bripat9643]

That may be how shit works in your world, but not in mine.

Sorry, dummy. You and. I live in the same world. If you refuse to do business with someone who is gay....I'll bet you give them a reason that has nothing to do with the fact that they are gay. That's because you are a coward and don't want to face the music.

Go ahead.....tell me I'm wrong. Liar.

I don't ask for sexual preferences when someone comes in to make a purchase. That's between them and God.

Still acting stupid? Elton John comes in and wants to buy three dozen AR-15's for his anniversary party. Cash above market value. You going to sell to him?

I wouldn't sell anyone that many guns at one time.

Oh......look at the nutter avoid the question. He wants one gun......an antique that sells for $18k and he's willing to pay $25k. Are you selling it to him?

You're the nutter, asshole.

 

[rightwinger]

You are welcome to show me any anti-gay legislation being passed at any level of government by Democrats.......otherwise STFU

(Reader: By "Anti-gay" it is trying to avoid conveying "Advocacy to Normalization of Sexual Abnormality"; which is to say policy the lifts mental disorder to a protected class... lending it privileges above those enjoyed by the sane.)

Instead of posting it anonymously on message boards....Why don't Republicans make that their official platform?

 

[BULLDOG]

Yes there is. The Civil Rights Act of 1964.
It's already starting in Indiana:

Gen Con We ll Pull 50 Million Convention Out of Indiana if Pence Signs Anti-Gay Religious Freedom Bill Gay News Towleroad

Salesforce exec criticizes religious freedom bill

There is a legal right, but there is no right in the absolute sense. The public accommodations act violates the rights of businesses. Furthermore, it only protects based on race, religion and national origin.

The Second Amendment violates the rights of communities who would rather be gun-free.

What I'm seeing here is hate filled bigots, spewing their vitriol against people who simply wish to conduct their lives and businesses according to their closely held religious beliefs. Your are the ones trying to force your value system on others and doing it in such a hateful way, I think it's inexcusable.

Remember the same values that give you the freedom to be you, also give me the freedom to be free from you. I see this as nothing more than atheist trying to further their persecution of people of faith, just another attempt by the left to destroy the 1st Amendment. The freedom to exercise one's religious beliefs as they see fit and the right of citizens to associate with the people they chose, are bedrock principles of this country that the left has been chipping away for decades. Now that the pendulum is swinging the other way you're having fits and calling names like spoiled little children.

Some of the greatest support for segregation was from religious groups who believed "GOD" didn't want the races to intermingle. How is this any different?

A person walking into a business to buy a retail product is one thing, forcing the proprietor to participate in a ceremony they object to outside the doors of the business is another. You can't force a pastor to perform a marriage ceremony for a couple he objects to and there is no logical reason to force a company to participate in a ceremony they object to. Do you really expect the business would produce its best efforts under such circumstances?

Nobody is forcing a pastor to perform any religious ceremony, and your implication that he would be is intentionally stupid. If a business sells an item or service, it is required to sell that item or service to anyone with the money. Get over it,

So saying "you can't force" suddenly becomes an implication that "you can force", what is your reading level 3rd grade? As for the rest of your BS, looks like that's changing doesn't it, get over it.

Not going to engage in whatever silliness you are trying to play concerning any preacher being forced to perform any ceremony. That has nothing to do with the subject and is immaterial. Some states might pass a few temporary laws to deny rights, but even the most rabid right winger has to realize that won't last.